JARB0000143
JARBO000143
From: Scully, Minister (Private Office} GRO
Sent: Fri 18/12/2020 11:22:29 AM (UTC)
To:
Ce: nick.read The Rt Hon The Lord Charles
Falconer, FELLOWS,
MarionI Alan Bates.
Kevanf}_
Subject: RE: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Attachment: 20201218 Minister Scully Response to Lord A.pdf
Dear Lord Arbuthnot,
Apologies for the delay, please see attached a response from Minister Scully.
Kind regards,
Jessica
aw Jessica Tysoe
Private Secretary to the Minister for Small Business,
Department for Consumers & Labour Markets
: and Minister for London
Business, Energy Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
& Industrial Strategy 1 victoria Street, London, SW1H OET
minister.scully: G
From: James Arbuthnot
Sent: 14 December 2020 17:48
To: Scully, Minister (Private Office)
The Rt Hon The Lord Charles Falconer QC ; FELLOWS, Marion ; Alan Bates ; JONES,
Subject: RE: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Dear Paul,
It is now more than three weeks since I drew to your attention that the Post Office, which your department owns and
for which you are responsible, lied to Parliament on 3 February 2015. The lie went to the heart of the BIS
Committee’s inquiry, and the effect of it must have been to deny to the subpostmasters evidence and an argument
about a lack of safety of their convictions which might have helped them in their defence. The Post Office then went
on to perpetuate the lie in the evidence they adduced and the arguments they made in the High Court, costing the
taxpayer well over £100 million.
I am disappointed that, despite the importance of the matter and the fact that you are responsible for the Post Office,
you have given me no response whatever. I am therefore writing to the Chair of the BEIS Select Committee to see
what the Committee might be able to do in the matter.
Yours ever,
James
From: The Rt Hon the Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom
na
From: James Arbuthnot
Sent: 07 December 2020 12:09
To: CALLANAN, Lord {
§ Callanan, Minister (Private Office)
The Rt Hon The Lord
“p>; Alan
; JONES, Kevan
JARB0000143
JARBO000143
Subject: RE: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Dear Martin,
Thank you. I shall pursue this with Paul Scully.
Yours ever,
James
From: The Rt Hon the Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom
jna@ GRO
From: CALLANAN, Lord
Sent: 07 December 2020 10:49
; Callanan, Minister (Private Office)
he Rt Hon The Lord
} Alan
Dear James,
Apologies for my delay in responding but UKIM bill is occupying a lot of my time at the moment.
I want to be as helpful to you as I can on this matter and have pushed repeatedly with BEIS lawyers and
officials, I can assure you that we do not have the Clarke Advice. After your most recent email, I asked BEIS
and UKGI officials to check the files again, including for copies, and neither BEIS nor UKGI have found a
copy of it on BEIS/UKGI systems.
Even if we did have it, the sharing of this document is now a matter for the courts - the strong advice to me is
that any sharing of it without the court’s agreement (even by Post Office) could result in a charge of contempt
of court. So I’m afraid there’s nothing more I can do at this stage.
As you are aware, whilst I am accountable for BEIS matters in the Lords, the Post Office is not directly within
my Ministerial portfolio and rests with Paul Scully, hence it may be more helpful for you to address any further
queries to his office.
Regards
Martin.
Get Outlook for iOS
From: James Arbuthnot
Sent: Monday, December 7, 2020 10:19:
To: Callanan, Minister (Private Office) <
"by FELLOWS,
; JONES, Kevan ¢_
Subject: Re: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Dear Mss Craig,
Thank you, but he has not done so. Please ensure that he sees the following message direct to him:
It is now more than two weeks ago that I wrote to you to say that the Post Office, which your department owns, lied
to Parliament. You have not denied it, and you cannot because you know it to be true. But neither can you admit it,
because that would create consequences for the Ombudsman inquiry submitted by Alan Bates through Kevan Jones
MP. So what are you going to do?
Yours sincerely,
James Arbuthnot
From: The Rt Hon the Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom
> wrote:
JARB0000143
JARBO000143
Dear Lord Arbuthnot,
lam copying in Lord Callanan’s parliamentary email address so that he can respond to you directly.
With best wishes,
Mel
Melissa Craig
Private Secretary to Lord Callanan
minist Hanant I melissa. crai
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
www.gov.uk/beis I https://twitter.com/beisgovuk
From: James Arbuthno' I
Sent: 30 November 2020 12:16
To: Callanan, Minister (Private Office) <i
Ce: Scully, Minister (Private Office)
Hon The Lord Charles Falconer QC <...
Subject: Re: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Dear Ms Craig,
Again, thank you. Please will you pass to the minister the following response.
Of course your department does not hold the document in question. It is a document which the Post
Office (which, I remind you, your department owns) commissioned and received and which therefore
the Post Office holds. Are you suggesting that your department does not have a copy of the document?
Really?
And do you have nothing to say about the issue of the Post Office (which, I remind you, your department
owns) lying to Parliament? I note that you do not deny it.
