PS 14/16-14/18
POL00006571
POL00006571
POST OFFICE LTD
PROJECT SPARROW SUB-COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Project Sparrow Sub-Committee of the Board
held at 148 Old Street, London EC1V 9HQ on 6 June 2014
Present: Alice Perkins (AP) Chair
Alasdair Marnoch (AM) Non-Executive Director
Richard Catlard (RC) Non-Executive Director
Paula Vennells (PV) CEO (by conference call)
Chris Aujard (CA) General Counsel
In Attendance: Alwen Lyons (AL) Company Secretary
Belinda Crowe (BC) Programme Director, Project Sparrow
Mark Davies (MD) Communications Director
David Oliver (DO) Project Sparrow
Martin Edward (ME) CEO Chief of Staff
PS 14/16 OPENING OF MEETING
PS 14/17
ACTION:
Mark Davies/
Belinda Crowe/
General Counse
(a
(b)
(d)
A quorum being present, the Chair opened the meeting of the Project
Sparrow Sub-Committee (“the Committee”) and welcomed Mark
Davies, Belinda Crowe, Chris Aujard, Martin Edwards and David
Oliver.
INITIAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW AND MEDIATION SCHEME - THE
WAY FORWARD
The Committee received a paper on the current position of the
mediation scheme, the progress to date and the associated risks and
challenges.
The Committee discussed the three options set out in the paper with
teference back to the three fundamental principles agreed by the
Business for its approach to Sparrow:
¢ to gain a fuller understanding of the facts;
« to ensure a fair outcome; and
¢ to highlight lessons learned so that improvements can be
made to Business processes.
The Committee reviewed the status of the mediation scheme and the
urgency of any decision if it meant moving away from the current
position (Option 1). The Committee agreed that Option 3 would be its
preferred option subject to the Minister's support and there being a
low probability of a successful application for a Judicial Review. This
would be recommended to the Board.
The Committee asked for a paper to the Board explaining the three
options. The General Counsel was asked to ascertain the risk of a
successful application for Judicial Review, the likelihood of it
POL00006571
POL00006571
succeeding and the additional costs of defending such an action.
(e) The Committee agreed to recommend to the Board that:
¢ Option 4 (continuing as is) was untenable given the challenges it
posed to the best interests of the business and value for money.
e subject to further legal advice on risk of Judicial Review, the
Chairman would explored with the Minister the extent to which
she would be prepared to support Option 3 and explain the
alternative approach of Option 2 as a fall-back position.
«the programme team and the Communications and Public Affairs
Directorate should continue to plan for the implementation of both
Option 2 and Option 3 on a contingency basis.
¢ an approach should be developed for Option 2 which is sensitive
to stakeholder handling but which could be implemented quickly
in the event that the risks associated with Option 3 prove
unacceptable.
PS14/18 CLOSE
There being no further business the meeting was closed.