Complaints against Ministers and civil servants' decisions reach new high

Tuesday 13 February 2018

Official complaints by the public against decisions taken by Ministers and civil servants are believed to be the highest number recorded within a year.

The States Complaints Board received 18 new complaints in 2017 - the previous highest total was 17 new complaints in 2006 and 2010.

In the 2017 annual report, the Board Chairman, Geoffrey Crill says: “The Panel recognised the sterling work undertaken across States Departments, and is pleased that in many of the complaints cases dealt with during 2017, Departments have adhered to best practice in complaint - handling processes, and in particular have acknowledged mistakes, apologised and sought to remedy guidelines and policies to ensure that such complaints are not duplicated in the future. However, there does remain a sense, in certain Departments, that the Complaints Panel’s findings are not supportable unless they uphold the Department’s position.

"It is our hope that under the leadership of the new Chief Executive, States Departments will see the Panel not as an adversary, but as a critical friend, and there will be greater appreciation of the honorary service it provides to both the Public and public bodies, in seeking to improve public administration.”

The board deals with any complaints where a member of the public feels a Minister or civil servant has not acted properly, fairly or provided poor service. They can assess whether to hold a public hearing into the case if all other processes have been exhausted, and put forward any recommendations so the situation doesn’t arise again in future.

The Planning Department received the majority of the 18 new complaints received within 2017, including decisions surrounding planning applications, a claim that the Environment Minister dismissed recommendations by a planning inspector, and a complaint on the exclusion of relevant parties in the consultation period ahead of the Future Hospital debate.

The Infrastructure Department received the second highest number of complaints – two of which were on the Minister of Infrastructure’s handling of a foreshore encroachment claim, and another associated with the Minister’s changes to taxi fares, charges and tariffs.

Pictured: Decisions by the Planning Department and Minister received the most complaints in 2017.

Of the 18 new complaints in 2017, 10 were either closed or dealt through the Complaint’s Panel’s involvement. Eight cases are still ongoing and have been carried into 2018, including one case on the handling of a person’s dismissal from the Jersey Youth Service, and one complaint against the Education Department due to an overpayment of student fees, on which the Board Chairman felt there wasn't sufficient justification for a public hearing, but expressed, “...disappointed that there appeared to have been a complete lack of any dialogue from either Education or the Treasury as to how the repayment might be effected."

Three unresolved complaint cases from 2016 were carried over to 2017 and have now been closed. One of which saw the panel support the complaint against the States Employment Board’s refusal to give ill-health retirement to a school laboratory technician, who was diagnosed with hypersensitivity pneumonitis caused by exposure to hazardous materials 16 months after she had retired.

The complaints panel said whilst they agreed that the decision not to grant ill-health retirement had: “…been appropriate given the information available at the time, it considered that there had been a failing in the duty of care towards her,” but the Chairman, Geoffrey Crill, was disappointed with the response by the States Employment Board on the matter, which he’s described as “poorly balanced, highly selective, and ignored the context of the events surrounding the decision.”

Pictured: A complaint against the States Employment Board over the handling of a school laboratory technician was carried into 2017. 

Mr Crill added that although the complaints panel does not agree with “…the majority of the recommendations contained within the recent Jersey Law Commission topic report entitled ‘Improving Administrative Redress in Jersey’, it does accept that some amendment to the legislation which underpins its work would help deliver greater effectiveness. To this end, the Panel will be urging the Privileges and Procedures Committee to bring forward amendments to the Administrative Decisions (Review) (Jersey) Law 1982 during 2018, in order to ensure that its procedures and scope are adequately defined."