We now move on to item 5 on the agenda, which is a statement by the Chair of the Finance Committee on the introduction of a committee-proposed Bill—the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Bill. I call on Simon Thomas, as Chair of the Finance Committee.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’m pleased to say that, on Monday, 2 October, I formally laid the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Bill before the Assembly. This is the first time that a committee has introduced a Bill since the Assembly gained full primary law-making powers. The Bill represents a significant amount of work undertaken over a number of years and I would like to place on record my thanks to the fourth Assembly’s Finance Committee, chaired by Jocelyn Davies, for its commitment to developing the Bill.

The ombudsman’s role is currently governed by the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Act 2005. This Bill restates that Act, while also setting out a number of new powers, creating one piece of bilingual legislation that will form part of the Welsh statute book. The 2005 Act has facilitated public access to the ombudsman’s service. It has enabled the resolution of disputes and provided redress for individuals. In its focus on complaints handling in the public sector, the 2005 Act has also stimulated improvement in the delivery of public services. However, since the introduction of the 2005 Act, best practice and international standards for ombudsmen have moved on. Developments include the strengthening of powers of ombudsmen in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

In the fourth Assembly, the Finance Committee undertook a public consultation to inform its inquiry into the proposals to extend the ombudsman’s powers. Following this inquiry, the committee drafted a Bill. In early October 2015, that committee consulted on the draft Bill. The responses were generally supportive of the provisions in the draft Bill. Since there was not sufficient time in the fourth Assembly to introduce a Bill, that Finance Committee recommended that the legislation be taken forward as soon as possible in the fifth Assembly.

The Finance Committee in this fifth Assembly has considered the draft Bill, seeking evidence from the ombudsman, as well as giving further consideration to the estimates of the costs and benefits of the Bill’s provisions. The Finance Committee, therefore, agreed to introduce the Bill to strengthen the role of the ombudsman and, in doing so, futureproof the legislation while making it citizen-centred.

I will now talk about these new provisions in this Bill. They will allow the ombudsman to accept oral complaints, which will therefore improve social justice and equal opportunities, and contribute to the Welsh Government’s commitment to create a fair and equitable Wales. We believe it will facilitate and improve the making of complaints by the most vulnerable and deprived members of society, such as people with learning difficulties, the homeless and the elderly. By removing the requirement to make a complaint in writing, the Bill will also futureproof access to the ombudsman’s services, allowing his office to develop guidance to respond to future developments, such as advances in technology—apps, smartphones et cetera.

The Bill will also include provision for the ombudsman to conduct own-initiative investigations. While requiring criteria specified on the face of the Bill to be satisfied prior to beginning an investigation, the power to conduct own-initiative investigations will provide a mechanism to protect the most vulnerable and give attention to the dignity of individuals. It also has wider benefits. It will enable the ombudsman to be more responsive to citizens since it allows him to investigate matters reported anonymously, strengthening the citizen’s voice.

The Bill allows the ombudsman to investigate matters relating to the private health services, which include medical treatment and nursing care—an element of a complaint in a public/private pathway. This will enable the ombudsman to explore the whole of a complaint, meaning that investigations can follow the citizen and not the sector. Currently, under the 2005 Act, the ombudsman has jurisdiction to investigate where the NHS commissions private medical treatment for patients, but not where such treatment is commissioned by patients themselves. Where patients commission private treatment, they currently have to make separate complaints for the public and private elements to the ombudsman and the private sector provider respectively. This is not satisfactory for the citizens in Wales.

For example, in giving evidence to the Finance Committee explaining these problems, the ombudsman noted a recent complaint. A member of the public had contacted his office in respect of the treatment provided to her late husband who had received treatment in the NHS, and who had then had private treatment before returning to the health service. The ombudsman noted that the individual had to wait five and a half years to get a response, which is clearly unacceptable.

