UKGI00001748 - Email from Mike Whitehead to MPST Swinson, cc Will Gibson, Peter Batten and others re: FW: Horizon: James Arbuthnot MP

Evidence on official site

UKG1I00001748
UKGI00001748

From: Whitehead Mike (ShEx)[/O=DTI/OU=DTIHQ/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=MJWHITEH]
Sent: Mon 08/07/2013 2:46:23 PM (UTC)

To: Swinson MPST[. ° “GRO.” F

Cc: } Batten Peter

‘Angela

Subject: : James Arbuthnot MP.
Attachment: 20130708 Horizon briefing note for the whips.doc
Claire

A couple of tweaks and typos.

Mike

Mike Whitehead

Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Shareholder Executive

Royal Mail and Postal Services

1 Victoria Street
London SW1H 0E
{GRO

From: Swinson MPST

Sent: 08 July 2013 14:58

To: Whitehead Mike (ShEx)

Ce: Gibson Will (ShEx); Batten Peter (ShEx); Balakrishnan Angela (Communications), Cable MPST; SPAD Cable MPST
Subject: RE: Horizon: James Arbuthnot MP

importance: High

Mike,

Could you please check the attached note before I send to the whips - it is based on the info you
sent me this morning

Claire

Claire Rannard I Private Secretary to Jo Swinson - Minister for Employment Relations and Consumer Affairs I
Department for Business, Innovation & Skills I {_
www.bis.gov.uk

All emails and attachments sent by a member of the Private Office to an official on behalf of a Minister relating to a
decision, request or comment made by a Minister, or a note of a Ministerial meeting, must be filed appropriately by the
recipient. Private Offices do not keep official records of such emails or attachments.
UKG1I00001748
UKGI00001748

From: Whitehead Mike (ShEx)

Sent: 08 July 2013 12:33

To: Swinson MPST

Ce: Gibson Will (ShEx); Batten Peter (ShEx); Balakrishnan Angela (Communications); Cable MPST; SPAD Cable MPST
Subject: Horizon: James Arbuthnot MP

Claire

Following Jo's earlier telephone call with James Arbuthnot, suggested briefing for the Whips'
Office:

Briefing for the Whips on James Arbuthnot tabling an Urgent Question to obtain a Ministerial
statement in response to Independent review by forensic accountants (Second Sight) of Post
Office Ltd's Horizon computer system which records all transactions conducted across the entire
post office network.

The issues covered by the review relate to a very small number of ex-subpostmasters whose
contracts were terminated and were subsequently convicted by the Courts for false accounting or,
in some more serious cases, theft and fraud.

The report confirms that no systemic problems with the Horizon system were found but also found
scope for Post Office Ltd (POL) to improve aspects of its support and training for subpostmasters.

POL has welcomed the report and committed to put in place additional measures to address
historic issues, improve future processes and to work with subpostmaster representatives to
examine potential changes in support measures for subpostmasters.

Though Post Office Ltd is wholly owned by the Government, it operates on an arm's length basis
in determining its commercial and operational strategies and policies.

The issues raised by the Report are wholly operational matters for POL and do not relate in any
way to Government policy decisions or actions. A government statement could only reiterate that
there was no Government role in the issues and it was not appropriate for Government to become
involved.

A second aspect on which James Arbuthnot (JA) has indicated a wish to see Government
comment or action is in respect of identifying a means of redress for ex-subpostmasters who were
advised to by their legal advisors to plead guilty to false accounting to avoid charges of theft and
fraud (which potentially carry risk of imprisonment if found guilty).

JA is seeking to imply that the Report suggests that new evidence might be found on the basis of
which some false accounting verdicts could be challenged/appealed. He has a constituent who
was convicted of false accounting but who has blamed her circumstances on the Horizon system
and lack of POL support in investigating the financial discrepancies which occurred in her
subpost office.

He also appears to take the view that a Government statement could open the review and or
appeal against these convictions.
UKG1I00001748
UKGI00001748

In summary we would suggest that there is a strong case against tabling an Urgent Question on
the basis that a Government statement could not achieve the objectives JA seeks because:

e the issues are not related to any Government action or policy decision but are wholly
operational matters for Post Office Ltd in which Government has no role.

e no systemic problems with the Horizon system have been identified by the review.

e the number of subpostmasters who have experienced problems are a minute proportion of the
tens of thousands of people successfully using the system across the network of over 11,500
branches on a daily basis

e Post Office Ltd has proposed measures to address some of the points about subpostmaster
support and training raised in the Report

e Government cannot intervene in the legal process to review or appeal past convictions.

Mike

Mike Whitehead

Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Shareholder Executive

Royal Mail and Postal Services

1 Victoria Street