Paula Vennells was back in Phase 5/6 of the Post Office Inquiry and now we're at Phase 7 - thread 5

[nauticant]

A continuation of this thread about the Post Office Inquiry:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5105378-paula-vennells-is-history-but-now-at-the-post-office-inquiry-is-fujitsu-distinguished-engineer-gareth-jenkins-thread-4

The Inquiry is at Phase 7 which is about how things stand now and looking to the future. Here's the timetable:

https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/phase-7-timetable

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

Management at a loss, decision-making just wasn't happening, huge matters simply outsourced to big expensive contractors, a general sense of drifting into crises because no one was in proper control.

Ooh, we're onto the investigations into the SPM NEDs, and particularly Jacobs, and Staunton's view is that this was a vendetta prosecuted by Ben Foat and the motivation was that they'd raised issues about the culture in Post Office that we're most inconvenient.

And then very murky goings-on into the investigation into Nick Read that became weaponised against Staunton because he'd been supporting the subpostmasters.

An extraordinary letter from Nick Vamos of Peter's & Peters saying the subpostmasters are probably mostly guilty anyway, and in any case the chances of them overturning their convictions were low. Not sure of the date, maybe early last year, but it was incredibly late in the day.

This turned into a letter Nick Read sent to the Lord Chancellor basically trying to obstruct the exoneration of subpostmasters. It'll be interesting to see Read asked about that.

I'm behind again!

Just catching the last 30 mins before the lunch break.

Blake's current argument is that there was so much going on, investigations, rows, turf-wars, and the rest that it wasn't surprising that there didn't seem to be much attention on compensation and remediation.

letter from Nick Vamos of Peter's & Peters saying the subpostmasters are probably mostly guilty anyway, and in any case the chances of them overturning their convictions were low

It's an undated letter, but most likely sent between 1st Jan to 8th Jan 2024. The exact same time the ITV drama was on.

The reason thet think this is because Nick Read's letter sent to the Lord Chancellor basically trying to obstruct the exoneration of subpostmasters, was sent on 9th January 2024.

It's extraordinary that while the UK were watching the Bates vs The Post Office drama, these nuggets were writing letters ar the exact same time, still saying the SPMRs are guilty.

Flat-out denial from Staunton was that he interfered with the investigation he was the subject of. He's claiming weaponisation against him because of his support for sub postmasters and is saying that there are significant people who have confirmed his version of events.

I'd be minded not to believe him but there were so many games being played and such mischief abroad that I struggle to believe any of the people involved, including those sticking their knives into him now.

Ooh, audio evidence of the telephone conversation between Staunton and Badenoch.

Ha, bloody Ben Foat, who is the current legal counsel lawyer for POL.

Can't wait for his testimony in 2 weeks, 18 October.
They are just looking at his email dated 9th Jan 2024, the day after the ITV drama, which he is claiming they can't overturn all the Convictions, unless the SPMR come forward. If they dont come forward then they are guilty as charged.

Boy, was he wrong, cos that's exactly what happened.

I don't think I've ever heard a recording of a telephone call of someone getting the sack before.

Just to pick up on the "untouchables" comment.

Henry Staunton, and the other witnesses have all said this comment "untouchables" was coined by Nick Read, to describe POL investigators/lawyers involved in the scandal, who are still employed by POL.

What's interesting, I re-watched Nick Read's Parliament Select Committee with MPs back in February 2024.
Nick Read was specifically asked by an MP about the "untouchables" comment, and Nick categorically denied ever using this term. He said he "didn't recognise this term".

I wonder if he will change his answer and admit that he did say "untouchables" when he comes to the Inquiry?

Oh dear, we're now onto the story Staunton told the press after he was sacked and he's now trying to finesse his claim that he was told by the government to stall on compensation payments. Now he's trying to rewrite that as him saying that he was told to stall on payments in general. This to me is that he gave a misleading account of what happened to make the government look bad when he was at war with them.

He should have backed down on his big claim months ago and now he's stuck with holding to a modified version of his original claim which no one, including Sir Wyn Williams, believes.

Wow at the latest meeting note that, in a massive reversal, supports some of Staunton's conspiracy-related allegations.

I'm just at the bit where they are playing Henry's call with Kemi Badenoch and he's getting sacked.

It's super awkward.

...'my style is after the meeting to...'

Be a weaselly little fucker and mutter about it later, not stand up and speak out IN the meeting!

Overall despite Staunton having some weaknesses and being willing to believe and say some things that were untrue, and to hold to them, it does seem to be the case that he was genuine and consistent in his support for subpostmasters and his downfall was celebrated, and possibly even engineered, by some of the worst people at the top of Post Office.

Absolutely.

So that meeting note is dated 29 February 2024.
Nick Read and Henry Staunton were at the Parliamentary Select Committee on 24 February 2024.

What's absolutely shocking is, at the Select Committee an MP asks Nick Read how POL are improving relationships with the SPMRs.
Nick categorically enthused about how POL were doing brilliantly and one of the things they've done is hire SPMRs ismail and Jacobs as non execs directors to the board. And they are brilliant and its all going really well.

Yet, here we are 5 days later, in a meeting, and Nick Read is slagging off the 2 non exec SPMR Ismail and Jacobs.

Nick lied to the Select Committee and is bloody 2 faced!

Now onto Alisdair Cameron, Cheif Financial Officer.

I re-watched his witness evidence back in May 2024.
He joined POL just as the GLO Bates vs POL Court cases were coming through
His evidence was POL did not get the correct advice from the lawyers and should have just admitted fault and started paying compensation back in 2018.

He is now back. Not hugely interesting at the moment.
To be honest, he has been on sick leave for over a year, so not sure what more he can contribute.

Morning.
Not sure if today is going to be particularly interesting.
It's Chris Brocklesby, the Chief Transformation Officer.

Although, he is no longer the CTO. He was only hired for 1 year, and he stopped working at POL on 6 September, last month.

He's on for the full day, so that must mean he has some interesting information, but I suspect it's going to be all about the new NBIT system, that's going to replace Horizon.

So, if anyone is into IT software or hearing about a system that's going to cost £100 million and is massively delayed, then this might be up your street 😉

That my view of today too. I'm might join in an hour, whizz through at 1.5x speed and see what a hour of watching brings.

Chris Brocklesby is being questioned about the recent investigation into a SPMR (just in April 2024) for shortfalls.
And the email from John Bartlett (new Head of investigations) wanting an expert witness statement from Fitjitsu confirming Horizon is robust.

Chris says it was probably not wise to do this.

No shit Sherlock.

For the love of God.
Chris Brocklesby, was also investigated by POL.
He allegedly gave misleading advice on the new NBIT system.

I've now lost count how many investigations into the Senior Executives on the board.

If I recall correctly, at one point all of the executive team and 4 of the Board.

You know what happens when there's an investigation going on? The executive team or the Board cannot act against the "untouchables".

Yet we are told that we have to offer silly salaries to get the best talent.

Meanwhile mugs like the rest of us think we are doing quite nicely if we are paid £40K p.a.