SURELY I cannot be the only person in Scotland who wonders exactly what the purpose of the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) actually is. I had naively thought its role was, broadly speaking, to pursue matters on behalf of members of the public who feel aggrieved by an organisational failure to adhere to laid-down standards.
From its own website it appears that the vision of the SPSO is to contribute actively and positively to Scotland's development and delivery of first-class public services, putting people and learning at the heart of what it does by being innovative and world-leading in its approach to complaints, reviews and standards. In addition, the SPSO maintains that it can check that a decision has been properly made and that if it identifies that something has gone wrong it can make recommendations to put things right.
Following my very recent rather woeful experience with the SPSO, I struggle to accept any validity in its stated aims of helping to ensure the delivery of first-class public services in Scotland. My recent complaint to the SPSO amongst other things related to a matter of data protection (upheld but not actioned by the Information Commissioners Office) and the failure of the complaints procedure of an organisation (upheld but not actioned by the SPSO).
In my particular case the SPSO agreed with me that a public service provider in Scotland failed to comply with its own complaints procedure. Interestingly, the complaints procedure of the organisation concerned was developed by complaints-handling experts working closely with the SPSO itself. Part of my complaint included the fact that the person being complained of was allocated the task of investigating and responding to the complaint made against himself, thus leading to a wholly biased and unfair investigation (denied by the organisation concerned).
The SPSO decided that, although it agrees that the complaints procedure was not followed, there was nothing to be gained by pursuing my various complaints, which strikes me as being somewhat at odds with its stated aim of ensuring the delivery of first- class public services in Scotland.
Whilst, admittedly, at a completely different level in terms of the seriousness of complaint it was of interest to me to note that in the recent case involving Alex Salmond, at the Court of Session, Judge Lord Pentland subsequently said that the Government's actions had been "unlawful in respect that they were procedurally unfair" and had been "tainted with apparent bias".
Perhaps Mr Salmond should be thankful that Lord Pentland decided on his case and not the SPSO.
John S Milligan,
86 Irvine Road, Kilmarnock.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here