Paula Vennells is history but now at the Post Office Inquiry is Fujitsu distinguished engineer Gareth Jenkins - thread 4

[nauticant]

A continuation of this thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5094266-paula-vennells-was-done-the-other-week-the-post-office-inquiry-is-now-questioning-associates-and-others-thread-3

When the hearings are going on, live-streaming can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/@postofficehorizonitinquiry947/featured

All of the previous hearings can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/@postofficehorizonitinquiry947/videos

Pat McFadden is up first. He's currently the top government enforcer of discipline and message and it'll be interesting to see his demeanor.

Ed Davey will probably be asked about this:
https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/davey-briefed-to-dismiss-justice-for-subpostmasters-alliance-concerns-in-2010/

One thing that stood out for me - what kind of organisation requires it's sole shareholder, its owner, to sign what amounts to an NDA before sharing information. The culture at the Post Office is clearly toxic. On the evidence we have seen, I don't think the current CEO has changed it. The culture of secrecy, resistance to government oversight and mistrust of subpostmasters didn't cause this scandal, but it enabled both the original miscarriages of justice and the failed attempts at a cover up.

That's my overall conclusion. A rotten culture that attracted the kind of people who would perpetuate it.

Pat McFadden is a refreshing change after yesterday. He answers very clearly and succinctly. No waffle, no "can't remember" just answers the question with relevant information.

Stupid work again today, so um.very thankful for all your updates.

I'm going to try and see if I can find some time to watch Ed Davey this afternoon.

McFadden really didn't like that line of questioning, that if a company is prosecuting staff, then the owner of that company might feel some responsibility as to the conduct of that prosecution. He's put up a constitutional sort of argument that the government has to be arm's length when it comes to the judiciary.

Ed Davey incoming. And it sounds like Mr Beer will be asking the questions.

McFadden was solid in his evidence and had a grip. When he was shown to have missed opportunities to uncover stuff, he explained things away with him having operated in the right way that a minister would have been expected to act.

Davey isn't wearing a wetsuit (well, there could be one underneath his suit) so I'm not expecting any water-based shenanigans from him.

I think they should have placed a kiddies' paddling pool next to him to see if he's tempted to throw himself in.

Uh-oh. Ten minutes in and Davey is getting slightly combative.

No big surprises here in Ed Davey's openers. Primarily reliant on his govt advisers. That's normal, especially as a new coalition and minister.

But - and it's a big but - I know as a former Lib Dem campaigner that the Lib Dem 'style' would be to get very hands on with campaigning groups and people like JSA and Alan Bates. (I know there was huge concern over Sarah Teather in Education about how she began to act in an 'elevated' ministerial way and seemed to forget she was still a Lib Dem MP and party member.) I find it difficult to believe that Ed Davey lost all his curiosity overnight.

I hope Ed Davey's honest about the content of briefings.

Now the surprises come.

Davey is saying he didn't know the Post Office prosecuted cases when he was the Minister (2010-2012).

So he was being 'high level' 'strategic'. 'Policy', 'big piece of legislation' being 'put together rapidly' with him responsible. Seems to be arguing for some kind of organic, iterative oversight of ShEx happening through this process; while at the same time saying he was heavily reliant on ShEx.

Davey asked to name the senior PO executives he says lied to him. He ducks around it a bit but the names he utters are David Smith and Paula Vennells.

Mr Beer trying to establish whether Davey defines lying the same way as he does.

Key point, agreed, because Davey's naming of Smith and Vennells does have a ring of truth about it?

'high level' 'strategic'. 'Policy',

This is government speak for "not interested in the details" - or at least it was when I last worked in central government in the 1990s

Doesn't give a shit and those annoying little people like Alan Bates really need to acknowledge he's too important for all this and just fuck off.

Awful.

Jo Swinson up today. She’s getting in nice and early with explanations of how busy she was and how little time she had to devote to PO matters.

Waffly with a head teacher vibe.

Nothing of substance yet.

Isn’t she just! Her ‘achhh’ screech, presumably Jo Swindon vocal fry for ummm, is really irritating me.

Her gabbling, , gesticulation and occasional lapses into a sing song delivery makes for an annoying session.

She is obviously fast talking and am finding her difficult to follow… British summer time? What was that about?

she’ll be asked to slow down for the stenographer soon…. I hope

Swindon letter from 2012 spinning the normal lines to an MP about all being well, although the substance is about the ongoing Second Sight investigation. The significant point is she signed the letter at the same time as she was briefed on Post Office as part of her induction into post and that briefing avoided mention of any Horizon issues.

So she was signing letters about stuff that she hadn't been briefed on. This is likely to define the nature of her evidence.

Mr Blake told her earlier he'd be in trouble with the stenographer if she didn't speak more slowly.

BST was a reference to that being one of a rag-bag of responsibilities within her ministerial post.

Thanks, nauticant. Am trying to work and keep ears alert but finding the conflated blusterings very hard to make sense of.

And so the brush-off letters and emails to constituents start in late 2012. "All's well. As minister my hands are tied. Not my problem."

Drafted by a civil servant, rubber-stamped by Swinson.