Recommendation 11

HM Government Acknowledged

We welcome the Committee’s recognition of the benefits of the independent peer review of PHSO’s value for money in 2018 and the plans to commission another peer review during the period covered by PHSO’s new corporate strategy. PHSO has been sharing its experience of peer review to encourage other Ombuds services to do the same. The Ombudsman has spoken to the Forum of Canadian Ombudsman on this subject. Further, PHSO has led the development of International Ombudsman Institute guidance to support peer reviews. This now includes the creation of a list of validated independent panel members which Ombuds can commission when undertaking peer reviews. The list will include academics who have expertise in Ombudsman services and auditors who have experience of Ombudsman services. We recognise the potential value that a panel member with a background in audit may bring, where this is complemented by the the wider range of skills and expertise required to carry out an effective peer review. In each peer review, the process is led by an independent chair who appoints additional independent members to form a peer review panel. The scope and content of the peer review is negotiated between the commissioning Ombudsman scheme and the independent panel. When PHSO commissions the next peer review (and there may be a delay for logistical reasons associated with travel restrictions during the covid-19 pandemic), we will notify the peer review chair, once appointed, of the Committee’s recommendations regarding the composition of the panel, the scope of the review, and the structure of the panel’s final report so that this can be taken into account. It is important to note, however, that the role of a modern national Ombudsman organization has already been set out by the Venice Principles, now endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly.1 Further, the value of a peer review lies in its flexibility to examine a range of emerging issues, and that it should be seen as complementary to a range of other audit and assessment mechanisms (Parliamentary scrutiny, internal audit, and audit by the National Audit Office), and not the single source of scrutiny. The way the peer review panel’s report is structured will ultimately be decided by the panel’s independent chair.