The provisions of the Bill will also drive improvements in public services and in complaints handling. Currently, a model complaints policy is in place in Wales to help achieve consistency across public services. Evidence shows that, while the position is improving, adoption across the public sector is not consistent. We hope that the Bill will address this. The provisions in the Bill for complaints handling and procedures propose a similar approach for Wales as that in Scotland. This means that, for the first time, there will be regular, reliable and comparable data on complaints across the public sector. This, hopefully, will drive accountability and improvement in public services, transparency in reporting, and will empower the scrutiny process for which data and information are critical.

As a committee, we believe it is more important than ever that public services should deliver for the people of Wales and that the public services ombudsman is empowered to ensure that our services are citizen centred. The public needs to have confidence in the ombudsman to investigate where they believe they have suffered injustice or hardship or some transgression through maladministration, or in the way that services are delivered, and we believe that this Bill will go some way to achieving this. It is for these reasons that, in the opinion of the Finance Committee, the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Bill is necessary, and therefore, on behalf of the committee, I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

Thank you very much. I now call the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford.

Thank you very much. May I just say a word of thanks to Simon Thomas and the other members of the Finance Committee for the work that they have already done in preparing this Bill, and to present the Bill today? The Welsh Government appreciates the role of the public services ombudsman. It provides an important service in being a means to assist citizens who haven’t received the level of service from the public sector that they have a right to expect. The Welsh Government will look positively at measures that will assist the ombudsman to deliver his role.

Therefore, for example, we would welcome the proposal that he should be able to take oral complaints. This could assist the most vulnerable people in our society, including those who have protected characteristics. I am sure that the committees with responsibility for scrutinising the Bill will also want to consider how those people who do have protected characteristics will be supported in interpreting the proposed legislation.

On the other hand, Deputy Presiding Officer, in relation to certain other aspects of the Bill, the Welsh Government does have some concerns that expanding the role of the ombudsman could lead to people believing that public services are being overregulated in Wales, and it could lead to overlap or confusion in the roles of various regulators. We look forward to holding further discussions on these issues and some other issues contained within the Bill during the scrutiny process.

I’m sure you would expect me to say this as the Cabinet Secretary for finance, but I should also add that we do have some concerns about the increasing cost that would have to be borne as a result of this legislation, at a time when the rest of our public services have to tighten their belts. Every additional pound spent here, or any savings that aren’t made, is a pound that cannot be transferred to front-line services.

We will also need to look further at this aspect during the scrutiny process, but I do believe that we need to be entirely assured that Wales would get substantial benefit for the additional costs incurred. In the meantime, as the Bill is formally laid, the Welsh Government looks forward to playing a constructive part, and to take a full part in the scrutiny process. Thank you very much.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his response to the statement, and for stating, in the first place, that he will take a positive approach to this Bill? He has put his finger on a very obvious element, where the Bill addresses a current weakness, in that complaints cannot be accepted orally. It’s obvious in the way that technology is developing and the way that some people, as he mentioned, with protected characteristics are safeguarded that we need to make sure that that situation is resolved.

Also, very appropriately, as the Government representative, he talked about the range of other regulators and other people acting in this field, and trying to avoid any overlap with the work of other regulators. The Bill, as it’s drafted at the moment, includes a number of provisions for ensuring that there is co-ordination on that. But, of course, as we scrutinise the Bill, it’s possible that we will need to look at that to make sure that that is robust enough, and that it will be possible to avoid those concerns that the Minister alluded to.

Finally, of course, the cost is a completely appropriate question to raise on this matter. I would just wish to remind the whole of the Assembly that it is you, the Assembly, who will be paying this cost, so that everybody is aware that any additional costs arising from this Bill will come to you, ultimately, in the public services ombudsman’s estimates that are discussed by the Finance Committee and, in turn, are approved here. But, of course, it comes from the block grant. It’s part of the block grant. So, the Cabinet Secretary, as the person who is primarily responsible for handling the money in the block, will want to keep a very close eye on this expenditure, as I’m sure will other Assembly Members, in order to ensure that the costs associated—and outlined very thoroughly in the explanatory memorandum, I might add—are appropriate to the benefits that we will gain from passing the Bill or the other new provisions suggested in the Bill. So, I look forward to that discussion.

