Public Administration Select Committee: Have your say on the complaints process

oneye14

Let us now look at this subject with view to the unintended consequencies:

- Many of us do not trust the services of the PHSO and never will

- Many of us do not trust MP's and never will. IMO this subject is evidential as to why.

- Disputes will remain unresolved.

It may be of interest to the Committee that the Department for Business Innovation & Skills were less than honest when submitting evidence to the PHSO.
The Secretary of State the RH Dr Vince Cable has shown little interest in this as has the Prime Minister.
So now Cable's BIS wants to contact businesses who were at the end of this alleged dishonesty, and surprise - they want nothing to do with the BIS or Cable or the PM.

The HOC has failed in one of it's fundamental objectives and the Government is getting into totally self-inflicted difficulties.

oneye14

oneye14 wrote: »

.... DOT is invited to check the facts submitted recently.

Having had no facts stated above being challenged, the matter is refered to the chair of the Committee (PASC) and other interested parties.

UKParliament

The Committee would like to pass on it's thanks for your comments. Please see the message from the Committee Chair Bernard Jenkin MP:

Thank you for your responses to the questions we posted in September. We asked you to give us ideas of the questions we should ask and areas we should explore in this inquiry by contributing to the discussion on this site.

Through this forum you have told us that you felt PHSO was not there to serve the individual and that PHSO was very defensive in the way that it dealt with your complaint. You have also told us that you felt processes and timescales for handling your complaint were unclear, and that responses to your complaint have been slow. These views have been helpful in shaping the questions that we have asked the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman about the organisation’s purpose, process and outcomes.

PASC has now finished taking evidence on this inquiry and we are now taking account of all the evidence we have received. The Committee will publish a report in the near future with our conclusions and recommendations for change that the Committee would like to see implemented.

We will post a link to the report on this forum once it is published.

Thank you again for taking the time to contribute to this inquiry.

oneye14

On meeting 16/12/2013 Dame Julie Mellor stated:

‘I think we have to be very careful here, Mr Mulholland, in terms of our accountabilities. Parliament intended for us to be accountable for our decisions to the courts and Parliament intended for us to be accountable for our service to Parliament. Therefore, I do not think it would be possible to go through individual cases with you, because our accountability is to the courts.’

The Committee Chair Bernard Jenkin MP is invited to comment since it is believed this is not the case.


The above should read:
The Committee Chair Bernard Jenkin MP is invited to comment since it is believed Dame Julie Mellor to be wrong on this point

oneye14

House_of_Commons_Rep_(DOT) wrote: »

PASC has now finished taking evidence on this inquiry and we are now taking account of all the evidence we have received. The Committee will publish a report in the near future with our conclusions and recommendations for change that the Committee would like to see implemented.

We will post a link to the report on this forum once it is published.

Have you any timescale to advise MSE users ?

UKParliament

oneye14 wrote: »

Have you any timescale to advise MSE users ?

Hi oneye14

Let me check on this and get back to you - it is usually a few weeks but the Committee itself will have more knowledge - I will return with the response.

Best wishes
DOT

UKParliament

Hi Oneye14

Following on from our last post we can tell you that the Committee are currently working on their report and hope to publish in the spring. We will post a link to the report on this forum once it is published.

We will keep you informed.
Thanks
DOT

oneye14

It appears we have a slght problem as reports go.
Is DOT going to explain what this is or shall I ?

I understand the PHSO is alleged to have committed several offences.
Can we be assured these are being addressed ?

oneye14

It would appear the Report in draft form is shambolic.
It has been delayed and there is as yet, I understand no fixed date for publication.

The 'woodentops' have realised any criticism of the Parliamentary Ombudsman would highlight previous shortcomings of your own Public Administration Select Committee.

The cost savings I alluded to in post #51 show not only Parliamentary Ombudsman gross underperformance but considerable cost savings the Select Committee could have made. The Select Committee has historically missed both.

Whilst the Select Committee is stalling - Why doesn't it (as we all can) closely examine one of Parliaments own library publications - Misconduct in Public Office reference SN/PC/04909 date 21/10/2009, and relate the Parliamentary Ombudsman to it's content.

oneye14

DOT has been very quiet recently;
just to let you know, I've got more bad news to come ....