Local Government
Ombudsman Watch
Ombudsman Watch
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
LGO INVESTIGATOR ATTEMPTS TO INFILTRATE
LGOWATCH FORUM
In November 2004, a Local Government Ombudsman Investigator attempted to join a
private, LGOWatch-supporters only Yahoo Group, without declaring who he worked for.
(I have since suspended activity and new membership of that Yahoo Discussion Group,
in large part to avoid the risk of infiltration. The LGOWatch website and Ebulletins are
now our main mode of communication instead).
I am not exposing the name of this Investigator on the LGOWatch website at the
present time, but reserve my position with regard to any decision to do so in the future.
My thinking at the moment is that this individual’s questionable actions seem typical of
the behaviour of Investigators and senior staff working for the Local Government
Ombudsman institution, and I would not wish to imply by any means that this individual’s
attitude is anything other than endemic in the whole LGO institutional ethos.
I shall therefore refer to this individual by the pseudonym ‘Jack Snooper’ for the
purpose of this article, and have amended the correspondence below accordingly.
First, I received an e-mail from Yahoo! Groups saying that an individual wanted to join
the LGOWatch Forum. The Forum clearly states that the Group is only for those who
support the aims of LGOWatch, which include the replacement of the biased Local
Government Ombudsman institution with a truly independent Local Government
Complaints Commission. Those who wished to join were asked to give their name and
also some detail of their experience at the hands of the LGO in their application e-mail.
Mr Snooper’s application did not include his name, but his e-mail address did identify
him. His supporting comment with the application e-mail was simply, ‘I am interested in
public administration.’
Initially, I did not know he was an LGO Investigator. However, as the Forum was
intended to be a supportive group for those who had suffered injustice from the LGO,
and not a resource for researchers, I rejected Mr Snooper’s application, and sent him
the following e-mail:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent Tuesday 2 November 04:
Dear Mr Snooper,
Thank you for your e-mail and for expressing interest in joining the Group.
On the basis of the message you sent with your application, I am not convinced that this
is quite the right Group for you to join. It is the campaigning and support Group of
LGOwatch, and membership is restricted to those who actively support our aims. Many
of the people who contact us have had a very upsetting and traumatic experience of
injustice in their dealings with the LGO, and we have members who have been driven to
depression and thoughts of suicide; we therefore need to ensure the Forum is a safe
space.
Perhaps you will find the LGOwatch website to have some interesting information and
links.
Best regards,
Gary Powell
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I then got a bit suspicious, and decided to do a Google search on Mr Snooper’s name,
including the phrase ‘Local Government Ombudsman’. It revealed that a Mr Snooper
worked as an Investigator at the Coventry office of the LGO. I wondered whether the Mr
Snooper who applied to join the LGOWatch Forum ,and the Mr Snooper at the LGO’s
Coventry office, might possibly be one and the same person. I therefore wrote the
following e-mail to Mr Snooper:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent on Thursday 4 November 04:
Dear Mr Snooper,
You recently applied to join the LGOwatch Forum for people who support the aims of
the LGOwatch campaign, which is highly critical of the Local Government Ombudsman
service.
The introduction to the LGOwatch group states that group membership is open to those
who support our aims, and gives the following information:
If you wish to join the Forum, please send a brief account of your experience of the
LGO to the Group Moderator, giving the reasons why you support our aims.
With your application you simply said
I am interested in public administration.
I rejected your application to join on the grounds that the comment you provided did not
provide evidence of meeting the membership criteria as an active supporter of the
LGOwatch aims and/or a victim of LGO injustice.
On the LGO website is this article:
[removed]
written by an LGO Investigator working at the Coventry office called Jack Snooper.
Please would you let me know whether you and this Jack Snooper are the same person.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Powell
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I received no reply from Mr Snooper, so I sent the same e-mail again on Monday 8
November.
I still received no reply.
I therefore sent the following e-mail to Mr Snooper:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent Sunday 14 November 04:
Dear Mr Snooper,
I refer to my last two e-mails to you asking whether you are the Mr Jack Snooper who
works as an Investigator at the Coventry Office of the Commission for Local
Administration in England, and note that you have not responded to my messages.
I hope you will appreciate that the Forum members and I would be concerned about the
intentions of any LGO Investigator who attempted to join this Forum without revealing
his interest, and that, in the first instance, asking for clarification of this matter, by
sending an e-mail to your goodself and/or by writing to Mr Snooper at the Coventry
office, is of considerable importance to us.
