Whether dealing with individual complaints or addressing systemic issues, the Ombudsman’s office reinforces the accepted principles of good conduct in public administration. These principles include compliance with law or policy, acting fairly and reasonably, timeliness, and access to information.
Resolving complaints
Since its establishment in 1975 the Office has prided itself in being able to listen to the person’s complaint sympathetically and to advise where they might find help. Consequently, frontline staff including the receptionist and investigation officers are amongst the most knowledgeable people when it comes to navigating NSW government bureaucracies.
For a complaint to be formally accepted, it was required (until the year 2000) to be made in writing. Sometimes this proved to be a barrier, particularly for complainants in detention and custody, and those with language or literacy challenges. It became an acceptable work-around for ombudsman staff to accept and write down complaints made orally and lodge them for the complainant in writing.
Resolving disputes quickly by making inquiries without commencing an investigation has been a consistent aim of the Office. As Irene Moss, the state’s fourth Ombudsman, noted, the willingness of public authorities to respond positively and openly to initial inquiries from the Office helps the ‘speedy and informal resolution of complaints’, and it was something she and other Ombudsman since have consistently sought to encourage.
The Ombudsman received 2,381 written complaints in the first year of operation (1975-76). Due to the novelty of the office, the telephone ran hot. The small staff of 14 employees dealt with approximately 3,600 telephone calls, plus ‘a considerable number’ of (uncounted) in-person enquiries and interviews. Thus in its first year the office dealt with (what would be defined today as) 5,981 contacts (not including in-person interviews).
Nearly fifty years on in 2023-24, the Office received 29,632 contacts, of which 14,770 were actionable complaints. The phone was still an important avenue for contacts, however this is now supplemented by electronic interactions via email, websites and widgets.
To give parliamentarians and the public a sense of the range of enquiries undertaken by the Ombudsman each year, the first Ombudsman Ken Smithers started the tradition of publishing case notes or case studies in the annual reports. This tradition continues to this day in the form of stand-alone 6-monthly casebooks introduced by the state's eighth Ombudsman, Paul Miller.
Ensuring fair and reasonable conduct
Over the years the areas of responsibility, or legislated jurisdiction, of the Ombudsman have changed and this has inevitably altered the mix of complaints received by the Office. The vast majority of complaints received relate to conduct and fairness.
It is never pleasant having your actions scrutinised and many departments found the process uncomfortable. Despite the Ombudsman’s best intentions, departmental responses - and those of their Ministers -were not always so welcoming. The inquiries and investigations of the Office were regarded by some public authorities as ‘aggressive and obstructive’. David Landa ruminated in his 1988-89 Annual Report that this was because ‘traditionally governments have operated away from the public eye.’ Landa took great pride in the role of the Ombudsman to ‘bring the lamp of scrutiny to otherwise dark places, even over the resistance of those who would draw the blinds’.
John McMillan, the former Commonwealth Ombudsman and sixth NSW Ombudsman, has observed that a reactionary, defensive response was typical of an agency being investigated for the first time. However, as agencies became more familiar with the Ombudsman’s role and accustomed to the scrutiny, they became more cooperative and receptive to the Ombudsman’s findings.
One area where the Ombudsman has had particular success over its fifty years is in pointing out deficiencies in decision making, and requesting that decisions be reassessed by departments and agencies. The Ombudsman has always maintained that furnishing reasons for any decision is one of the basic principles of good administration and is often a requirement of procedural fairness. Explanations to a complainant should always include enough information to inform them about their appeal rights and the kind of case they would need to make in order to have their appeal fully considered.
Local government came within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction in 1976. A large category of complaints about Councils related to rates. Another long-standing area of complaint was the lack of notification of adjoining owners of building applications. The Ombudsman repeatedly recommended that councils needed to notify affected neighbours and to consider objections of such people. It was not until 1993 that this became obligatory.
Investigating in the public interest
Over the years, the NSW Ombudsman has conducted major investigations of public interest issues. Sometimes these were triggered by an individual complaint.
Moving beyond individual complaints to consider the bigger issues was first embraced by David Landa, who saw it as a useful strategy to reinforce the Ombudsman’s ‘value and credibility’ to Parliament. He established a path for those that followed. Sometimes, public interest special reports have been welcomed. Occasionally they have been resisted.
Key reports include
- Inadequate Maintenance at Electricity Commission Power Stations (1981-82)
- Report concerning amendments to the Local Government Act to require councils to notify owners of adjoining properties of building applications and to consider the objections of properly interested persons before determining building applications (1990)
- reports on Asbestos (2010, 2012, 2017, 2025)
- Modifying public housing to meet the needs of tenants with disability (2022)
- Investigation into inmate discipline in NSW correctional centres (2024).
