POL00162071
POL00162071
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject: Re: BBC Wales - Horizon Documentary
Yep lets do that. thanks for all your efforts on conferences. And best wishes to the cats.
Sent from my iPhone
On 26 Sep 2013, at 18:31, "Jane Hill"
Great. And yes I am. I think week three is where you begin to understand scale and scope of role (scary)
but have started to get to know team (not scary).
Be good to chat tomorrow - will be in late and leaving early (cat neutering day) but hopefully we can
grab 10 mins.
J
From: Mark R Davies
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 05:06 PM
To: Jane Hill
Subject: Re: BBC Wales - Horizon Documentary
Yes definitely. Lets try to have a chat tomorrow. Thanks - great idea and just what we need. Are
you enjoying it?
Mark
Sent from my iPhone
On 26 Sep 2013, at 17:17, "Jane Hill" < GRO. «> wrote:
Mark
Sophie's filled me in on this. BBC Wales has too much airtime to fill..
As the local MP is David Jones, Welsh Secretary, I thought I would try and grab him for a
coffee in Manchester - just to make contact and get a feeling for where he is on this. Does
that sound OK to you?
J
Jane Hill I Head of Public Affairs
<image001.png>
B
London, EC1V 9HQ
<image006 jpg>
From: Sophie Bialaszewski
Sent: 26 September 2013 17:12
To: Jane Hill
Subject: FW: BBC Wales - Horizon Documentary
FYI - Wales documentary emails. Sophie
<image002.png> 148 Old Street, London, EC1V 9HQ
<image003.png> postoffice.co.uk
<image004.png> @postofficenews
<image005.png>
From: Ruth X Barker
Sent: 26 September 2013 17:10
To: Susan Crichton; Mark R Davies
Cc: Nina Arnott; Andy Holt; Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Sophie Bialaszewski
Subject: BBC Wales - Horizon Documentary
I think might have to take your call on that.
The amends aren't substantial to previously cleared. it's the final question or rather what
we say in response which worries me the most.
From: Susan Crichton
Sent: 26 September 2013 16:38
To: Ruth X Barker; Mark R Davies
Cc: Nina Arnott; Andy Holt; Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Sophie Bialaszewski
Subject: Re: BBC Wales - Horizon Documentary
Ruth - do you want this to go to our media lawyer?
Susan
From: Ruth X Barker
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 03:24 PM
To: Mark R Davies; Susan Crichton
Cc: Nina Arnott; Andy Holt; Angela Van-Den-Bogerd; Sophie Bialaszewski
Subject: BBC Wales - Horizon Documentary
Hi Both
We need to submit responses to BBC Wales re their programme on Horizon,
It is expected that the programme will focus on the case of Noel Thomas. They also say
.they may be interviewing an MP, a lawyer and a computer expert
POL00162071
POL00162071
Below is a statement and a response the questions posed.
I've tried to use previously cleared content as much as possible. New text is marked in red.
Susan are you able to give some guidance on the final question. I've added a line re the
change in charges but not sure this is factually correct.
BBC Wales have asked that we send our response tomorrow.
Ruth
Statement
"The Post Office is committed to addressing any outstanding concerns
among subpostmasters swiftly and transparently.
"As part of this commitment we set up an independent review which recently
published an interim report which found that so far there was no evidence of
any systemic issues with Horizon but did identify some further improvements
we could make to our training and support arrangements, which we are
taking forward.
"The Horizon system has around 68,000 users and processes more than six
million transactions every day. The total number of cases put forward by
users to Second Sight as part for its external review was 47, less than 0.1
per cent of the total number of users of the Horizon system. We are
reviewing our training and support procedures and have established an
independent mediation scheme to provide an effective way to assess and
address any outstanding cases where subpostmasters feel they have been
unfairly treated.
"Subpostmasters are the lifeblood of our business and we take their
concerns extremely seriously. We hope the measures we are taking will
demonstrate our commitment to working closely with them to further improve
our network."
Why didn't you, the Post Office, admit that you had found bugs in the
Horizon computer system in 2010 (This is in the interim report published in
July - part 6. 6.4).
It is not the case that the report found bugs in the system. In fact the interim
report found that investigations so far had shown no sign of systemic issues
with the Horizon system,
We voluntarily provided information on two anomalies involving a receipts/
payments mismatch and historic accounting entries. Both of these were
found and rectified by the Post Office and voluntarily communicated to the
independent review company.
POL00162071
POL00162071
Modifications have already been made to rectify these issues and all
subpostmasters involved have been informed of this. None of the
subpostmasters involved have been prosecuted.
Why have you continued to prosecute sub-postmasters after this date even
though they claim it is Horizon that is causing the defecits they have in their
branches. Why didn't you tell MP's about your findings in 2010?
We recognise some subpostmasters have concerns that their cases have
not been fully resolved and we are committed to finding a resolution to this.
That is why we commissioned an independent review and have also worked
with the JFSA to establish this Independent Mediation Scheme. Any cases
which were raised through this review have been placed on hold pending its
outcome. This will remain the case until the review is concluded.
The Horizon system has around 68,000 users and processes more than six
million transactions every day. The total number of cases put forward by
users to Second Sight as part for its external review was 47, less than 0.1
per cent of the total number of users of the Horizon system. For information
so far 30 applications have been submitted to the mediation process.
The interim report produced by SS found no evidence of systemic issues
with Horizon but did identify some further improvements we could make to
our training and support arrangements, which we are taking forward.
Why did it take 10 years for POL to ask an independent company (Second
Sight) to investigate the claims made by tens of sub-postmasters that the
computer system Horizon is faulty?
The interim report produced by Second Sight found no evidence of systemic
issues with Horizon but did identify some further improvements we could
make to our training and support arrangements, which we are taking
forward.
Why did the POL not have a central file full of the cases and people that you
had prosecuted who all claimed Horizon was at fault. There was no file
ready for Second Sight when the company began their investigations. If POL
had already investigated the sub-postmasters' claims one would expect a
central file on the matter. Why wasn't there one? Had you investigated these
claims thoroughly?
In line with industry standards we operate a seven year document retention
policy. We have fully co-operated with Second Sight's investigation. We
have provided case files where established and contacted people in our
11,800 branches to offer them the opportunity to put forward any concerns
they may have regarding Horizon and its training and support processes.
The 47 cases considered by Second Sight were a combination of cases
which had gone to court and those which were based on comments made by
people working across the network.
If you are so sure that the sub-postmasters had stolen from you, why did
you, time after time, drop the charges of theft and change it to one of false
accounting in court?
POL00162071
POL00162071
We take forward approximately 50 prosecutions a year and with a network
of 11,800 post offices that means such cases are not commonplace
These prosecutions are progressed in accordance with the Court's
processes and systems. We have a duty to investigate where there is
suspicion of wrong-doing. Subpostmasters are pillars of the community and
must abide by high standards of probity in that role. The public would be
surprised if we did not take action where public money may have been
misappropriated.
In line with the code for Crown Prosecutions we continually review cases for prosecution
and in some cases charges may change in line with this code.
POL00162071
POL00162071