Should this just be an astonishing coincidence - given that there cannot be that many Mr
Jack Snoopers in the UK who have both an interest in local administration and a
specialised interest in joining a Forum that discusses negative experiences of the LGO
- then I am sure that the Mr Snooper who works as an LGO Investigator will want to
confirm he is not the individual concerned.
If you could please find a moment to send a one-line answer, I should be very grateful.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Powell
LGOwatch Yahoo Group Owner
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was still no reply.
On 4 April I therefore sent the following letter to the LGO Investigator Mr Jack Snooper
by recorded delivery. I also sent a copy by recorded delivery to his boss in the Coventry
Office, the Local Government Ombudsman Mr Jerry White, and the most senior Local
Government Ombudsman Mr Tony Redmond. Just for good measure, I sent a further
copy of the letter to the Select Committee on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister,
which was preparing a Report at the time on the Role and Effectiveness of the Local
Government Ombudsmen for England. This is the letter I sent:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Jack Snooper
Investigator
Local Government Ombudsman’s Office
The Oaks No 2
Westwood Way
Westwood Business Park
Coventry CV4 8JB
Enclosures
4 April 2005
Dear Mr Snooper
LOCAL GOVERNMENT OMBUDSMAN WATCH FORUM
I am the founder and co-ordinator of Local Government Ombudsman Watch, a
campaign to expose the pro-local government bias in the investigations and decisions
of the office of the Local Government Ombudsman.
LGOWatch has an online Yahoo Group where contributors can post and read
messages at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LGOWatch/ . It is restricted to members
only, and those wishing to join the Group must apply to the Group Owner by e-mail. It
has always been made clear in the Group’s introductory message that membership is
only open to those who support the Group’s aims, one of which is exposure of the
LGO's pro-council bias. For some time I have not posted or approved any messages to
the Group, or accepted any new Members, in large part from fear that the Group has
been or will be infiltrated by a member of the organisation we are seeking to have
disbanded.
On 1 November 2004 I received an e-mail from Yahoo stating that someone with the e-
mail address [removed] was applying to join the Forum. The message he wrote
supporting his application was simply, ‘I am interested in public administration.’
The Group’s introductory message was absolutely clear that this was a Group only for
those who believed that the LGO was biased against complainants and who wanted
reform or abolition of this institution. I therefore sent an e-mail to Mr Snooper on 2
November explaining why I had rejected his application.
During a subsequent moment of suspicion, I entered ‘Jack Snooper’ in a search
engine, and discovered that a Mr Jack Snooper works as an Investigator at the
Coventry Office of the Local Government Ombudsman. Indeed, he had written an article
(that I can no longer find on the LGO’s website) entitled [removed], (enclosed).
I therefore sent a further e-mail to Mr Snooper on 4 November asking him to let me
know whether or not he was the Jack Snooper who worked for the LGO at the Coventry
Office. I received no reply, so I sent the same e-mail again on 8 November. I still
received no reply, so I sent yet another e-mail to Mr Snooper on 14 November. To date,
I have received no reply to any of these four e-mails, notwithstanding my simple request
for a one-line confirmation or denial.
Please could I therefore ask you to confirm or deny that you are the Mr Jack Snooper
who attempted to join the Members Only Local Government Ombudsman Watch Forum
on 1 November 2004.
If you are not the Mr Jack Snooper in question, please accept my apology for this
inconvenience. I hope you would understand, however, the importance of my enquiry for
the sake both of my members, and of the public at large, who might have cause to
question the intentions of a Local Government Ombudsman Investigator who attempted
to join a private forum that is critical of the LGO without declaring that he works for the
said institution. I imagine there are not many people in the country called Jack Snooper
who have an interest in local administration to the extent that they attempt to join an
Internet discussion group restricted to those who are campaigning against pro-council
bias on the part of the Local Government Ombudsman; and if indeed there is a Jack
Snooper in the country, different from yourself, who falls into this category, it seems
rather strange that he did not have the courtesy to reply to any of my four e-mails simply
to say that he did not work for the Local Government Ombudsman. Furthermore, apart
from the usual advertisers who attempt to sneak into Yahoo Groups, this Mr Snooper
was the only applicant to LGOWatch who merely expressed an academic interest.
It could be the case, of course, by an astonishing coincidence, that you are not the Mr
Jack Snooper in question, in which case, as mentioned above, I do hope you will
forgive my enquiry to remove the doubt.
