UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Horizon Questions for Parliamentary Debate 17" December 2014
Scope and Operation of the Scheme
Q. How has POL defined “the system” — this was supposed to be wider than
just Horizon?
The Scheme’s overall objective is to try to achieve the mutual and final
resolution of individual Applicants’ specific concerns about Horizon and
related issues
The scheme is wider than just the software involved. This encompasses, as
recorded in Second Sight’s interim report, the following:
“...Horizon relates to the entire application. This encompasses the software,
both bespoke and software packages, the computer hardware and
communications equipment installed in Branch and the central data centres. It
includes the software used to control and monitor the systems. In addition,
veeeees testing and training systems are also referred to as Horizon”
Q. If it’s not a Horizon issue that is causing the problem, what is, 140
Subpostmasters can’t be wrong?
140 subpostmasters is less than 0.03% of the total users of Horizon — there
are thousands of other subpostmasters who have not made a complaint
That said, this question is precisely what the Scheme is designed to find out
No two cases are identical, so inherent danger lies in trying to look for a “one
size fits all” explanation
However, investigations so far show that a large number of the problems
were caused by how the Subpostmasters themselves were using Horizon.
The Scheme was set up in good faith and Post Office is prepared to respond
constructively to what it finds, good and bad
Of course subpostmasters in the Scheme have faced difficulties, but it does
not necessarily follow that Post Office is responsible
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. Paula Vennells talks about investigating “Horizon and directly associated
issues”. “Directly” is not what was agreed when the scheme was established.
e Scheme was set up with a specific and defined purpose which it is seeking to
address.
e [tis not in the interests of applicants or the thousands of other
subpostmasters delivering vital services to communities and our constituents
to keep expanding the scope of the Scheme in the hope that something
somewhere might be found when no issues have been found (thus far) with
Horizon
e I would remind everyone that nothing prevents subpostmasters from raising a
complaint with Post Office at any time and Post Office will look into it.
Q. Why did Post Office agree to incorporate convicted cases in to the scheme
if it knew it wasn’t going to mediate?
e Each case is looked at on its individual facts and merits. That meant not pre-
supposing the outcome of some cases by blocking their entry to the scheme.
e However, investigations so far have not revealed any suggestion that a
subpostmasters conviction is unsafe. Many of the convictions were based on
the admissions of the sub-postmaster in interview or his/her guilty plea
e Let me be clear: Post Office does not have the power to overturn any
conviction and nor does the Mediation Scheme — Only a Court does.
e Post Office is, however, under an absolute duty to immediately disclose any
information which might undermine the Prosecution’s case or support the
case of the defendant and Post Office has done so where appropriate. There
is no doubt in my mind that it is being particularly vigilant in this regard as it
carries out its investigations
e The fact remains, uncomfortable as it may be for some, that nothing has to
date surfaced which suggests that any of the convictions are unsafe. If it
does it will be dealt with in accordance with POL’s obligations. It will have to
be.
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. Why aren’t POL mediating criminal cases?
e As Ihave made plain, I understand that each and every case is looked at
individually
e You have suggested you have lost faith in the Scheme, and indeed a number
of cases have already been resolved. So it cannot be said to have failed.
e However I am not going to say anything which could be taken by applicants
which could suggest that Post Office or anyone else might decide whether to
proceed in a particular way.
e All cases are being considered on a case by case basis and I have not seen
any of the cases and I assume my honourable members have not either.
e If asub postmaster or his legal representative feels that the conviction is
unsafe or is not happy with the conviction, the sub postmaster is entitled to
seek leave to appeal his conviction to the court of appeal criminal division
out of time
e The scheme does not operate as a substitute criminal appeals system.
