code of conduct section 12 whistleblower escalation

Summary

A request was made for statistics on whistleblower escalations under the Civil Service Code and Government Code over six years, including outcomes and support provided. The authority sought clarification on the specific codes referenced, and the final outcome was a decision notice where the complaint was partially upheld.

Key Facts

• The request was received by the Cabinet Office on 31 May 2021.
• The authority sought clarification on 10 June 2021 regarding whether the Civil Service Code was the intended subject.
• The request distinguished between employee referrals under Civil Service Code paragraph 12 and Chief Officer referrals under Government Code section 4.24.
• The final outcome was a Decision Notice issued on 22 March 2022.
• The complaint regarding the response was partially upheld.

Data Disclosed

• 31 May 2021
• 10 June 2021
• 22 March 2022
• 6 financial years
• 2021/22
• paragraph 12
• section 4.24
• case_id: 1815534

Original Request

How many public sector code of conduct section 12 escalations have been received by the Chief Secretary in the most recent 6 financial years to include 2021/22 to date (or calendar years to include 2021); how many were ignored, rejected verbally, rejected with correspondence, investigated by the Chief Secretary, investigated by OHR, investigated by an external investigating officer via OHR; and how many resulted in agreement with the concerns highlighted by employees that have demonstrated the highest ethical standards that the Isle of Man public sector clearly states it expects and more importantly it requires (a) partly (b) fully with what actions and what if any financial or legal support to the employee? The two processes appear similar but are actually distinctly different in that the Civil Service Code paragraph 12 empowers an employee to refer a whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary (a high percentage will not feel able to do that if certain colleagues close ranks in misguided loyalty to senior management) whereas the Government Code section 4.24 requires the Chief Officer to refer a whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary. Therefore statistics should be separated out into the two sources of referrals. We asked for clarification on the 10 June 2021: In order to identify and locate the information that you have asked for we need some further information from you. We need to seek clarification from you as it is not clear from your request? In particular, it would be helpful to know if it is the Civil Service Code that you are seeking information on? Having consulted with my colleagues we believe this is referring to paragraph 12 of the Civil Service Code? Found Here: https://hr.gov.im/media/1463/civilservicecode.pdf It is contained in CS Regulations Handbook and in the Government Code: https://www.gov.im/media/1359547/the-government-code-february-2017.pdf Para 12 (relates to para11) and they say: 1. Where a civil servant believes he or she is being required to act in a way which: is illegal, improper, or unethical; is in breach of constitutional convention or a professional code; is required to act in a way which, for him or her, raises a fundamental issue of conscience; may involve possible maladministration; or is otherwise inconsistent with the code; or if he or she becomes aware of other breaches of this Code, he or she should report the matter to the Department's Accounting Officer. The Accounting Officer should report to the appropriate authorities evidence of criminal of unlawful activity brought to his/her attention. 1. Where a civil servant has reported a matter covered in paragraph 11 and believes that the response does not represent a reasonable response to the grounds of his or her concern, he or she may report the matter in writing the the Chief Minister. Following clarification you requested: The two processes appear to similar bur are actually distinctly different in that the Civil Service Code paragraph 12 empowers an employee to refer a whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary (a high percentage will not feel able to do that if certain colleagues close ranks and misguided loyalty to senior management) whereas the Government Code section 4.24 requires the Chief Officer to refer whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary. Therefore statistics should be separated out onto the two sources of referrals.

Data Tables (1)

Full Response Text

Government Office Douglas Isle of Man IM1 3PN Telephone: (+44) 01624 686244 Website: www.gov.im/co

Our ref: 1815534 13 July 2021

Dear ###

We write further to your request which was received on 31 May 2021 and which states:

"How many public sector code of conduct section 12 escalations have been received by the Chief Secretary in the most recent 6 financial years to include 2021/22 to date (or calendar years to include 2021); how many were ignored, rejected verbally, rejected with correspondence, investigated by the Chief Secretary, investigated by OHR, investigated by an external investigating officer via OHR; and how many resulted in agreement with the concerns highlighted by employees that have demonstrated the highest ethical standards that the Isle of Man public sector clearly states it expects and more importantly it requires (a) partly (b) fully with what actions and what if any financial or legal support to the employee? The two processes appear similar but are actually distinctly different in that the Civil Service Code paragraph 12 empowers an employee to refer a whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary (a high percentage will not feel able to do that if certain colleagues close ranks in misguided loyalty to senior management) whereas the Government Code section 4.24 requires the Chief Officer to refer a whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary. Therefore statistics should be separated out into the two sources of referrals.” We asked for clarification on the 10 June 2021: In order to identify and locate the information that you have asked for we need some further information from you. We need to seek clarification from you as it is not clear from your request. In particular, it would be helpful to know if it is the Civil Service Code that you are seeking information on? Having consulted with my colleagues we believe this is referring to paragraph 12 of the Civil Service Code? Found Here: https://hr.gov.im/media/1463/civilservicecode.pdf

It is contained in CS Regulations Handbook and in the Government Code: https://www.gov.im/media/1359547/the-government-code-february-2017.pdf

Para 12 (relates to para11) and they say: 1. Where a civil servant believes he or she is being required to act in a way which: is illegal, improper, or unethical; is in breach of constitutional convention or a professional code; is required to act in a way which, for him or her, raises a fundamental issue of conscience; may involve possible maladministration; or is otherwise inconsistent with the code; or if he or she becomes aware of other breaches of this Code, he or she should report the matter to the Department's Accounting Officer. The Accounting Officer should report to the appropriate authorities evidence of criminal of unlawful activity brought to his/her attention. 1. Where a civil servant has reported a matter covered in paragraph 11 and believes that the response does not represent a reasonable response to the grounds of his or her concern, he or she may report the matter in writing to the Chief Secretary. Following clarification you requested: “The two processes appear to similar bur are actually distinctly different in that the Civil Service Code paragraph 12 empowers an employee to refer a whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary (a high percentage will not feel able to do that if certain colleagues close ranks and misguided loyalty to senior management) whereas the Government Code section 4.24 requires the Chief Officer to refer whistleblowing impasse to the Chief Secretary. Therefore statistics should be separated out onto the two sources of referrals."

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance the Cabinet Office does not hold the information that you have requested.

Please quote the reference number 1815534 in any future communications.

Your right to request a review

If you are unhappy with this response to your freedom of information request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response, by completing a complaint form and submitting it electronically or by delivery/post.

An electronic version of our complaint form can be found by going to our website at https://services.gov.im/freedom-of-information/Review . If you would like a paper version of our complaint form to be sent to you by post, please contact me and I will be happy to arrange for this. Your review request should explain why you are dissatisfied with this response, and should be made as soon as practicable. We will respond as soon as the review has been concluded.

If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner for a decision on; 1. Whether we have responded to your request for information in accordance with Part 2 of the Freedom of Information Act 2015; or 2. Whether we are justified in refusing to give you the information requested.
In response to an application for review, the Information Commissioner may, at any time, attempt to resolve a matter by negotiation, conciliation, mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution and will have regard to any outcome of this in making any subsequent decision. More detailed information on your right to a review can be found on the Information Commissioner’s website at www.inforights.im. Should you have any queries concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Further information about freedom of information requests can be found at www.gov.im/foi. I will now close your request as of this date.

Yours sincerely