POL00107889
POL00107889
Message
From: Theresa Iles [IMCEAEX-
__O=MMS_OU=EXCHANGE+20A\
72BC-4825-9716-38713697 1F1:
on Theresa Iles <IMCEAEX-
behalf Renee RO MCORP DIT#29 ENSREGIPIENTS CNSTHERESAS2EC#2ELESF!
of 72BC-4825-9716-: 387136971F13;_
OUP+20+28FYDIBOHF23SPDLT+29_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=THERESA+2EC+2EILESFI
“
728-4 4825- 9716- 387136971F13i
Sent: 12/03/2013 14:01
To: -
Subject:FW: James Arbuthnot letter
Val
V've just printed the earlier email from Alwen re this ~ please can you hold the date/time in the diary (25 March), plus
venue, as Alwen has suggested below that perhaps Paula should go too.
Thanks
Theresa
From: Alwen Lyons
Sent: 11 March 2013 18:33
To: Paula Vennells
Subject: Re: James Arbuthnot letter
First an assurance that the reason for the separate emails was because I missed you off the first one to Alice, no excuse
and i apologise, and I will make sure she realises you should have been included and have seen the email. Let me also
assure you that no other notes have or will be sent to Alice without you being included.
And I also would not want anything to spoil the transparency between us which I think is vital.
The brief which was drafted by Simon Baker and edited by Susan and myself was written as a brief for you and Alice
before we knew she would be invited to the meeting. Simon it is IT link.
My view of the SS findings is mixed. I believe they are dolng a good job albeit taking longer than we would have hoped
but their process means that they have collected all the 'evidence' from subpostmasters before inviting out comments
or explanations. They have therefore found similar issues, either because they are real issues or because they are good
excuses when things go wrong. Until we see the evidence which is beginning to come through now it is difficult to say.
We, Susan, Simon, Angela, Alana, Rod and myself, have regular meetings with SS and there is now a working group to
look at the evidence.
Susan, Simon, Mark, Angela and I are have a meeting next week to discuss the comms before we have a per meet with
ss.
THey have assured me today that they understand that they need James and the mps to understand they way they are
conducting their work, and that issues will be live at the moment but they then look to disprove them.
It is disconcerting but we need to work through each point as they raise it with out being defensive. At least in James'
letter he acknowledges that we are working well with SS it will be hard not to be defensive as we disprove
subpostmasters evidence.
Hope that helps, perhaps we can pick up tomorrow and include Susan in the conversation.
POL-0110853
POL00107889
POL00107889
I think Alice and I, or Alice, you and I should go on the 25th, with Angela as well if Alice wants to take 4 people. We were
the 4 who met the MPs last time.
How did today go with Jo and Moya
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons
pompany. Secretary.
GRO I
wrote:
Alwen, thanks for this.
(A very small point but in the interests of transparency between you and me - regarding which to
reassure you, I always assume the best - presumably there is no good reason other than you forgot, that
I wasn't copied in the original update to Alice? Or she in your note to me. This is tricky enough as it is
without Alice and I wondering who knows what and why?)
The update note is very good by the way - who wrote it? Always useful to know where we have such
good briefing skills? (You?)
Now to my biggest concern - we are taking big decisions on IT currently and irrespective of the
independence of the SS work, which it is critical to protect, I/we should be aware asap if there are
emerging issues with Horizon. Who from IT is in the loop, do you know? And do you know if we have a
view as to how robust the SS findings are - ie., there may be similarities of accounts from Spmrs - but are
they being born out by analysis of what actually happened within the system itself?
lam surprised that I picked this up only by reading a letter from James to Alice. I'd have thought that a
loyal supplier would have let us know - it's pretty important in terms of POL risk management and it
would be good if SS had flagged it to us as the work unfolded. That shouldn't compromise their
independence in anyway. Do you have any insight into this?
I don't want us being defensive as I'm pleased to find these things out (sort of!) - but goodness, this is
very very serious if either true and/or leaked.
Who is now working up the Comms, will you arrange a pre-brief for 25/3 and who do you think should
attend?
Thx as always for your attention to this, it was never going to be easy.
Paula
Sent from my iPad
On 11 Mar 2013, at 11:56, "Alwen Lyon:
fyi
POL-0110853
POL00107889
POL00107889
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons I Company Sceretary
<image001.gif>
<image002 png>
<image003.png>
<image004.png>
<image005.png>
<image008.png>
From: Alwen Lyons
Sent: 11 March 2
To: Alice Perkins I
Subject: James Arbuthnot letter
Alice please find attached an update on the Horizon Second Sight investigation and the
letter we were expecting from James Arbuthnot inviting you to his meeting on the 25"
March,
Jorja has asked Bea to check your diary.
James is also suggesting a call this week. Let me know what you think about attending
and the call and I will organise with Janet.
Thanks
Alwen
Alwen Lyons I Company Secretary
<image00 I .gif>
<image002.png> 148 Old S
<image003.png> / i
<image004 png> i G RO I
<image005.png>
<image008.png>
POL-0110853
From: Jorja Preston
Sent: 11 March 2013 09:59
To: Alwen Lyons
Subject: FW:
Jorja Preston I PA to Alice Perkins, Chair
<image001.gif>
<image002.png> 148 Old
weet, LONDON, ECIV 9HQ
<image003.png>
<image004.png>
<image005.png>
<image006.gif>
<image007 gif>
<image008.png>
Sent: 07 March 2013 17:20
To: Alwen Lyons
Subject:
Jorja Preston I PA to Alice Perkins, Chairman.
<image001 gif
<imageG02.png>
<image003.png>
<image004.png>
<image005.png>
<image006.gif>
<image007 gif? @postofficenews
<image008.png>
<2013.03.07 invite from JA.pdf>
<March 2013 Horizon update brief for AP and PV.doc>
POL00107889
POL00107889
POL-0110853