If, however, you are the Mr Jack Snooper in question, I wonder whether you would kindly
explain to me why you attempted to join the LGOWatch Forum without declaring that
you are an LGO Investigator, why you did not reply to any of my four e-mails, and
whether you feel that your actions reflect the degree of integrity and honesty that should
be expected from Investigators working for your institution.
I look forward to receiving your reply at your earliest convenience.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Powell
Co-ordinator, LGOWatch
cc Mr J White, Local Government Ombudsman
Mr T Redmond, Local Government Ombudsman
Ms C Littleboy, Clerk to the ODPM Select Committee
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This produced a response, and on 6 April 2005 I received the following e-mail:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received 6 April 05:
Mr Powell,
I refer to your letter of 4 April 2005.
I confirm that I am the person who applied to join the Ombudsmanwatch forum
on Yahoo, based on my personal interest in public administration.
It was unfortunate that I overlooked your organisation’s opening message, but
it was not intentional.
I now consider the matter to be closed.
Jack Snooper
cc Mr J R White
cc Mr T Redmond
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Mr Snooper now considers the matter to be closed, I am unfortunately unable to put
the following questions to him, which are burdening me somewhat:
1 After the initial e-mail rejecting his application, I sent Mr Snooper a further three e-
mails asking him whether he was an LGO Investigator, and he failed to reply to any of
them. Why did he not reply to any of these e-mails if he had nothing to hide?
2 Even if he did, as he claims, ‘overlook the opening message’, does he not think
that it should nonetheless have occurred to him that it was totally inappropriate to try to
join the Group without declaring that he works as an Investigator for the Local
Government Ombudsman? After all, the Forum is called ‘Local Government
Ombudsman Watch’. Did he not think that other members of the Forum had a right to
know his interest before possibly revealing sensitive information about their dealings
with the LGO and any avenues they were currently pursuing as a result?
3 Even if Mr Snooper did ‘overlook the opening message’, if he had nothing to
hide, why did he not declare that he was an LGO Investigator in his application e-mail?
Why did he just say ‘I am interested in local administration’ instead? Does he not think
that, if you are joining an organisation that you know to be concerned with the Local
Government Ombudsman, and you are asked to give details of your experience of the
LGO, not disclosing the relevant fact that you work for the institution gives the
impression of having something to hide?
4 Does Mr Snooper think it is a good idea to apply to join a Forum without reading
what that Forum is about, what beliefs its members have and what its stated objectives
are? Does he not think that a person who worked as an Investigator for the LGO might
be a little more cautious and reflective before making decisions of this kind, perhaps
considering the evidence beforehand as to whether the Forum is one whose aims and
objectives he supports, and its members people he wishes to be associated with?
5 Was Mr Snooper feeling unwell or confused when he applied to join the
LGOWatch Forum so precipitously, whilst, as he claims, ‘overlooking the opening
message’? If one really is interested in a Forum to the extent that one wants to join it,
would it not be a natural thing to read the introductory message? After all, there is a
delay between applying to join a Yahoo Group and the Moderator accepting the
application, so in the meantime it might perhaps have seemed interesting to read the
introductory message. The Forum was called ‘Local Government Ombudsman Watch’
after all, and Mr Snooper does work for the Local Government Ombudsman.
6 Does Mr Snooper think that the public would expect staff working as Investigators
for the Local Government Ombudsman to have the qualities of honesty and integrity?
Does he think he has given this impression? Does he not think that a sincere apology
might have been appropriate, rather than a mere reference to his actions being
‘unfortunate’?
7 Mr Snooper says ‘I now consider the matter to be closed’. Does he think that the
supporters of LGOWatch and other members of the public who fund the LGO and his
staff through taxation, and have a right to expect high standards from staff investigating
maladministration, would consider the matter to be closed on the basis of his eventual
reply?
8 We have discovered that the LGO sends Mr Snooper out to give talks to councils
on good practice. Does he think that his actions in this case represent good practice? If
a local government officer he was investigating behaved in a similar way, would Mr
Snooper be minded not to find fault?
The reader will, of course, draw his or her own conclusions with regard to all these
questions that I am unable to put to Mr Snooper, as he considers the matter to be
closed.
Unilaterally closing a case with so many serious unanswered questions outstanding that
suggest evidence of bad practice …. now, why does that sound a little familiar …..?
