Abstract
The Law Commission has been working on ombudsman issues for some years in its attempts to produce legislative reforms to the system of public law remedies. Its latest publication represents its most in-depth study yet of the ombudsman community and contains a number of important proposals. Perhaps its most controversial proposal is to give ombudsman reports enhanced legal authority by making their findings legally binding on public bodies. This article argues that whilst there is much merit in the idea, it is unnecessary and would unfavourably alter the nature of the ombudsman design.
Notes
1. According to the Law Commission Final Report, the origins of this project dated back to 2003 (Law Commission Citation2010a, para. 1.9).
2. The use of the term public services, as opposed to public sector, ombudsmen is an increasingly common development, possibly influenced by the trend towards private bodies delivering public services.
3. I have placed on my website a draft copy of my response to the Law Commission's Consultation Paper which deals with the majority of the proposals made by the Law Commission. See http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/law/staff/academic/rkirkham
4. The appointment process was chaired by the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament and was overseen by an independent assessor who provided ‘Parliament with a validation certificate confirming that the process complied with good practice and that the nomination of the ombudsman was made on merit after a fair, open and transparent process’, per David McLetchie MSP, 25 March 2009, plenary session of the Scottish Parliament, 25 March 2009 http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/business/orsearch/ReportView.aspx?r = 4857
5. See the announcement on the Welsh Assembly's website regarding the appointment of the most recent Public Services Ombudsman for Wales: http://www.assemblywales.org/newhome/new-news-third-assembly.htm?act = dis&id = 78496&ds = 3/2008