2026.03.24 Statement by the Assistant Minister for Sustainable Economic Development and External Relations regarding Report on the review of final stage complaints against public services

STATEMENT TO BE MADE BY THE ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR
SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS ON TUESDAY 24th MARCH 2026

Report on the review of final stage complaints against public services

In October 2024, the Chief Minister tasked me with leading the next phase of developing a final- stage complaint-handling mechanism to reform or replace the current States of Jersey Complaints Panel. This included reviewing the case for establishing a Jersey Public Services Ombudsman

The Report was published on Government's website last Friday.

Firstly, the report identifies the admirable efforts and dedication of past and present volunteer members of the Jersey Complaints Panel.

Secondly,  the  Report  recommends  urgent  progress  of  Proposition  P.32/2018  to  replace  the Complaints Panel with a Jersey Public Services Ombudsman service and that further policy work include the development of a road map for implementation.

The report has identified and addresses two main objections to the establishment of a Public Services Ombudsman: the grounds of cost and a perception that the main need for our community is for the Complaints Panel to have teeth.

The Administrative Decisions (Jersey) Law constituted the Complaints Panel in 1982 – 35 years before the July 2017 report of the Jersey Care Inquiry exposed one of a number of critical gaps in complaints handling against public services: children's voices were not consistently heard within government, and systemic failures within government were going unchecked.

The cost of that inquiry was reported to be in the region of £23 million. The recommendation of the inquiry that Jersey establish an independent Jersey Children's Commissioner was implemented, but this role is not the same as a Children's Ombudsman.

Broader governance, systemic and cultural flaws within government have been the focus of Jersey's Comptroller  and  Auditor  General,  who  was  established  in  2014.  Unlike  a  Public  Services Ombudsman, this statutory watchdog does not inquire into the handling of individual complaints nor seek to resolve them as a final review process before potential judicial review.

In October 2017, Jersey's Law Commission published a report recommending the establishment of a Public Services Ombudsman with wider scope. The following year the States Assembly supported Proposition P.32/2018 to effect this, brought by Deputy Ozouf .

Jersey's Children's Commissioner, established in 2019, is not an ombudsman. Her investigation powers are confined to actions or omissions of a "relevant authority" providing services to children that  infringe  or  adversely  affect  the  rights  of  children  and  young  people.  The  Children's Commissioner may also assist a child or young person in making a complaint to a relevant authority and enquiring into its progress.

Unlike a Public Services Ombudsman, she does not investigate individual complaints and cannot make findings on individual cases of maladministration. Nor does she have power to recommend remedies in specific cases, or function as a formal dispute resolution body.

Our Children's Commissioner has worked in the office of the Ombudsman for Children in Ireland. This is a hybrid model handling both advocacy and final investigation of individual complaints. Conversely, in both the UK and New Zealand, these two functions are split between a Children's Commissioner and a Public Services Ombudsman.

In my Report, I recommend not only a single Ombudsman but also a rationalised complaints handling landscape to improve Islanders' experiences while reducing public sector costs. The administrative justice principles upon which a regulatory authority, a court tribunal or a public services ombudsman investigates a complaint differ substantially from the format of a Scrutiny hearing administered by the Greffe. The States Greffier serves the Panel as an administrator rather than a professional investigator.

The Complaints Panel is an anachronism in the context of modern privacy rights. Its methodology and resourcing no longer conform with international modern standards of administrative justice. These aim to ensure complaints are investigated adequately, and parties are heard fairly, even in the absence of a public hearing. Complaints handling mechanisms can be weaponised against public officials. Our local press often acts as a voice for Islanders, along with easily accessible States Members. It is not appropriate for government machinery to allow grievances to be aired in matters of public reputation without a robust safeguarding structure.

Policy officers and I have received many emotive submissions from different people who have engaged with public services and the Complaints Panel. Unlike the format of a Scrutiny Report, and more in line with a report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, my report has kept this content private while publishing the anonymised results of a public consultation that supports a complaints  resolution  service  consistent  with  the  service  provided  by  a  Public  Services Ombudsman.

This statement has outlined what now could be perceived as a history of administrative resistance towards the implementation of P.33/2018. I would advise present and future States Members to be mindful of conflicts that could be perceived to compromise advice on this matter. There is evidence that nearly all recommendations of British Public Ombudsmen are implemented and have driven improvement in public services.

Thank you, Sir. I now would be happy to answer any questions from Members.