LGOWATCH FORUM
In November 2004, a Local Government Ombudsman Investigator attempted to join a
private, LGOWatch-supporters only Yahoo Group, without declaring who he worked for.
(I have since suspended activity and new membership of that Yahoo Discussion Group,
in large part to avoid the risk of infiltration. The LGOWatch website and Ebulletins are
now our main mode of communication instead).
I am not exposing the name of this Investigator on the LGOWatch website at the
present time, but reserve my position with regard to any decision to do so in the future.
My thinking at the moment is that this individual’s questionable actions seem typical of
the behaviour of Investigators and senior staff working for the Local Government
Ombudsman institution, and I would not wish to imply by any means that this individual’s
attitude is anything other than endemic in the whole LGO institutional ethos.
I shall therefore refer to this individual by the pseudonym ‘Jack Snooper’ for the
purpose of this article, and have amended the correspondence below accordingly.
First, I received an e-mail from Yahoo! Groups saying that an individual wanted to join
the LGOWatch Forum. The Forum clearly states that the Group is only for those who
support the aims of LGOWatch, which include the replacement of the biased Local
Government Ombudsman institution with a truly independent Local Government
Complaints Commission. Those who wished to join were asked to give their name and
also some detail of their experience at the hands of the LGO in their application e-mail.
Mr Snooper’s application did not include his name, but his e-mail address did identify
him. His supporting comment with the application e-mail was simply, ‘I am interested in
public administration.’
Initially, I did not know he was an LGO Investigator. However, as the Forum was
intended to be a supportive group for those who had suffered injustice from the LGO,
and not a resource for researchers, I rejected Mr Snooper’s application, and sent him
the following e-mail:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent Tuesday 2 November 04:
Dear Mr Snooper,
Thank you for your e-mail and for expressing interest in joining the Group.
On the basis of the message you sent with your application, I am not convinced that this
is quite the right Group for you to join. It is the campaigning and support Group of
LGOwatch, and membership is restricted to those who actively support our aims. Many
of the people who contact us have had a very upsetting and traumatic experience of
injustice in their dealings with the LGO, and we have members who have been driven to
depression and thoughts of suicide; we therefore need to ensure the Forum is a safe
space.
Perhaps you will find the LGOwatch website to have some interesting information and
links.
Best regards,
Gary Powell
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I then got a bit suspicious, and decided to do a Google search on Mr Snooper’s name,
including the phrase ‘Local Government Ombudsman’. It revealed that a Mr Snooper
worked as an Investigator at the Coventry office of the LGO. I wondered whether the Mr
Snooper who applied to join the LGOWatch Forum ,and the Mr Snooper at the LGO’s
Coventry office, might possibly be one and the same person. I therefore wrote the
following e-mail to Mr Snooper:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent on Thursday 4 November 04:
Dear Mr Snooper,
You recently applied to join the LGOwatch Forum for people who support the aims of
the LGOwatch campaign, which is highly critical of the Local Government Ombudsman
service.
The introduction to the LGOwatch group states that group membership is open to those
who support our aims, and gives the following information:
If you wish to join the Forum, please send a brief account of your experience of the
LGO to the Group Moderator, giving the reasons why you support our aims.
With your application you simply said
I am interested in public administration.
I rejected your application to join on the grounds that the comment you provided did not
provide evidence of meeting the membership criteria as an active supporter of the
LGOwatch aims and/or a victim of LGO injustice.
On the LGO website is this article:
[removed]
written by an LGO Investigator working at the Coventry office called Jack Snooper.
Please would you let me know whether you and this Jack Snooper are the same person.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Powell
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I received no reply from Mr Snooper, so I sent the same e-mail again on Monday 8
November.
I still received no reply.
I therefore sent the following e-mail to Mr Snooper:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent Sunday 14 November 04:
Dear Mr Snooper,
I refer to my last two e-mails to you asking whether you are the Mr Jack Snooper who
works as an Investigator at the Coventry Office of the Commission for Local
Administration in England, and note that you have not responded to my messages.
I hope you will appreciate that the Forum members and I would be concerned about the
intentions of any LGO Investigator who attempted to join this Forum without revealing
his interest, and that, in the first instance, asking for clarification of this matter, by
sending an e-mail to your goodself and/or by writing to Mr Snooper at the Coventry
office, is of considerable importance to us.
Should this just be an astonishing coincidence - given that there cannot be that many Mr
Jack Snoopers in the UK who have both an interest in local administration and a
specialised interest in joining a Forum that discusses negative experiences of the LGO
- then I am sure that the Mr Snooper who works as an LGO Investigator will want to
confirm he is not the individual concerned.
