PSO is needed more than ever.
Guernsey has taken pride in its reputation for effective governance and robust public institutions in recent years. However, behind the scenes, all is far from okay. While our island’s public services may strive to give the appearance of high standards, visible gaps in oversight and accountability have undermined public confidence. Hidden mistakes are far worse, and such mistakes are becoming harder and harder to conceal in the modern day. Inordinate amounts of senior civil servants’ time is spent covering up, and we’re paying for it.
The absence of a Public Services Ombudsman (PSO) to address grievances against public institutions leaves citizens vulnerable and limits transparency.
This article examines the necessity for a PSO in Guernsey, using lessons from other jurisdictions and recent examples to highlight the risks of failing to provide adequate oversight mechanisms.
Why Does Guernsey Need a Public Services Ombudsman?
In small communities like Guernsey, where public services are close-knit and intertwined with local governance, impartiality can be a challenge. The introduction of a PSO would provide an independent channel for investigating complaints against government departments, health services, and other public bodies.
Currently, individuals in Guernsey who experience misconduct, inefficiency, or maladministration by public institutions face significant barriers when seeking redress. Many are reluctant to pursue formal complaints, fearing reprisals or a lack of resolution. A PSO could bridge this gap, offering a cost-effective and neutral means of handling disputes.
The need is stark when considering Guernsey’s position compared to the UK. The UK’s Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) investigates over 30,000 complaints annually. Yet, even in such a large system, failures persist. A recent Telegraph ((https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/24/nhs-managers-silence-whistleblowers-barred-telegraph/)) investigation revealed that NHS managers often silence whistleblowers through gagging orders and suppression, creating a culture of fear that allows wrongdoing to thrive. The lack of robust, independent oversight exacerbates these issues. Without a PSO, Guernsey all but guarantees worse failures in its public sector.
Key Benefits of a Public Services Ombudsman
- Improved Accountability
A PSO would provide independent oversight of public bodies, ensuring that decisions are fair, transparent, and within the law. Public institutions would be held to higher standards, with an impartial mechanism to address maladministration. - Restored Public Confidence
Public trust is vital for effective governance. A PSO would reassure citizens that their concerns are taken seriously and addressed impartially, fostering a stronger relationship between the government and the community. - Prevention Through Oversight
The mere presence of a PSO often encourages better behaviour from public bodies. Knowing their actions are subject to scrutiny discourages complacency and misconduct. - Support for Whistleblowers
As seen in the Telegraph investigation, whistleblowers are often the first defence against malpractice. A PSO could provide a safe channel for individuals to report wrongdoing without fear of retaliation.
Guernsey’s Unique Vulnerabilities
Guernsey’s small size amplifies certain risks. Decisions in local governance can be influenced by close personal or professional ties, making impartiality harder to achieve. This closeness, while fostering community, can deter individuals from speaking out against wrongdoing for fear of social or professional repercussions.
The absence of a PSO creates a systemic vulnerability. Currently, residents must rely on internal complaints procedures or resort to legal action – both daunting and broken prospects, especially for individuals without financial or legal resources. A PSO would provide an accessible, non-adversarial alternative. The lights would come on.
Learning from Other Jurisdictions
The UK’s experience offers valuable lessons. Despite its well-established ombudsman system, cases like those highlighted in the Telegraph investigation expose ongoing challenges in ensuring accountability. NHS whistleblowers who have faced silencing orders illustrate the dangers of opaque governance, even within institutions subject to oversight. If such issues can persist in a system with an ombudsman, how much more vulnerable is Guernsey, where no such independent body exists?
Other small jurisdictions, such as the Isle of Man, have recognised the importance of ombudsmen. The Isle of Man’s Tynwald Ombudsman1 handles complaints against public services, providing an efficient and transparent mechanism for dispute resolution. Guernsey would do well to follow suit, adapting the model to its own needs.
Potential Counterarguments and Responses
Critics might argue that Guernsey’s size makes a PSO unnecessary. However, the island’s small scale is precisely why such a role is essential. Close relationships between decision-makers and the public heighten the risk of perceived or actual bias. An independent PSO would mitigate these risks, ensuring impartiality.
Concerns about cost are another common objection. Yet, the financial outlay for a PSO is minor compared to the long-term benefits of improved governance, reduced litigation, and enhanced public trust. Moreover, failing to address systemic issues early can lead to far greater costs, both financial and reputational.
A Vision for the Future
The establishment of a Public Services Ombudsman in Guernsey is not just a bureaucratic addition but a vital step towards safeguarding our rights as residents and working towards integrity for public institutions.
It would provide an essential mechanism for accountability, foster public confidence, and prevent the systemic failures that have plagued us and other jurisdictions.
By learning from the successes and failures of ombudsman systems elsewhere, Guernsey can implement a tailored solution that meets the island’s unique needs. Ignoring this opportunity risks leaving our public services vulnerable to the very failures they exist to prevent.
It is time for Guernsey to take this necessary step, demonstrating its commitment to transparent, accountable governance for all its residents. Deputies who recently voted against such an ombudsman are voting for opacity and should be censured for such by the electorate2.