POL00448698
POL00448698
From: Henry Staunto!
Sent: Thur 07/12/2023 6:55:07 PM (UTC)
To: Diane Blanchard” i
Subject: Saf feedback - CONFIDENTIAL
I thanked Saf for the excellent contribution he made to the business , including at Board
meetings . Board colleagues specifically commented that his insights on the business were very
helpful in understanding the issues we face . I encouraged him , though , to focus more on the "
strategic " aspects of those issues . I asked if he had any observations on the conduct of the
Board and related issues .
He thought that Rachel was , perhaps ," over procedural " . He noted that she suggested that I
leave the Board when a tangential issue involving WH Smith was discussed . I said that I thought
she was just wanting the matter to be aired . He was upset that he was kept outside the NomCo
when business had moved on from his reelection . I apologised for the incident but Rachel did
not . He accepted however , that no further action needs to be taken .
He was much much more concerned about the culture of JB and the Investigations team . he
thought not much had changed over ten years . He felt strongly that Investigations needed to
come out of the Legal area under Ben Foat . There was not sufficient PM involvement . Perhaps
an Advisory Council of 4/5 PMs might be the final arbiter . I said this may be just too difficult to
convene . As an alternative it could that one PM who was either the direct report of JB or a
sounding board for whoever was JB's boss . He was v critical of Ben and Legal . They were still
treating PMs as guilty unless proved otherwise
With respect to Retail he thought Nick and I might have held Martin more to account for the lack
of progress on DMB closures and SSKs . He felt the SSK presentation to the Board was " not
entirely truthful". Morrisons, the Coop , WH Smith and other strategic partners were very
keen on SSKs particularly after the Min Wage increase . He thought that strategic partners may
demand the SSKs for free but PMs may have to pay . I said that I had not heard this . As a PM he
would have to say that " Martin was just not good enough " and he seemed equally unimpressed
by one or two subordinates . ( He referred to the poor performance at the Inquiry of Elaine
Caldwell ? - that is what happens if the staff are not up to it. ) I put in context the difficulties
placed on Martin and his team but Saf did not move his position .
Throughout Saf wanted to emphasise his support for the Board and the senior team .
Sent from Outlook for iOS
POL-BSFF-WITN-006-0027941