World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration

Article Id: WHEBN0004447608
Reproduction Date:

Title: Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Deaths in 2003, Society for Individual Freedom, Alan Marre, Julie Mellor, Cecil Clothier, Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, Edmund Compton, Ann Abraham
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) comprises the offices of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (PCA) and the Health Service Commissioner for England (HSC).

The Ombudsman is responsible for considering complaints by the public that UK Government departments, public authorities and the National Health Service in England have not acted properly or fairly or have provided a poor service. In 2011–12, the Ombudsman handled just under 24,000 enquiries about Government departments and agencies and the NHS in England. Of these the Ombudsman resolved 23,889 enquiries – providing help and advice for 19,157 and looking closely at 4,732.[1]

The PHSO also advises some NHS trusts on how to proceed with complaints. This service is not documented anywhere and is not known to all NHS trusts, but if requested to do so PHSO staff will act as an advisory service. [2]

The Ombudsman is appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Prime Minister and is accountable to Parliament. The Ombudsman is independent of both the Government and the civil service and reports annually to both Houses of Parliament.

The current Ombudsman is Dame Julie Mellor who has held the post since January 2012. Dame Julie has little to do with cases brought to the Ombudsman. In 2012/13, out of 26,961 complaints brought to the PHSO, 47 were presented to her.[3]

The offices of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman are at Millbank Tower, London.

Whyatt Report
Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967
National Health Service Reorganisation Act 1973
Overlapping TV licences and Court Line
War Pensions Injustice Remedied
Preece case
Barlow Clowes
Compensation for slaughtered poultry
Channel Tunnel
Clinical judgment within remit
Reeman case
SERPS report
Report on NHS continuing care
A Debt of Honour
Pensions promise report
Equitable Life report
Ombudsman's Principles


The creation of the post of the Parliamentary Ombudsman was spurred on by the 1954 Crichel Down affair and by the activism of pressure groups, including the Society for Individual Freedom. The position was created, and his or her powers are documented in, the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967, the most notable section of which is section 4 and Schedule 2, which constrain the powers of the incumbent ombudsman. Amongst other things, the ombudsman cannot investigate personnel and commercial actions.

The position of HSC was created later, under the Health Service Commissioners Act 1993. The office of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman emphasises that it looks into complaints "that government departments, their agencies and some other public bodies in the UK – and the NHS in England – have not acted properly or fairly or have provided a poor service." The first UK Ombudsman was Sir Edmund Compton who had previously been the Comptroller and Auditor General. He was succeeded by Sir Alan Marre, a career civil servant. He was the first Ombudsman appointed for the National Health Service and combined that role with that of the Parliamentary Ombudsman as have all his successors. He later became chairman of Age Concern and the post is currently held by Dame Julie Mellor DBE (since January 2012).


All complaints go through a Member of Parliament (MP); this is known as the 'MP filter', which checks the legitimacy of complaints. In many cases, an MP attempts to solve the problem themselves. The Ombudsman rejects many complaints at first instance. In 2009–10, 11,066 enquiries were received, but only 356 were accepted for investigation. Finally, the ombudsman will not investigate complaints where recourse to an alternate remedy (tribunal, internal complaints etc.) exists.

Putting a complaint to the HSC is simpler in that no MP filter is operated. The HSC since April 2009 is the final stage of the complaints process.


The Ombudsman may investigate the administrative actions of a Government department or a public authority after a Member of Parliament has referred a complaint by a member of public who claims to have suffered injustice as a result of maladministration. The Ombudsman may investigate maladministration or a failure of service within the National Health Service upon receiving a complaint by anyone who claims to have suffered injustice as a result of that maladministration or service failure.

The Ombudsman possesses wide powers of investigation and is able to determine the procedure for the investigation and to obtain information from such people as required. In respect of the gathering of evidence and the examination of witnesses, the Ombudsman has the same authority as the High Court. Defiance of these powers can be treated as contempt of court.

If the Ombudsman finds that there has been injustice caused by maladministration or a failure in service, a remedy to put things right can be proposed. This can include an apology, a compensation payment for hardship or injustice and compensation for financial loss. Although the Ombudsman does not possess the power to compel a public authority to adhere to its findings, in practice, the public authority will comply. In 2010–11, more than 99% of the individual recommendations for remedy made by the Ombudsman were accepted by the body complained about.[4]

In rare instances where the body complained about does not accept the Ombudsman's findings, the Ombudsman may lay a report before Parliament explaining that the injustice done to the complainant has not been, or will not likely to be, remedied. In such an event, the Select Committee that oversees the work of the Ombudsman is able to examine the matter and reach its own conclusions.

Reports issued by the Ombudsman are susceptible to judicial review by the courts. However, it has been held that the court would not readily interfere with the exercise of the Ombudsman's discretion.[5]


External links

  • Official website
  • Report on ten investigations into NHS care of older people


This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.