The government’s efforts to increase openness helps resolve staffing issues before they require whistleblowing according to its chief secretary.

Will Greenwood, chief secretary to the Cabinet Office, was responding to questions from the Tynwald select committee on whistle blowing.

Mr Greenwood said the Cabinet Office follows the standard government rules on whistle blowing and as such has a designated officer to enact the policy.

He said: ’We try to instil a culture of openness and transparency and therefore I hope we can resolve issues staff may have before we get to invoking the policy.’

When asked by chairman of the committee, Onchan MHK Julie Edge, if the policy was working effectively, Mr Greenwood said: ’I have no evidence that proves otherwise.’

He added he had received no feedback from staff, chief officers or trade union representatives that suggested the policy doesn’t work.

Last resort

Mr Greenwood explained that every quarter, the chief officers meeting provided an opportunity to discuss any issues raised by staff, which can be done anonymously through the government’s internal system.

Ms Edge asked him at what point raising an issue becomes whistleblowing. Mr Greenwood said that ’invoking the whistleblowing policy is the last resort for a member of staff’.

He added: ’I think that’s why probably the numbers are so low and I hope they’re low because we’re resolving a lot of the issues at a managerial level because the culture is much more open now.’

Also appearing before the committee was the executive director of human resources for the government, Jon Callister.

Ms Edge asked him to explainhow, in his role, he would deal with a situation where he could be perceived to be conflicted.

Conflict of interest

Mr Callister said in any such instance he would step aside and let someone else take on the role and have no part of any whistle blowing investigation.

Ms Edge then asked him if that would happen or does happen.

Mr Callister said he believes that where there could be a perception of bias or conflicts of interest, managers would step away and other people would take up the initiative on it.

He added: ’There may be occasions that as HR officers, we advise them to do so and that it would be in their interest in following procedures and satisfying employment law.

’You’ve got to be sure you follow procedures properly and not present bullets for a tribunal to fire.’