Q. James Arbuthnot states that the “outcome envisaged” at the start of the
scheme was that not mediating would be the exception. Why is this not now
the case?
e It was never envisaged that all cases would be mediated
¢ Post Office looks at every case on it merits and will mediate in cases where in
its view mediation offers the genuine prospect of fair resolution
e No party could predict at the start of the Scheme what the investigations
might discover with any certainty, nor could they given that the Applicants
had not yet set out their individual complaints.
e Mediation is a voluntary and consensual process and, accordingly, neither
Applicants nor Post Office are bound to proceed to mediation even where it is
the Working Group’s view that mediation is appropriate
¢ But it is worth remembering that Post Office placed no bar on the acceptance
of cases to the Scheme even where there appeared to suggest little of
substance to investigate
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. Why is POL excluding professional advisers from the final consideration of
whether a case should go to mediation?
Post Office makes a substantial contribution to Applicants to obtain
professional advice in preparing their claims against it
And, in cases which do proceed to mediation, there is a further contribution
for professional advisers to attend
In any event, JFSA fulfil the role of representing the views of Subpostmasters
on the Working Group
If pressed:
In any event, Applicants and advisers are free to approach Post Office about
mediation or a discussion on their case at any time
Q. How can we rely on Second Sight if paid for by POL?
In response to the honourable member for Batley and Spen (Mike Wood MP)
last year, I gave a specific commitment that the working group would include
representation from Second Sight, recognising their independent
understanding of the issues
Second Sight continue to play a central role in all aspects of the Scheme
The honourable member for North East Hampshire (James Arbuthnot MP)
acknowledges their independence in his letter to the POL CEO and in a BBC
blog where he wrote:
o “...someone had to pay for it. I wasn't going to, the Government
wouldn't have forked out money from somewhere else to do so, and
the Post Office offered to do so despite the risk involved to their
reputation. That does contrast ...... with the cover ups we've seen
elsewhere in the public sector”.
Q. Who is Sir Anthony Hooper? Who Chairs the Working Group?
The Working Group is independently chaired by Sir Anthony Hooper, whose
appointment was announced on 29 October 2013.
I understand he was suggested by JFSA themselves.
He is a former member of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales.
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. When were subpostmasters able to complain? Hundreds have been frozen
out of the process.
e Subpostmasters were offered an opportunity to come forward when Second
Sight were first appointed back in 2012.
e Those who wanted to apply for the Scheme had three months between
August and November 2013 to submit their applications
e The Post Office advertised the Scheme, as did the Justice for
Subpostmasters Alliance, and I’m sure interested honourable members would
have done so also
e There is nothing to stop any SPM from raising a concern with PO at any time
through any other channel and it will be investigated.
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Progress / Results of the Scheme
Q. What were the main accusations of the interim report?
Though Second Sight identified a number of areas of concern that needed
further investigation, it must be noted that their primary finding was one of no
evidence of system wide problems with the Horizon software
However, there was recognition both within the report, and from Post Office
Ltd, that more could be done to support and train subpostmasters who use
the Horizon system.
Q. What were the main accusations of the leaked thematic report?
The Report is confidential to those involved in the Scheme and Members will
understand that I can’t comment on document I haven't seen
I do, however, know that it remains the case that no evidence of system wide
problems with the Horizon software has been identified
Q. How many cases have been resolved?
Sir Anthony Hooper has written to me with regard to progress of the scheme.
There were 150 applicants originally, of which 4 were ineligible
Of the 146 remaining, 12 were resolved early
Since that point, 24 cases have been proposed for mediation by the working
group:
o 2 of those were resolved before the mediation meeting
o 7 have been mediated
© 9 are waiting for mediation (3 scheduled for this week)
© 2 where Post Office declined to mediate
Q. Can the minister summarise the findings of the scheme to date, in her view?
I am unable to say because I neither know nor am entitled to know the detail
of cases
In any event I am not prepared to say anything which might, in some way
affect the process or individual mediations.
What I can say is that in none of the cases which have been re-investigated
to date has any evidence been found of a system wide issue with Horizon or
any suggestion that a criminal conviction is unsafe.