Yours sincerely,
James Arbuthnot
From: The Rt Hon the Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom
On 30 Nov 2020, at 11:26, Callanan, Minister (Private Office)
<Minister.Callana! > wrote:
Dear Lord Arbuthnot,
My sincere apologies for the delay — I! passed on your second email to the policy team as
soon as it was received so that they had the full picture of your request. It took a little
longer than anticipated as BEIS does not hold the advice you reference. Lord Callanan has
considered your request, please find his response below:
Dear James,
BEIS does not hold the document you are asking for. I am told that the document in
question has been disclosed by the Post Office to parties to ongoing legal proceedings that
are before the Court of Appeal. On 19° November 2020 the Court of Appeal noted that
some of the content of the document was already in the public domain and there was no
current need for reporting restrictions. However, the Court also said that it would keep the
need for reporting restrictions under review if and when more of the content of the
document was referred to in Court. The Criminal Procedure Rules permit any member of
the public to apply to the Court for access to information about cases (Rule 5.8). As the
document relates to proceedings before the Court of Appeal, and given what that court
have said about the document, it is clearly not appropriate for anyone other than the court
to decide whether the document should be made public at this time.
Kind regards,
Martin
With best wishes,
Mel
Melissa Craig
Private Secretary to Lord Callanan
Minister for Climate Change & Corporate Responsibility
minister.callanan¢
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
www.gov.uk/beis I_https://twitter.com/beisgovuk
From: James Arbuthnot GRO.
Sent: 28 November 2020 13:10
To: Callanan, Minister (Private Office)
Ce: Scully, Minister (Private Office) ¢
nick.readiy GRO I ‘
Subject: FW: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Dear Martin
A week ago I wrote to you (amongst others, including Paul Scully and the CEO of the Post
Office) to say that the Post Office, which your department owns, funds and directs, lied to
Parliament in its evidence on 3rd February 2015. Please would you acknowledge receipt of
that email? Please will you tell me what you are doing about it?
And over a week ago I wrote to you asking you to place a copy of the Clarke advice in the
libraries of both Houses of Parliament. Ms Craig in your office said (see below) “Thank you
for your email — I have passed it on to the appropriate team in BEIS who are looking into
this. We'll get back to you next week.” You have not got back to me. Please would you do
so?
Yours ever,
James
From: James Arbuthnot 7
Sent: Saturday, November
To: ARBUTHNOT OF EDROM, Lord
Subject: RE: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Dear Mss Craig,
Thank you for this. Further to my request yesterday that the Minister should place a copy
of the advice of Mr Clarke in the Library of both Houses, I have a further request, and you
will note that as a result of this request I am copying this email to the Speaker of the House
of Commons, to the Lord Speaker and to other interested parties.
On 3 February 2015 the BIS Select Committee took evidence in their inquiry into the Post
Office Mediation scheme. Part of that evidence was a written submission from the Post
Office, although they also received oral evidence from amongst others the Chief Executive
of the Post Office. Paragraph 11 of that written evidence
(http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/b
usiness-innovation-and-skills-committee/post-office-mediation/written/17827.pdf ) reads
as follows:
“At the start of the Scheme, both Post Office and the Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance
made clear that mediation cannot overturn a conviction. This can only be done through
JARB0000143
JARBO000143
established Court procedures. Post Office is under an absolute duty to disclose any
evidence that might undermine a prosecution case or support the case of a defendant. It
takes its responsibilities in this regard very seriously and Post Office’s investigations have
been carried out with this important duty firmly in mind. Post Office writes to everyone
who has suggested they have or have seen evidence that a conviction is unsafe and asked
them to disclose this so that it can be acted on. To date no such evidence has been
provided.”
I suggest that the contemptibly late disclosure of the advice of Mr Clarke — something that
should have been in the public domain in 2013 — establishes that the Post Office lied to,
and was in contempt of, Parliament. The above quoted paragraph of the Post Office’s
written advice was only one of many instances of this. I should be grateful if you would
consider my request for the immediate publication of the advice in the light of this.
Yours sincerely,
James Arbuthnot
To: James Arbuthno
Subject: RE: The Clarke Advice
Dear Lord Arbuthnot,
Thank you for your email — I have passed it on to the appropriate team in BEIS who are
looking into this. We'll get back to you next week.
With best wishes,
Mel
the Post Office
Melissa Craig
Private Secretary to Lord Callanan
Minister for Climate Change & Corporate Responsibility
minister.callanani
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
www.gov.uk/beis I https://twitter.com/beisgovuk
From: James Arbuthnot
Sent: 20 November 2020 09:10 .
To: Callanan, Minister (Private Office) <j.
Subject: The Clarke Advice to the Post Office
Dear Martin,
On Wednesday 18 November the Court of Appeal considered a piece of advice written by a
barrister, Simon Clarke, in 2013 for the Post Office. According to Brian Altman QC, acting
for the Post Office, this advice - which was apparently to the effect that the evidence of
Gareth Jenkins (a former senior Fujitsu Horizon engineer) was wrong - was disclosed to
Aria Grace solicitors (acting for three appellants) by Peters and Peters solicitors (acting for
the Post Office) last week. As you know, the judge in the Horizon litigation referred Mr
Jenkins’ evidence to the DPP.
In 2013 I and other MPs were in full flow of the discussion with Paula Vennells and Alice
Perkins about the unsafe nature of the Horizon convictions. We should have been told
about this document, but I have not yet seen it. Please will you immediately send me a
copy, and place it in the library of both Houses?
Yours ever,
James
The Rt Hon the Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom
JARB0000143
JARBO000143
JARB0000143
JARBO000143
UK Parliament Disclaimer: this e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have
received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any
unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for
viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this
e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not encrypted and should not be used for
sensitive data.
UK Parliament Disclaimer: this e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-
mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this
e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not encrypted and should not be used for sensitive data.