UKGI00014031 - Letter from Norman Lamb MP to Alok Sharma MP re: Michael Wilson and problems with the Post Office computer system.

Evidence on official site

UKGI00014031

UKGI00014031
Norman Lamb MP.
Alok Sharma MP Our ref: 287169
House of Commons Your refJH3482
London
SW1A OAA
March 2012

Thank you for your letter of 8 March enclosing correspondence from your
i i ilson of :
_}, about the Horizon computer system used by
ie post office network.

I should however first explain that issues relating to the integrity of the Horizon
system and decisions and actions taken in the context of their contractual
relationships with subpostmasters are operational matters and are therefore
the responsibility of the management of Post Office Ltd (POL). The
Government, as shareholder, does not a play role in these issues.

Mr Wilson sets out his concerns that the financial discrepancies identified at
his brother’s post office were attributable to problems with the POL’s Horizon
computer system. I am aware that legal action is in progress against POL on
behalf of a number of former subpostmasters who are members of an
organisation called Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance.

POL is defending the legal action against it and is fully confident that the
Horizon system used in all branches enables subpostmasters to account
accurately for the transactions they undertake in their branches. The system
has been operating for over 10 years. Over that time, some twenty thousand
subpostmasters have performed many millions of successful weekly and
monthly reconciliations between the cash they have in the office and the
transactions they have handled. The Horizon system has been rigorously
tested both in daily use and in external scrutiny and accreditation. The
National Federation of Subpostmasters, which represents subpostmasters
UKGI00014031

UKGI00014031

across the country, has also expressed its full confidence in the accuracy and
robustness of the system.

In the small fraction of cases where the subpostmaster has not been able to
reconcile their cash and transactions, there are tried and tested systems of
checking, auditing and following up to establish what has happened. These
checks resolve virtually all discrepancies satisfactorily, identifying them as the
small day to day mistakes and human errors which are typical in any banking
or retail environment.

In the extremely small number of cases where missing sums cannot be
accounted for and the amounts are significant, POL makes further
investigations as to the cause. Large amounts of public money are entrusted
to post offices and it is vital that all of it is fully accounted for. If significant
money is missing as a result lack of sufficient competence by the
subpostmaster or their staff, or, in very rare cases, as a result of dishonesty,
POL may feel it necessary to terminate the subpostmaster’s contract in line
with its contractual provisions and to take legal action.

It would not be appropriate for me to comment further as it would appear from

Mr Wilson’s email of 7 February 2011 that his brother is a party to the legal
action currently before the Courts.

NORMAN LAMB MP