POL00458454
POL00458454
From: Laurence ONeilt_
Sent: Thur 09/05/2024
To: Sarah I Graii
McEwan. a
Subject: FW: Project Pineapple, highly confidential
Attachment: Re: Project Pineapple - STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Attachment: Re: Key Agenda Items for Upcoming Board Meeting
Hi Sarah
Further to our conversation earlier, the below email was the last email I had on Project Pineapple 2. I
note you were not copied.
Following that email, there was a meeting (Ben F, Nic M and I were present. I thin!
may also have been present) with Amanda Burton, who confirmed that she (as Speal
and the Board were aware and were dealing with this matter. It was understood that no separate
investigation into it was needed.
If you would like me to pick this up again with Amanda (perhaps for an update as to where the Board
got to), please let me know.
Kind regards
Laurence O'Neill
Head of Legal, HR/IR
Legal, Compliance and Governance
100 Wood Street
London, EC2V 7ER
postoffice.co.uk
From: Ben Foati nf
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 6:06 PM
To: Amanda Burton fi
Cc: Laurence ONeil
Subject: FW: Project Pineapple
Hi Amanda
POL00458454
POL00458454
A potential Speak Up matter has been brought to my attention late last week. On Friday, Nic Marriott
contacted me and reported that in the course of her interview with Saf and Elliott in relation to
Pineapple that Elliott Jacobs and Saf Ismail alleged that Nick Read lied to the BEIS Select Committee.
They have alleged that Nick Read had used the word untouchables and that his comments in
Parliament were untrue. They have followed up the assertion by sending the email of 18/1 to Nick
where they refer to him having used the word untouchable to describe myself, Martin Roberts, JB.
They also note that their emails were not provided to the Select Committee.
My understanding (though subject to the transcript) is that Nick Read has stated that he is not
familiar with the word “untouchables” or as it pertains to the 40+ investigators that had been raised
as still being in the POL business. Consequently, it may be Nick’s position that he has not lied to
Parliament.
The emails of Saf and Elliott (attached) were identified as part of the urgent review by the FOIA team
but given that the search resulted a substantial number of returns it was further limited to Nick’s sent
box given that the request pertained to whether he had used the words— not someone else writing
to him alleging that he used a derivative of a word in respect of another group of people. As Nick
responded to Saf’s email that email was identified to the group working on the disclosure to the SC
but given that it does not record Nick using the term it was deemed not to fall within the scope of the
request and therefore was not provided. As noted below, I was conflicted on the matter and
therefore was not aware of those emails or involved in that aspect.
Ordinarily I would also write to Ben T (who I think does need to be informed) but Elliott and Saf have
raised a concern regarding Ben T’s involvement; in that (I understand from Nic M) they say that they
raised this matter with Ben T and indeed the word had been used in a discussion in which he was
present. They report that Ben T’s view is that the matter has been dealt with at the Select Committee
and that nothing further is to be done (which does not reflect their view).
Given that the two PM NEDs have made this potential Speak Up I believe I must raise with you. As Im
conflicted, I have copied in Laurence who is aware of the issue and: ‘who is also aware of the
correspondence search). JB is conflicted in these emails too. Karen has obviously been made aware.
My view is that Pinsents should support you on what steps should be taken in terms of investigating
this matters.
As noted above, I did flag the fact that I consider myself to be conflicted (having immediately declared
the conflict on Pineapple when the relevant email was sent to me). When I raised the conflict point
again with Nic M she advised me that Elliott and Saf have retracted their position about me saying it
was Henry’s view and not theirs. That said, I still remain of the view that I am conflicted until the
investigation is resolved. To be clear, I am merely passing on the information that I have received
from Nic Marriott and of course she can liaise with you directly in due course.
Happy to have a call later this week if I or Nic M can be of assistance.
Kind regards
Ben
Ben Foat (He/Him)
‘oup General Counsel
POST
OFFICE
00 Wood Street
ondon
EC2V 7ER
From: Nicola Marriott {
Sent: Monday,
Subject: Fw: Project Pineapple
FYI
POL00458454
POL00458454
From: Saf ismail !
Sent: 02 March 2024 08:45
To: Nicola Marriott
Cc: Elliot Jacobs
Subject: Project Pineapple
Hi Nicola
I hope all is well, see attached the emails that were not disclosed to the SC.
Let me know if you need anything else.
Regards
Saf Ismail
Non-Executive Director
100 Wood Street,
London, EC2V 7ER
postoffice.co.uk