I certainly welcome the increased powers of the public services ombudsman under this Bill and the inclusion of the Assembly in the appointments process. I was very supportive of this when it came before committee last term and I look forward to scrutiny in our committee when it comes forward.

We firmly believe that the ombudsman should be accountable to the National Assembly for Wales, not just the Welsh Government, so the Welsh Conservatives are pleased to note that the nomination for this role will be here through the Assembly. However, I’d like some further clarification as regards how Members of the National Assembly for Wales will feed into all levels of the nomination process for the ombudsman and not just the final stages of appointment.

In terms of accessibility, we do welcome proposals to remove the requirement to make a complaint in writing and for the ombudsman still to be able to initiate investigations. Only five other members of the Council of Europe have ombudsmen without this power, so this is, in fact, long overdue in terms of bringing Wales in line with the rest of the UK and Europe. In ensuring objectivity with regard to this power, how will the provisions in this Bill draw a clear dividing line between the ombudsman’s commitment to representation and the Welsh Government’s priorities? And how will this Bill ensure greater Welsh Government and public service acceptance of investigatory outcomes?

The current model complaint policy in Wales is voluntary and the Finance Committee previously noted that adoption across the public sector is not consistent. So, firstly, what consideration might be made for the statutory basis of guidance issued by the ombudsman to apply to private health services as well? Following on from the open day debate last week, this particular new power will mean that we will be able to collate regular, reliable and comparable data on complaints across the public sector. Secondly, then, how will this data be collected to ensure a concerted drive in accountability and transparency in public services, empowering the scrutiny process?

And, finally, how will best practice going forward be determined? Will we be able to scrutinise best practice examples from around the UK and further afield to ensure that public service complaints are efficient and effective as a result of this Bill? Will this be reviewed as part of the five-year review by this Assembly?

I thank the committee and the Chairman of the Finance Committee, and I thank the Cabinet Secretary for receiving this in good spirit. I look forward to working with everybody, in my part, on the committee, and when it comes to scrutiny here, to ensure that we get this right. Thank you.

I thank Janet Finch-Saunders for her comments and her broad welcome for what the Bill proposes to do. Can I say at the outset that the Bill is based on the current—it does not change the current legislation in terms of the accountability of the public services ombudsman to the National Assembly, not to the Government? It’s a he. He currently is an independent ombudsman, and appointed for—. I think there are still some several years to go until the end of his appointment. I can’t quite remember when he came into post—something like 2013, I think, or 2014. The Bill makes specific assurances that his appointment is not broken by passing this Bill—so we haven’t interfered with those powers that are in place—and, when we come to appoint a new public services ombudsman, the Bill does not change the current arrangements that ensure that it’s this Assembly that is responsible for that, up to and including appointment through committee. So, I hope that some of the other innovations that we’ve also had in Finance Committee, for example, with pre-appointment hearings and so forth, can be looked at, not only for the ombudsman but for the new auditor general, which is actually the next appointment that will be made by this Assembly.

I welcome the fact that you broadly want to see these powers and believe that the verbal complaints powers and the own initiative, which I think is one of the more innovative powers there, that is used by, as you said, by other ombudsmen throughout the Council of Europe. It’s not unique in that sense, so we need to understand that international comparison. I’m sure that if the ombudsman were here himself, he would talk about the network of ombudsmen that does exist. There are international conferences, and they do come together. In fact, I attended one in Aberystwyth last year to hear from other ombudsman about how their work was done.

On the particular issue around data collection, I think it’s important to recall that the ombudsman makes an annual report to this Assembly, which is scrutinised, I think, by the committee that you sit on, but is available to all Assembly Members. You would expect that annual report, if this Bill were to become law, to include that data, to include the data comparison. There is certainly allowance made in the regulatory impact assessment for some of the costs that might come about that and, of course, you have some initial set-up costs to make sure that you have the infrastructure in place to allow that to happen. But the clear lesson of that—Janet Finch-Saunders’s final point, I think—was how that then informs best practice, and we want to see that reflected in ombudsmen’s annual reports going forward. You’re quite right; in the Bill itself, there’s a specific requirement for the Assembly to do a five-year review of the Bill and its operation, but that does not, in any way, hinder any other review being done by any committee of the Assembly or any external body that might be commissioned to do that.

