Recommendations of the Committee on Standards in Public Life


Whistleblowing Best Practice - Second Report, May 1996
“All organisations face the risks of things going wrong or of unknowingly harbouring malpractice. Part of the duty of identifying such a situation and taking remedial action may lie with the regulatory or funding body. But the regulator is usually in the role of detective, determining responsibility after the crime has been discovered. Encouraging a culture of openness within an organisation will help: prevention is better than cure. Yet it is striking that in the few cases where things have gone badly wrong in local public spending bodies, it has frequently been the tip-off to the press or the local Member of Parliament - sometimes anonymous, sometimes not - which has prompted the regulators into action.

Placing staff in a position where they feel driven to approach the media to ventilate concerns is unsatisfactory both for the staff member and the organisation. We observed in our first report that it was far better for systems to be put in place which encouraged staff to raise worries within the organisation, yet allowed recourse to the parent department where necessary. In the course of the present study, we received evidence from the independent charity, Public Concern at Work, which specialises in this area. They proposed that an effective internal system for the raising of concerns should include:

  • a clear statement that malpractice is taken seriously in the organisation and an indication of the sorts of matters regarded as malpractice
  • respect for the confidentiality of staff raising concerns if they wish, and the opportunity to raise concerns outside the line management structure
  • penalties for making false and malicious allegations
  • an indication of the proper way in which concerns may be raised outside the organisation if necessary.

We agree. This approach builds on some aspects of existing practice. For example the duty of accounting officers in education bodies to notify the funding councils of the misuse of public funds. It goes further by inviting all staff to act responsibly to uphold the reputation of their organisation and maintain public confidence. It might help to avoid the cases when the first reaction of management faced with unwelcome information has been to shoot the messenger.”

Click here to read extracts from the 1997 White Paper on whistleblowing and gagging clauses.  This was from the Major Government's response to the Nolan Committee recommendations

Whistleblowing Revisited - Tenth Report, January 2005
After the first comprehensive review of how whistleblowing is working in the UK, the Committee on Standards in Public Life made some wide-ranging and important recommendations. In its report the Committee stresses the importance of leadership and sets out whistleblowing best practice. One of its recommendations was that:
“R38. Leaders of public bodies should reiterate their commitment to the effective implementation of the Public Interest Disclosure 1998 and ensure its principles and provisions are widely known and applicable in their own organisation. They should commit their organisations to following the four key elements of good practice i.e.

(i) Ensuring that staff are aware of and trust the whistleblowing avenues;
(ii) Provision of realistic advice about what the whistleblowing process means for openness, confidentiality and anonymity;
(iii) Continual review of how the procedures work in practice; and
(iv) Regular communication to staff about the avenues open to them.”

In conclusion, the Committee stated that:
“We have recommended that leaders of public bodies should commit themselves to follow the elements of good practice developed by Public Concern at Work, the leading organisation in this field.”

Read the Committee’s recommendations on whistleblowing.

In April, Ross Cranston MP initiated a House of Commons debate on whistleblowing in public life. This touched on the recent recommendations of the Shipman Inquiry and the Committee on Standards in Public Life, as well as questioning where whistleblowing best sits in the machinery of government. The Cabinet Office Minister confirmed that the Government sees whistleblowing and PIDA as about organisational culture and good governance rather than employment law. The Minister also stated that the Committee on Standards in Public Life’s recent report on whistleblowing is “thoughtful, serious and common-sensical - practical”. The full text of the debate can be viewed either here or (on the House of Commons website) here. The Government's White Paper responding to the report can be read here.