What I observe, however, is a genuine and good faith effort being made by
Post Office to try to resolve the issues raised by Applicants to the Scheme
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. Why has POL rejected 90% of cases going to mediation?
e I have heard this figure being quoted and it is extremely unclear how it has
been arrived at
e Information shared with me by the Working Group tells a different story
e Of the 24 cases recommended for mediation by the Working Group, Post
Office have only declined to mediate 2 cases
Q. Why are POL ignoring Second Sight’s advice if they are independent and
are recommending mediation?
e Post Office is not ignoring Second Sight’s advice — on the contrary it takes all
information into account when deciding whether to mediate
e However, Post Office cannot be expected necessarily to agree with Second
Sight’s recommendation
e If Second Sight’s recommendation alone was the determinant factor in
whether the case was recommended for mediation then that decision would
be made without the benefit of the views of the Working Group
e This is why recommending cases as suitable for mediation is one of its role
as jointly designed by JFSA, POL and Second Sight
Q. How much has Post Office invested in this?
¢ Post Office has provided the secretariat support for the Scheme, established
a team of some 20 people specifically to investigate complaints to the
Scheme.
e It has investigated over 130 complaints, producing over 2,000 pages of
investigation reports and reviewed over 3,000 pieces of information
Q. Given POL has invested so much, why is POL not going the final mile to
mediation?
e Mediation is a voluntary and consensual process, designed to get agreement
through compromise
e But there must be something to suggest that responsibility for what went
wrong is really in doubt, and that resolution is a realistic outcome — mediation
may not be able to deliver what an Applicant wants.
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. James Arbuthnot admits that some Subpostmasters might be trying it on -
have there been any cases where the working group / JFSA/ SS agree?
Again, Post Office is unable to provide any detail relating to specific cases in
order to protect Applicants’ privacy
Members will understand that, perhaps particularly in cases where there may
be suggestions of this nature, subpostmasters are unlikely to want this
information disclosed
Q. Post Office has taken six months to investigate some cases, SS have only
taken 2-3 months?
Each case is being considered individually, no two cases are the same, and it
is important that each case is rigorously investigated
Some of the cases are complex and some date back many years, involving
exhaustive searches of Post Office records
Post Office investigations are obviously therefore the longest part of the
process for many cases
Post Office prepares a case report and provides this, together with the all
material retrieved and appropriately ordered, to Second Sight for their
analysis
Some investigation reports run to over 30 pages and 80 pieces of
information/evidence
A much shorter period is required for this because it does not involve
searches and retrieval
Q. Why is the scheme taking so long to complete?
In circumstances where the integrity of the system which millions of people up
and down the country rely on every day is being questioned, that requires an
appropriate response
It is imperative therefore that all investigations are thorough and complete
Each case is investigated afresh and on its own merits
This takes time
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
James Arbuthnot “asks” of POL (in his letter to Paula Vennells)
Q. Will the delay in investigating the scheme mean that Post Office can rely on
the statute of limitations so that applicants cannot bring action against them?
e The progress of the Scheme does not affect any Subpostmaster’s legal
rights.
e If a Subpostmaster is facing a limitation deadline, there is nothing stopping
them from starting Court proceedings against Post Office if they believe their
case has merit.
Q. Will Post Office agree to waive the time bar to statute of limitations in this
matter?
e I absolutely cannot commit POL to anything such as this — this is for Post
Office to decide.
e However, the Limitation Act protects defendants against very old claims that
may not be able to be properly investigated.
e Like everyone else, Post Office has the right not to be sued after a limitation
period has expired.
e However, Post Office has paid for Subpostmasters in the Scheme to receive
support from professional advisors who can help with any limitation issues
and they are encouraged to contact Post Office if a case is facing a limitation
deadline.
e In any event, there has never been anything stopping a Subpostmaster from
bringing Court proceedings against Post Office before a limitation deadline
passes.
Q. Will Post Office agree to not destroy data ?
e Of course Post Office will not destroy available information related to their
investigations
e The Scheme anticipated that some cases would be old and information may
not be available.