I think, in terms of the model policy, that is—as you quite rightly said—a voluntary system at the moment. I think that by putting it on a more statutory footing, we’d have a gold standard. I’d hope that, for example, private healthcare providers would then want to be part of the gold standard because that, in turn, would show how they were playing their role in meeting citizens’ needs and meeting the needs of the people of Wales.

I also very much warmly welcome the introduction of this first committee-generated Bill. Eighteen years after we voted for devolution we’ve now got a Bill being introduced by an Assembly committee. I think that’s a huge piece of progress. I was part of the Finance Committee in the fourth Assembly, and can I join with Simon Thomas in paying credit to Jocelyn Davies for the work she did as Chair of that committee in taking this Bill to the stage that it is at now?

The ombudsman provides a hugely important service to many of the people living in Wales. The ombudsman is often the last resort for people trying to get justice. They have been let down by the system right the way across. The ombudsman is the last person that they can go to. The proposed Bill provides many potential improvements. Can I just talk about oral complaints? The ombudsman cannot take oral complaints. Every single one of us in this room, I would suggest, takes oral complaints. If we didn’t, we would reduce the number of complaints we get from constituents by about a third. If we didn’t accept them orally, and quite often in inappropriate places, when they want to tell you about things—. A lot of people do like to tell you things rather than having to write it down. There’s a literacy problem amongst many people who don’t like to write things down, especially officially, which can be dealt with by officialdom. They have a nervousness about it. They have a nervousness about their literacy skills. I think, perhaps most importantly, they’re frightened they’ll get something wrong. I think that allowing the ombudsman to accept things orally will mean that people will lose that fear. Now, that might increase the number of complaints going to the ombudsman, but it might also stop future ones, because, if the ombudsman gets a lot of complaints in one area, rather than having to wait continually for the next one, he’ll be able—and I use the word ‘he’ because it’s currently a he—to deal with it.

So, if nothing else, having oral complaints would totally change the ombudsman from somebody who works within that sort of technical area, which all of us feel at home in but a large number of my constituents don’t, to someone prepared to accept complaints in the same manner that every single one of us does.

I’ve only one question for Simon Thomas: can he further outline how the legislation builds on the current legislation to benefit what we should only be interested in: the people of Wales?

I thank Mike Hedges not only for his comments today but for the work he’s done on the Finance Committee previously, and of course very much support what he said about Jocelyn Davies. I hope I can continue—. I think Jocelyn had an approach where she wanted to work with all parties here, and I hope that—. Certainly, taking through a Bill, I need to do that, and I’m very much aware that I need to build support for this Bill on behalf of the committee.

I just want to say, before answering specifically the question, to really just support what Mike Hedges was saying about the need for oral complaints, we’ve all sat down in surgeries and in our offices with people who are very prepared to tell us their story but will not sign the piece of paper or will say they didn’t have their glasses, and, you know, we have to navigate our way through this. But, looking into this Bill, I was struck by the figures for, in effect, functional illiteracy in Wales. It is as high as 25 per cent of the adult population, and is higher in Wales than in other parts of the United Kingdom. So, I think there’s a real need for us to open the doors for the ombudsman to accept those oral complaints.

Of course, there has to be some kind of verification process and we’d have to ensure that the ombudsman was able to ensure the complaints were fully taken forward. But the potential increase in complaints could then be offset, as Mike Hedges said, by a better understanding of the pattern of complaints in a particular sector, which might lead to an own-initiative investigation, and, in turn, as well, by the standardisation part of this Bill, which, certainly in the Scottish ombudsman’s case, has actually led to fewer complaints progressing beyond the first stage. In other words, things get resolved earlier and there are some savings within the system due to that.

