Deputy Parliamentary Ombudsman: Valtori’s organisation model is compliant with legislation
The decision was made at the end of November.
In March, the Negotiation Organization for Public Sector Professionals JUKO, which represents employees, filed a complaint to the Parliamentary Deputy Ombudsman concerning the organisational change of the Government ICT Centre Valtori.
According to JUKO, Valtori’s new organisation model might be unlawful regarding the carrying out of the responsibilities related to the security network TUVE.
Pasi Pölönen, Deputy Parliamentary Ombudsman, gave a decision on the matter at the end of November. The conclusion is that, according to the Deputy Parliamentary Ombudsman, Valtori’s new organisation model cannot be deemed to be unlawful.
However, he states that when Valtori’s organisation was renewed, the functions could have also been separated more clearly based on the statements referred to in the report of the Administration Committee and the wording in legislation. “Nevertheless, in my opinion, the limits of the discretion granted to Valtori and the Ministry of Finance were not exceeded,” states Pölönen in the decision.
“The matter gives me no grounds for taking any other actions than adding to my audit calendar an audit of Valtori to take place in the near future.”
Synergy benefits through an organisational change that responds to customers’ needs
Valtori’s new organisation took effect in April this year. The change was implemented first and foremost based on the needs expressed by customers.
Valtori’s CEO Pasi Lehmus considers it a good thing that a statement was requested from the Parliamentary Ombudsman concerning the implementation of the requirement to separate TUVE operations.
“According to legislation, TUVE operations are required to be separated in terms of administration, operations and finances. For this reason, Valtori continues to have two business areas. However, we can harmonise processes within the legislative framework, identify best practices and use resources in a more flexible manner. We have now received important guidance for this,” says Lehmus.
“Now that we have received the decision we were waiting for, we should review the decision of the Deputy Ombudsman thoroughly and then continue to develop operations to the direction of the received guidance and as outlined by the Parliamentary Ombudsman. We will of course ensure that the rules of procedure continue to be interpreted correctly, as required by the Deputy Ombudsman,” says Kimmo Suopajärvi, Valtori’s Director of Administration.