POL00350207
POL00350207
Transcript PAGE 1
BBC Radio 4, Today, 12/9/2014, 7:33:15 AM
Duration: 09:56
Booking reference: 573608 (01471385)
Interviewer/ee details: Presenter, Jo Hamilton, James Arbuthnot, Mark
Davies
Presenter: ...being made scapegoats for a faulty IT system called Horizon Accounting that
created thousands of Pounds of shortfalls in cash when none existed. Jo Hamilton was a
SubPostmaster in the South Warnborough Village Shop in Hook in Hampshire. Within a few
weeks of getting the new system, she noticed something wrong.
Jo Hamilton: _ It all started off in December 2003 and I had a discrepancy of minus £2,000, so I rang
the helpdesk, because that’s what they're for, and they told me to do various things and I did
that, and the amount that I was down doubled, and I asked to speak to a supervisor, so they
came on the phone, and whatever we did, it wouldn't go back to minus £2,000. The upshot of
it was that they asked me to pay the money into the Post Office, which I didn’t have, and then
they decided to take my wages for the next 10 months to pay it back, because under the terms
of my contract that’s what has to happen if you're down — you have to make it good.
I had to re-mortgage the house and repay the money, and originally I was charged with
stealing. They said if I repaid and pleaded guilty to 14 counts of false accounting, they would
drop the theft, so the decision was made that I was less likely to go to prison for false
accounting than I was for theft, and that’s what I did. If I didn’t plead guilty, they would have
charged me with shift, and I couldn't prove I didn’t take anything. They couldn't prove I did
and at the time, they told me, oh, I was the only person that had ever had problems with
Horizon, nobody else had. I actually did think I was the only person in the world that had ever
had problems with it and I hadn't taken any money, but I didn’t know what the hell was going
on and they never made any attempt to investigate the money or where it had gone. I would
love to see all our names cleared and I would love to see some of us have some of our money
back.
Presenter: Well, a group of MPs took up the cause of the SubPostmasters, but now they say they
have lost faith in the Post Office. The leader of that campaign is the Conservative MP, James
Arbuthnot, and he is with me, so is Mark Davies, who is the Communications Director for the
Post Office. Mr Arbuthnot, what's the problem, because the Post Office did set up a mediation
system?
James Arbuthnot: Yes, at considerable public expense, the Post Office set up this mediation
scheme, but sadly they are now trying to sabotage that very mediation scheme that they set
up and they're doing this in secret. It's an extraordinary story. They're trying to bar from
mediation 90% of the SubPostmasters for whom it was set up. They're arguing, for example,
that those who, like Jo Hamilton, pleaded guilty to false accounting shouldn't have the
mediation scheme available to them, despite having agreed expressly with MPs that those
who had pleaded guilty to false accounting, should have it available to them, so they're doing
it in secret, they're doing it at a stage when there is no legal representation available to these
SubPostmasters, because they're trying to bar these people from the mediation scheme in the
working group for the mediation getup. It's an extraordinary story and I'm afraid I have no
confidence that the Post Office is trying to clear it up.
Presenter: Well, what they say is that they paid for people to get independent advice, they've
advised to people to come forward with their stories, they've investigated the cases; they've
done everything that could be reasonably requested of them.
ee Precise.
POL00350207
POL00350207
Transcript PAGE 2
James Arbuthnot: They talk about this legal advice, but then they try to prevent the
SubPostmasters going into the mediation scheme at a stage of the process when the
SubPostmaster is not represented by that legal advice. You won't get any of those legal
advisors coming onto this programme, because the Post Office has bound them to secrecy.
You won't get 24 Sight, the independent investigators, coming onto this programme, because
the Post Office has bound them to secrecy.
Presenter: So couldn't you argue that they have a relationship with their clients and, therefore,
they're inevitably bound to secrecy?
James Arbuthnot: Yes and there was a concern at the beginning of this that 2 Sight, the
independent forensic accountants, who the Post Office chose and are paying for, do have a
relationship with the Post Office and that worried MPs about whether they would have the
independence that was required, but they have had, and now that they've shown that
independence, the Post Office is doing its utmost to poo-poo the recommendations that 2™
Sight is putting forward and they're trying to override those recommendations possibly
because of that very independence.
Presenter: But, look, the investigation isn't over yet and a lot of things might yet change.
James Arbuthnot: Well, that is my hope, but for myself, since this is an investigation and a
mediation scheme which is in the hands largely of the Post Office, it's paid for by the Post
Office, for myself, I have lost faith in the Post Office’s determination to see it through to a
proper end.
Presenter: Mark Davies, it is a very serious charge that you sabotaged this scheme.
Mark Davies: _ It's an extremely serious charge, John, and clearly we reject it outright and it's very
regrettable some of the things that Mr Arbuthnot has said.
Presenter: What did he say that was wrong?
Mark Davies: Well, I think to go back to the original setting up of this inquiry, we at the Post Office
take our responsibilities to our people extremely seriously and to their welfare as well.
