The problem is, very simply, that there is a conflict of interest. The role of a minister is to administer his or her department. The minister is the person in charge. If we consider the British theory of ministerial responsibility, the minister is responsible for the actions of the department. I know that, over the years, there have been attempts to change that theory. However, there was a time when the minister had to resign, if a gaffe was committed by the department. That has changed over time; we are no longer as strict.
The problem is that, when a minister is responsible for a department, and an ombudsman reports to the minister, it is in the minister's interests to protect and promote the best interests of the department. When the ombudsman identifies a systemic problem, a great deal of pressure is exerted on the ombudsman not to make it public, which causes a conflict of interest, a problem in relations.
I experienced it for seven years. I left. At a certain point, it was implied that I had been dismissed. That is not the case. I left because I had completed my seven years and another opening was offered to me. During those seven years, there were conflicts. I experienced them. It wasn’t necessarily because the ministers were not good or were given bad advice by politicians, although that sometimes happened. It was more because it can’t work within the infrastructure of a department. We can’t all be friends. The ombudsman is there to blow the whistle on improper administration. Sometimes that doesn’t make the minister or the department look good.