Specifically to reply to Mike Hedges, I assure him and the whole Assembly that the Bill only builds on the current Bills; it doesn’t take away any powers. As well as the oral complaints powers, it will enable, as I said, having those own-initiative powers. I think it’s important that we put on record that we’re not writing a blank cheque for the ombudsman to just go off and do own-initiative investigations. It’s on the face of the Bill how those investigations have to relate to his work and to the wider needs of the citizen. I hope, as the Bill gets scrutinised, that the needs of the citizen are recognised as being central to this Bill, and, of course, there may be ideas that come in through the security process that will only assist and help us achieve that aim.

I’d also like to thank Simon Thomas, as Chair of the committee, for the work that he’s done in bringing this Bill forward. Indeed, a number of the points that I was going to raise have already been raised by other Members. But I think it is a very important point to make—Mike Hedges has mentioned this in particular—the point about costs relating to accepting complaints orally. Because, of course, if there’s going to be an increase in the number of complaints because you can make them orally, that might mean that there are costs at the outset of the process, but, in the long term, we can ensure, through this process, that public services work better and more efficiently, and so there will be savings. Invest to save, possibly—that model.

I see the Cabinet Secretary is smiling, and I know that he’s very keen to keep costs under control, for obvious reasons, but I think this is an issue of social justice. Many of the people who are involved regularly with public services, and who then need a system in order to make complaints and get justice, are people who need all possible support in order to ensure that they receive equitable treatment that perhaps many of us would feel more comfortable and confident doing in written form.

I’d like to ask the Chair of the committee how he foresees it will be possible to inform our citizens that this new process is available to them. What kind of process will need to be put in place so that citizens know that they can make oral complaints? Also, the Chair mentioned in his statement many times, for good reasons, futureproofing—I’m not sure what that is in Welsh, but ensuring that things are futureproofed for the future in terms of technology and so forth. Of course, technology can be a good thing; it can make it easier for people to contact people in public office, in particular, but, of course, that’s going to cause a lot of work if you can receive complaints through Twitter, for example. I can imagine that that could have unexpected or unwanted consequences. So, I’d like to ask, as I said, in the first place: how are we going to ensure that citizens, on the one hand, know that they have the right to make these complaints orally and have the support to do that, but, on the other hand, how are we going to keep that balance, remembering that Mr Drakeford is going to look at the costs—how are we going to ensure that costs are under control, and that we don’t use technological opportunities, because that might create a situation that we don’t want to see?

Thank you very much to Steffan Lewis for those questions. May I start by saying that there’s some good news here in the wider context? Namely, if you look at the reports of the public services ombudsman over recent years, then the number of complaints, without the proposed legislation, has been increasing regularly. Now, does that reflect on the quality of public services, or does that reflect on improved information about the services of the ombudsman? That’s not a question that I can answer here and now, but what I can say is that, as the number of complaints increases, the cost per complaint for the ombudsman of dealing with those complaints has been decreasing. So, it’s interesting to see that the complaints are going up, but the cost per complaint is going down, which means that the ombudsman, to date, has been managing to subsume those and absorb those costs within the way his office works and to provide enhanced services without necessarily engendering additional costs as a result of that.

It’s also true to say that the ombudsman has set a voluntary ceiling in coming to the Finance Committee. He committed that he wouldn’t ask for more than 0.03 per cent of the total block. So, although that is a voluntary agreement, it is something that the Finance Committee, and, in turn, the Assembly, can also insist upon. So, the management of costs, in a way, is in the hands of the committee and the Assembly. So, as I said, this isn’t a blank cheque to enable costs to increase. But it is true to say that more information about services and greater accessibility to those services could lead to an increase in the number of complaints. If you look at the fact that we are discussing legislation based on the 2005 Act, well, back in 2005, there was no iPhone, there were no apps, there was no way of making contact directly using those methods. There’s nothing in the current legislation that allows the ombudsman to actually advertise services in that way; everything has to be done in written form and the most electronic means is to receive an e-mail. Now, perhaps we wouldn’t want to go down the Twitter route, because we all receive complaints via Twitter and Facebook from time to time, but you would expect, over a period of time, those interactive services, through apps, smartphones or whatever else, to be developed by the ombudsman, but it’s difficult to do that whilst the powers are so restricted in terms of only accepting written complaints.

Thank you very much.