If you could please find a moment to send a one-line answer, I should be very grateful.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Powell
LGOwatch Yahoo Group Owner
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was still no reply.
On 4 April I therefore sent the following letter to the LGO Investigator Mr Jack Snooper
by recorded delivery. I also sent a copy by recorded delivery to his boss in the Coventry
Office, the Local Government Ombudsman Mr Jerry White, and the most senior Local
Government Ombudsman Mr Tony Redmond. Just for good measure, I sent a further
copy of the letter to the Select Committee on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister,
which was preparing a Report at the time on the Role and Effectiveness of the Local
Government Ombudsmen for England. This is the letter I sent:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Jack Snooper
Investigator
Local Government Ombudsman’s Office
The Oaks No 2
Westwood Way
Westwood Business Park
Coventry CV4 8JB
Enclosures
4 April 2005
Dear Mr Snooper
LOCAL GOVERNMENT OMBUDSMAN WATCH FORUM
I am the founder and co-ordinator of Local Government Ombudsman Watch, a
campaign to expose the pro-local government bias in the investigations and decisions
of the office of the Local Government Ombudsman.
LGOWatch has an online Yahoo Group where contributors can post and read
messages at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LGOWatch/ . It is restricted to members
only, and those wishing to join the Group must apply to the Group Owner by e-mail. It
has always been made clear in the Group’s introductory message that membership is
only open to those who support the Group’s aims, one of which is exposure of the
LGO's pro-council bias. For some time I have not posted or approved any messages to
the Group, or accepted any new Members, in large part from fear that the Group has
been or will be infiltrated by a member of the organisation we are seeking to have
disbanded.
On 1 November 2004 I received an e-mail from Yahoo stating that someone with the e-
mail address [removed] was applying to join the Forum. The message he wrote
supporting his application was simply, ‘I am interested in public administration.’
The Group’s introductory message was absolutely clear that this was a Group only for
those who believed that the LGO was biased against complainants and who wanted
reform or abolition of this institution. I therefore sent an e-mail to Mr Snooper on 2
November explaining why I had rejected his application.
During a subsequent moment of suspicion, I entered ‘Jack Snooper’ in a search
engine, and discovered that a Mr Jack Snooper works as an Investigator at the
Coventry Office of the Local Government Ombudsman. Indeed, he had written an article
(that I can no longer find on the LGO’s website) entitled [removed], (enclosed).
I therefore sent a further e-mail to Mr Snooper on 4 November asking him to let me
know whether or not he was the Jack Snooper who worked for the LGO at the Coventry
Office. I received no reply, so I sent the same e-mail again on 8 November. I still
received no reply, so I sent yet another e-mail to Mr Snooper on 14 November. To date,
I have received no reply to any of these four e-mails, notwithstanding my simple request
for a one-line confirmation or denial.
Please could I therefore ask you to confirm or deny that you are the Mr Jack Snooper
who attempted to join the Members Only Local Government Ombudsman Watch Forum
on 1 November 2004.
If you are not the Mr Jack Snooper in question, please accept my apology for this
inconvenience. I hope you would understand, however, the importance of my enquiry for
the sake both of my members, and of the public at large, who might have cause to
question the intentions of a Local Government Ombudsman Investigator who attempted
to join a private forum that is critical of the LGO without declaring that he works for the
said institution. I imagine there are not many people in the country called Jack Snooper
who have an interest in local administration to the extent that they attempt to join an
Internet discussion group restricted to those who are campaigning against pro-council
bias on the part of the Local Government Ombudsman; and if indeed there is a Jack
Snooper in the country, different from yourself, who falls into this category, it seems
rather strange that he did not have the courtesy to reply to any of my four e-mails simply
to say that he did not work for the Local Government Ombudsman. Furthermore, apart
from the usual advertisers who attempt to sneak into Yahoo Groups, this Mr Snooper
was the only applicant to LGOWatch who merely expressed an academic interest.
It could be the case, of course, by an astonishing coincidence, that you are not the Mr
Jack Snooper in question, in which case, as mentioned above, I do hope you will
forgive my enquiry to remove the doubt.
If, however, you are the Mr Jack Snooper in question, I wonder whether you would kindly
explain to me why you attempted to join the LGOWatch Forum without declaring that
you are an LGO Investigator, why you did not reply to any of my four e-mails, and
whether you feel that your actions reflect the degree of integrity and honesty that should
be expected from Investigators working for your institution.
