POL00384472
POL00384472
BRUNSWICK
Private & Confidential: June 11, 2014
Horizon: Public Affairs Messaging
This looks at messaging that can be used with public affairs audiences ahead of
any formal changes to the mediation group.
These messages are not necessarily ones that would be used with media.
Therefore, they would not necessarily be used in conversations which might
subsequently be leaked to journalists.
The Horizon system works
After investigating more than two years and costing, to date, £xxm, we have
found no evidence of any serious failures in the Horizon IT system;
What has been improved in recent years is user training and support;
68,000 subpostmasters successfully use this system every day;
The PO has clear legal advice that it is does not face any legal liability in
relation to Horizon;
This is the opposite of the usual story of: ‘failed computer system costing
taxpayer millions’;
It is in fact: ‘working computer system is costing taxpayer millions.’
The mediation system doesn’t work
The working group established to run the mediation scheme appears to be
dysfunctional;
So far, after almost a year, of the 150 cases under consideration, only xx have
been reviewed and xx have been sent to mediation;
None of the cases sent to mediation have been concluded;
It is our concern that the legal firms who have signed up many of the sub
postmasters in dispute with the PO are delaying the process, in order to
maximize their fees;
In the meantime, the PO is having to finance the process to the tune of
approximately [£500,000] a month;
1IPage
POL00384472
POL00384472
As things stand, it is expected to require at least another 18 months for the
working group to finish its work, at a cost of approximately £12.5m;
This is public money for which the PO is accountable;
We are not advocating leaving genuine cases high-and-dry, but we feel it is
now incumbent on us to set out the true cost of what is happening here.
It is in everyone’s interests to have this matter resolved as quickly as
possible
Having reviewed the situation all the way up to Board level, we feel that the
process needs to be speeded up and the costs reigned in;
This means we are proposing to take a more robust stance which may alter
how the scheme progresses [add details];
Should the other parties to the Working Group refuse to continue on this
basis, we may be forced to continue with our own review of the outstanding
cases;
This will doubtless lead to further protests from the JFSA and others but we
feel that the current process needs to be reformed;
There is the possibility that we could face a legal challenge / call for a
Judicial Review. This is also a possibility if we continue the process in its
current format. Should we face any kind of legal challenge, we will defend
our position robustly;
We remain committed to concluding the review of all cases as quickly and
fairly as possible;
Ata time when the Government is still committed to saving money across
Whitehall, this is money that is ready to be saved;
A greater fear is that in a year’s time the Public Accounts Committee, for
example, could look at the scheme and say it was obvious that taxpayers’
money was being wasted;
Any potential political ‘pain’ resulting from protests about the proposed
reform of the review process, would be small and should be more than offset
by the medium-term economic gain.
2IPage