We do, in fact, have an annual evidence session where we look at the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s annual report in detail and pick over those things. My right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden has drawn my attention to the fact that there was, for example, no reporting of overdue cases in the latest report. That is the sort of thing that we should be looking at.

We have also made a recommendation, as the Committee that receives the reports on behalf of Parliament and responds to them in the same way as the Public Accounts Committee does for the Comptroller and Auditor General, that it would be sensible for performance to be scrutinised by the same body that scrutinises the performance of the NAO. The performance of the NAO is not scrutinised by the PAC; that is done by the House of Commons Commission. We have recommended that there should be some consistency in this because we are conflicted: in  one way, we want to champion what the ombudsman does, but, in another, we have to criticise what it does. I think that the PAC model would be more satisfactory, which is why we recommended it.