A quality public service

The Public Administration Act, among other things, holds government entities accountable for the manner in which they provide services and carry out their functions. It is indeed considered to be a public service value that government entities “deliver services to the public, courteously, expeditiously and impartially” (article 4(1)).

In some instances, the vehicles used to promote these values are quality service charters.

The concept of quality service charters is not new to Malta. They have been around since 2000 when various government entities drew up their own quality service charters. They are not new in Europe either as all governments endeavour to improve the quality of service delivery.

Quality service charters are a means to improve consumer trust in government activities

In the 1990s, the United Kingdom introduced the Citizen’s Charter or Service First, Italy introduced the Carta dei Servizzi and France La Charte des Services Publics.

Service charters act as an interface between government services and end users, that is, consumers.

Quality service charters are also a means through which the government introduces transparency in its activities. They engage the citizen to be interactive and are accessible to citizens through innovative methods that enhance customer relations. Indeed, appropriately devised service charters should allow for consumer feedback.

Charters set a commitment, a standard, by an organisation stating to its clients the level of service to be expected. They provide a guarantee. They also go into specifics such as the type of service offered by an organisation, address issues of waiting times, information provided and a commitment of delivering a courteous service.

They are meant to be a means to ensure that the public always receives a good and efficient service. Quality service charters are a means to improve consumer trust in government activities.

The Public Administration Act enables the Principal Permanent Secretary to issue directives and guidelines to uphold public service values. The law specifically states that, in drawing up these directives, the Principal Permanent Secretary seeks “to frame his directives in the best interests of the consumer and in such a manner as to impose the least possible administrative burden” (article 38 (3)).

The law also enables the Principle Permanent Secretary to introduce measures to improve the performance of agencies and the quality of the services they deliver to the public.

Directive 4, regarding consolidated service quality standards, issued on March 17, 2010 is of particular interest to consumers as it sets the level of service and behaviour to be expected from government departments and agencies. As stated by the same directive it is also in line with the code of ethics annexed to the Public Administration Act, which requires public employees “to serve all citizens fairly, reasonably, equitably and efficiently” (principle A2, schedule 1).

The key feature of the directive is that it sets standards of service quality in relation to the following areas: correspondence (both in writing and electronic) with the public, telephone communications, appointments and queues, provision of information and complaint handling, service delivery mechanisms.

Different standards apply to the health sector.

The directive establishes a five-day time window within which government entities are normally required to reply. A provisional reply is sent to those presenting a complex case giving an indication of when a definitive reply is to be expected.

In cases were correspondence may not be replied by one organisation this should be forwarded to the relevant organisation and consumers informed accordingly within five days. Those in receipt of such correspondence are likewise required to reply within five days. Members of staff replying to such correspondence should clearly identify themselves when doing so. This also means that they assume responsibility of the contents therein.

In cases of telephone communications, consumers are to expect prompt replies and an immediate identification of the organisation they are in contact with. The public is to be given a reply by the government entity concerned. If there is no one able to do so at the time of the call, the caller is to be called back once the relevant information has become available.

Websites are considered to be the vehicle through which clear, accurate and up-to-date information is provided to the public by a specific government entity. It is expected that these websites, being an official communication medium, contain clear and correct information. It is incumbent on the organisation concerned to update its website as any incorrect information is bound to mislead readers.

As yet, the concept of service charters does not seem to have penetrated much consumer consciousness. This undermines the whole idea because there will not be any real indicator as to whether these charters are really drawn up to meet consumer needs, whether targets are met and whether managerial improvements are required to address any deficiencies.

It is commendable that the public service has set itself these standards. It would be also appropriate for consumers to be informed of these, particularly of the quality of service to be expected.

Consumers ought to be informed of the time and mode of delivery that governments departments and entities require in addressing complaints, this due to the fact that other legislation may come into play. Ideally, this information should be provided on websites and also through one central government customer information office, which should also be geared to receive customer complaints for effective monitoring of the system.

Antoine Grima lectures on consumer law at the University of Malta.