I look forward to receiving your reply at your earliest convenience.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Powell
Co-ordinator, LGOWatch
cc Mr J White, Local Government Ombudsman
Mr T Redmond, Local Government Ombudsman
Ms C Littleboy, Clerk to the ODPM Select Committee
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This produced a response, and on 6 April 2005 I received the following e-mail:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received 6 April 05:
Mr Powell,
I refer to your letter of 4 April 2005.
I confirm that I am the person who applied to join the Ombudsmanwatch forum
on Yahoo, based on my personal interest in public administration.
It was unfortunate that I overlooked your organisation’s opening message, but
it was not intentional.
I now consider the matter to be closed.
Jack Snooper
cc Mr J R White
cc Mr T Redmond
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Mr Snooper now considers the matter to be closed, I am unfortunately unable to put
the following questions to him, which are burdening me somewhat:
1 After the initial e-mail rejecting his application, I sent Mr Snooper a further three e-
mails asking him whether he was an LGO Investigator, and he failed to reply to any of
them. Why did he not reply to any of these e-mails if he had nothing to hide?
2 Even if he did, as he claims, ‘overlook the opening message’, does he not think
that it should nonetheless have occurred to him that it was totally inappropriate to try to
join the Group without declaring that he works as an Investigator for the Local
Government Ombudsman? After all, the Forum is called ‘Local Government
Ombudsman Watch’. Did he not think that other members of the Forum had a right to
know his interest before possibly revealing sensitive information about their dealings
with the LGO and any avenues they were currently pursuing as a result?
3 Even if Mr Snooper did ‘overlook the opening message’, if he had nothing to
hide, why did he not declare that he was an LGO Investigator in his application e-mail?
Why did he just say ‘I am interested in local administration’ instead? Does he not think
that, if you are joining an organisation that you know to be concerned with the Local
Government Ombudsman, and you are asked to give details of your experience of the
LGO, not disclosing the relevant fact that you work for the institution gives the
impression of having something to hide?
4 Does Mr Snooper think it is a good idea to apply to join a Forum without reading
what that Forum is about, what beliefs its members have and what its stated objectives
are? Does he not think that a person who worked as an Investigator for the LGO might
be a little more cautious and reflective before making decisions of this kind, perhaps
considering the evidence beforehand as to whether the Forum is one whose aims and
objectives he supports, and its members people he wishes to be associated with?
5 Was Mr Snooper feeling unwell or confused when he applied to join the
LGOWatch Forum so precipitously, whilst, as he claims, ‘overlooking the opening
message’? If one really is interested in a Forum to the extent that one wants to join it,
would it not be a natural thing to read the introductory message? After all, there is a
delay between applying to join a Yahoo Group and the Moderator accepting the
application, so in the meantime it might perhaps have seemed interesting to read the
introductory message. The Forum was called ‘Local Government Ombudsman Watch’
after all, and Mr Snooper does work for the Local Government Ombudsman.
6 Does Mr Snooper think that the public would expect staff working as Investigators
for the Local Government Ombudsman to have the qualities of honesty and integrity?
Does he think he has given this impression? Does he not think that a sincere apology
might have been appropriate, rather than a mere reference to his actions being
‘unfortunate’?
7 Mr Snooper says ‘I now consider the matter to be closed’. Does he think that the
supporters of LGOWatch and other members of the public who fund the LGO and his
staff through taxation, and have a right to expect high standards from staff investigating
maladministration, would consider the matter to be closed on the basis of his eventual
reply?
8 We have discovered that the LGO sends Mr Snooper out to give talks to councils
on good practice. Does he think that his actions in this case represent good practice? If
a local government officer he was investigating behaved in a similar way, would Mr
Snooper be minded not to find fault?
The reader will, of course, draw his or her own conclusions with regard to all these
questions that I am unable to put to Mr Snooper, as he considers the matter to be
closed.
Unilaterally closing a case with so many serious unanswered questions outstanding that
suggest evidence of bad practice …. now, why does that sound a little familiar …..?
| Please note: we will treat in confidence and welcome any information provided to us by any former or current LGO employee who genuinely has concerns about injustice and bad practice in the workings of the Local Government Ombudsman institution. We would invite you to contact us, anonymously if you would prefer, if you wish to contribute important information to our campaign. |