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. Why is Post Office being so secretive?
e Itis not being secretive, it is being responsible.
e The cases involve sensitive and personal information and that cannot be
discussed or made public
e Post Office must respect Subpostmasters' privacy
¢ This is what the Chair has said in his letter to me
e This is why details of the Scheme are confidential
e However, that confidentiality is balanced by the fact that that Scheme was
designed to be overseen by an independent Working Group chaired by Sir
Anthony Hooper
e The Scheme documentation makes it clear to applicants that they and Post
Office must endeavour to keep details of their case confidential and that all
matters discussed in the actual mediation will be strictly confidential
e The confidentiality of mediation is common to all mediations, not just cases
mediated as part of this Scheme
e The Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR) is providing the
mediation for the Scheme
e The arrangements are in line with CEDR's own Code of Conduct and the
European Code of Conduct for Mediators which the Civil Mediation Council
requires all UK providers to observe in order to maintain accreditation
Q. James Arbuthnot refers to “the response of 22 September 2014” in his letter
to Paula— which refers to contracts and other issues being outside the scope
of the Scheme — Why are contracts outside the scope of the scheme?
« The document to which he refers is, as I understand it, Post office’s response
to the confidential report prepared by Second Sight for the purpose of
mediation.
e Ihave not seen that report nor the Post Office's response. They were
confidential documents prepared for mediation.
e However, the Scheme was about Horizon and associated issues and
attempts to extend the scope of the Scheme are unhelpful and will not assist
with the speedy conclusion which so many want
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Treatment of Subpostmasters
Q. Did Post Office pressure people in to pleading guilty to lesser offences?
e Before Post Office brings a prosecution, they will apply the Code for Crown
Prosecutors which means that it will consider the evidence and decide
whether there is a realistic prospect of conviction.
e If there is no realistic prospect of conviction then there will be no prosecution.
e If the evidence shows that there is realistic prospect of conviction, Post Office
will then consider whether it is in the public interest to prosecute.
e It is only where there is both realistic prospect of conviction and it is in public
interest to prosecute that the PO will bring a prosecution.
¢ Once a decision has been made to prosecute, the PO has a duty to disclose
evidence against the suspect.
e Any decision made by the defendant to plead guilty would have been made
after he/she has had the opportunity to take legal advice and consider the
evidence against him/her.
Q. Subpostmasters’ contracts are 100 pages long — what else do/did Post
Office do to ensure Subpostmasters understand their responsibilities?
e The vast majority of the contract deals with everyday matters such as holiday
leave and sickness pay.
e The key issue in the context of the Scheme is the subpostmaster's
responsibility for the safekeeping of the public money held in their branch.
This duty is explained to subpostmasters in their contract and during their
training, and is consistent with obligations under the general law.
Q. What has Post office done to settle out of the scheme?
e Details of any settlements are confidential between Post Office and the
subpostmasters involved and so I do not have details of this
e The Chair's letter to me says 14 cases have been resolved prior to mediation
Q. Why has POL suspended access to the Horizon mediation schemes data
room?
e Scheme data can only be used for the purposes of the Scheme in order to
protect the privacy of the Subpostmasters involved
e JFSA suggested in a press release that it had left the Scheme and so JFSA's
access was temporarily suspended whilst that matter was clarified
e JFSA later confirmed that they are still supporting the Scheme and therefore
their access has been re-instated.
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Q. What are the arrangements for ex subpostmasters who did not hear about
the scheme but want their case investigated?
e The Scheme is closed to new Applicants but a subpostmaster can raise any
concerns direct with Post Office at any time.
UKGI00002764
UKGI00002764
Other — possible point to fire back at James Arbuthnot
Q. James Arbuthnot quotes the January minutes of the working group. Should
he have had access to these?
e I'm disappointed that someone has leaked these to the Rt Hon Member for
NE Hampshire as I think this may cause concern to some Subpostmasters
who don't want this type of publicity of their sensitive cases and just want an
opportunity to have their case investigated privately.
e The chair has provided me with such limited information as he is prepared to
disclose and we should all respect his position as the independent Chair