A long-running dispute between the DTI and the charity Public Concern at Work over whistleblowing legislation has ended with the DTI paying compensation of more than £130,000 for time-wasting.
The dispute centres around a high court ruling that the public had a right to know about whistleblowing issues in claims that were brought under the Public Interest Disclosure Act.
Public Concern at Work referred the dispute to the parliamentary ombudsman. In her report, published last year, Ann Abraham found the DTI overturned the High Court ruling in secret, blocked Parliament from considering the new policy, misled consultees and failed to consider the public interest.
In paragraph 99 of her report she said: “Serious shortcomings on the part of the department served to deny the charity the opportunity to influence the process of changing the regulations and the failure to keep the charity properly in the picture led them to incur unnecessary expense, time and trouble.”
The compensation not only covers the time the charity’s staff wasted but also £15,000 for ‘botheration’ or distress. This is the first time such an award has been made to an organisation, rather than an individual, who has suffered loss as a result of maladministration.
Along with the award, the DTI has apologised to Public Concern at Work. Guy Dehn, the charity’s director said: “The critical issue now is that lessons are learned so that Parliament, the courts and the public do not have to endure such abuse again.
“The more serious the crime or wrongdoing the more likely this rule will be used to cover it up. When these claims are brought under the Public Interest Disclosure Act in a public forum and at public expense, it makes no sense that they should be shrouded in secrecy.”
Public Concern at Work is planning to use the compensation to fund its open justice campaign which aims to reverse the rule that now means the public has no right to any information about – or even to know the existence of – a whistleblowing claim unless it ends in a formal tribunal decision.
As more than two in three whistleblowing claims settle and lead to no decision, Public Concern at Work believes the rule subverts the Act as it encourages employers and employees to trade the public interest for private gain.