Presenter: What did he say that was wrong?
Mark Davies: If I could just finish the point, I think it's really, really important to set this out. The
Horizon system that Mr Arbuthnot refers to is used every single day by about 80,000 people.
In the course of the last decade, half a million people have used that system without any
problems face to face with customers across the 11,500 branches in the Post Office network.
That said, a very small number of people came to us through their MPs with some questions,
some issues, which they said they had problems with the system. That amounts to 0.03% of
those people who have dealt with the Horizon system...
Presenter: It's still 150 people though.
Mark Davies: It absolutely is.
Presenter: They're each individuals with their own lives being ruined. Now, what was it that Mr
Arbuthnot said about your handling of this scheme that is wrong?
Mark Davies: Well, what is wrong is first and foremost that the scheme hasn't finished yet, John. So
2.5 years ago, we set up a review into the Horizon system. That review has found no
evidence at all of any systemic problems with the Horizon system.
Presenter: Well, it's your own review, isn't it?
ECS ocosk Precise.
POL00350207
POL00350207
Transcript PAGE 3
Mark Davies: Well, it's with independent forensic accountants, John, and then we set up the
complaints and mediation scheme for those 150 people who came forward. Look, we
advertised for people to come forward. We went to our people across the Post Office network
and said if you feel that you've been treated unfairly, please come and talk to us about that. I
don't think...if we weren't taking this seriously, I don't think we would have done that.
Presenter: But you heard the story of Jo Hamilton there. I mean she's tried to do everything that
she could, at least if we're to believe her and we have no reason not to believe her, everything
she's said she could have done, she has tried to do, and she's got nowhere.
Mark Davies: You'll forgive me, John, for not getting into an individual case.
Presenter: All right, I understand you can't do that, but nonetheless, she is representative of
many people like her and they are in desperate trouble now, and they have a case, don't
they?
Mark Davies: I am really sorry if people have faced lifetime difficulties, lifestyle problems, that are as
a result of their having been working in Post Office branches. It doesn't necessarily follow
though that the Post Office is responsible for the issues that people have had, and I think our
commitment to seeking to look at every single case is underlined...
Presenter: But you've barred 90% of them. This is...
Mark Davies: No, that’s not true and I don't accept that figure at all.
Presenter: Well, what is the figure? How many have you barred?
Mark Davies: Well, the working group, which is chaired independently by a former High Court Judge
is bound by confidentiality, the Post Office is bound by confidentiality...
Presenter: So you can't tell me how many have been barred. It might be 90%. It might be...
Mark Davies: I'm afraid I can't, John, because the working group was set up with confidentiality in
mind and we, as the Post Office, are bound to that.
Presenter: But you're not giving anything away. I'm not asking you for the names of the people.
I'm asking you for the number of people who have been barred.
Mark Davies: And I can't go into the details of that...
Presenter: So in that case, we're entitled to accept what Mr Arbuthnot has said, which is that it is
90% of cases.
Mark Davies: I don't accept that at all. It's not...
Presenter: Well, if you're not being able to give me a figure, with the best [motive in the world], it's
impossible for us to do anything other than accept the figure that was Mr Arbuthnot has given.
Mark Davies: Well, we're being placed in an intolerable position as the Post Office, because we're
bound by a confidentiality agreement which was agreed with all parties...
Presenter: But you entered into that agreement yourself.
Mark Davies: We did — including with the Justice for SubPostmasters Alliance, so we're in an
extremely difficult position. It's not the case that 90% have been rejected. We're actually
looking at every single case on a case by case basis. We're absolutely committed to doing
that...
Precise.
POL00350207
POL00350207
Transcript PAGE 4
[All talking]
Mark Davies: _ I'm not saying that at all. We look at every single case on a case by case basis and in
some cases, there is evidence whereby we have looked at what's happened and we have
held our hands up and said in some cases we could have done things differently and we have
reached agreement with some cases.
[AII talking]
Mark Davies: __...in other cases we haven't reached that conclusion, because we have to take it
extremely seriously. We're a large retail organisation. We conduct audits in our branches
across the 11,500 branches every single day. Where there are cases where there have been
losses in those branches, clearly we have a duty to look at those, and you'd expect us to do
that on behalf of our customers, on behalf of taxpayers.
Presenter: A final very quick word, Mr Arbuthnot.
James Arbuthnot: Mark Davies says that it's a tiny proportion of the transactions in the Post
Office and of course that's right, and yet one single miscarriage of justice ought to galvanise
the nation. I have got more than 140 MPs, some of them with more than one case. This is
not a small problem...
Mark Davies: And if evidence emerges where there is evidence that a case should be relooked at
through the legal process is absolutely the Post Office's legal duty to take that forward and we
will do so.
Presenter: Mark Davies, James Arbuthnot, thank you both very much indeed.
1 Broadgate, London EC2M 20S Precise.