POL00211873
POL00211873
From: Mark R Davies,
Sent: Fri 07/11/2014
To:
Ce: inda Crow Chris peice
I Patrick Bourke}
Subject: Re: Scheme report
Strongly agree and v happy to sponsor this approach.
M
Mark Davies
Communicati
Mobile?
rporate Affairs Director
Sent from my iPhone
On 7 Nov 2014, at 09:53, "Melanie Corfield" < GRO > wrote:
I agree with this. We will need something on the record to bust the many myths that will otherwise
rumble on (and potentially be fuelled by SS's never-ending "investigations"), that draws the line and also
highlights the positive actions on training and support that address the original SS 'conclusions'. It is as
Tom says not without risk but if we do not do this we will continue to have to provide info piecemeal in
various ways and to different audiences. We need a permanent point of reference with all the facts. We
know these will not be accepted in some quarters but at least we can shut the dialogue down.
Mel
From: Belinda Crowe
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 08:03 AM
To: Mark R Davies; Chris Aujard; Melanie Corfield; Patrick Bourke; Tom Wechsler
Cc: Belinda Crowe
Subject: Scheme report
All
I have been giving some thought again to how we might deal with what seem to be an increasing number
of Fol requests in relation to the Scheme — a trend that I think will continue. I think that we have reached
the stage at which we should consider making a decision now to publish a report on the Scheme when it
ends.
Section 22 of FolA exempts information if, at the time of the request for it the public authority intends to
publish the information at some future date (whether determined or not) and in all the circumstances it is
reasonable to withhold the information prior to publication. This is a qualified exemption therefore the
public interest test must be considered.
My proposition is that we make a decision now to publish a report on the Scheme when all cases have
been closed.
The contents of that report could include:
e Background to the establishment of the Scheme — why and how we did it set it up
e The Working Group — membership, ToRs, how it worked, number of meetings etc.
* Case information:
POL00211873
POL00211873
Applications received
Number ineligible
Number resolved prior to entry
Number resolved prior to mediation
Number SS recommended for mediation
Number WG approved for mediation
Number WG did not approve for mediation
Number mediated
Number where party declined to mediate
Number of ‘criminal conviction’ cases
Number of cases previously heard in the criminal courts
Number of convictions appealed on the basis of information
Number resolved at mediation
Number not resolved at mediation
Number of applicants with advisors
Number of unrepresented applicants
Number of different advisors
Etc.etc. As many facts as possible .
ecc0000000000000000
Finances
o Cost of Scheme ?
o Amount paid to advisors for CQRs (flat fee) per case and aggregated
o Amounts paid to advisors for attending mediation (flat fee) — per case and aggregated
o Amounts paid in expenses for attending mediation
o Financial resolution (aggregated amounts)
Our approach
o Where liable
o Where at fault
What we found
0 No systemic problem with Horizon
What we did
o Branch improvement etc.
The aim would be to tell the story based on facts and figures.
In deciding exactly what goes into the report we could take account of questions we have been asked
about the Scheme
Making this decision would allow us to:
.
deal with Fol requests (subject to the PI test) on the basis that we plan to publish a report on the
Scheme at its conclusion. We do not need to announce the decision (although we may wish to
do so) — just make it.
allow us to draw a line under this issue at the end
put us on the front foot in terms of dealing with the inevitable spate of Fol requests we would get
at the end
show we are open and transparent and that our ‘not giving a running commentary on the
Scheme was really based on not undermining it
take control of what happens at the end to ensure others do not seek to produce a report
There are risks. Anything we publish may give rise to further enquiries but we would not discuss
individual cases. But if we don't tell the story, someone else will and we may as well do that proactively.
For that reason I think we should consider this.
Grateful for views - subject to that I will think about how to put this to ExCo/Board to get a decision.
Best wishes
Belinda
Belinda Crowe
148 Old Street, LONDON, EC1V 9HQ
POL00211873
POL00211873