WITNO06370100
WITN06370100
Witness Name: Tony Kearns
Statement No.: WITN0637_01
Exhibits: WITN0637_01/1 to WITN0637_01/5
Dated: 12.10.2022
POST OFFICE HORIZON IT INQUIRY
FIRST WITNESS STATEMENT OF TONY KEARNS
BACKGROUND
I, MR ANTHONY KEARNS, will say as follows:
4. My name is Anthony Kearns, between late 1997 and early 2002 I was employed
by the Communication Workers Union as an Assistant Secretary. This was a
national role responsible for leading on negotiations over terms and conditions
and associated matters with a number of employers. With regards to this inquiry
one of those employers was Post Office Counters Limited (POCL). It is now
well over 20 years since I undertook the role set out above and as such I will
answer the questions raised as best as I can from memory.
2. I have read document POL00028522 [WITN0637_01/1, POL00028522]. This
document contains a written submission made by both the Communication
Workers Union (CWU) and the Communication Managers Association (CMA).
The document was compiled by the Research Dept at CWU Headquarters and
sets out the position of the CWU (agreed, to the best of my knowledge with the
Page 1 of 8
WITNO06370100
WITN06370100
CMA) with regard to the understanding we had at the time of the reasons for
the (then) delay to the Horizon Project and our understanding of why that was.
In response to the specific question “Please set out the background to my
involvement in the Horizon Project” I was not involved in either the concept,
design or inter party negotiations (Government. ICL. Benefits Agency. POCL)
of the Horizon system. We, CWU, accepted the announcement in May 1999 by
the new DTI Minister to be directly involved in the project. Up to that point we
had no direct involvement in this project as far as I can remember. In that regard
we played no part in the technical design of this system.
PROCUREMENT
3. As far as I can recall I believe CWU had no position in relation to the
procurement of the Horizon system. From memory I believe this was a decision
made either by POCL or Govt or both.
4. As far I can recall I believe firmly that the CWU had no involvement in the
procurement of the Horizon system.
DEVELOPMENT AND DELAY
I have read and considered documents CWU00000089 and CWU00000090
[WITN0637_01/2, CWU00000089] [WITN0637_01/3, CWU00000090).
5. With regards the question “what (if any) involvement did the CWU have in the
development of the Horizon IT system” the answer is, none.
6. The CWU's understanding of the reasons for the delay are set out in the
CWU/CMA Submission to the Trade and Industry Select Committee on Post
Page 2 of 8
WITNO06370100
WITN06370100
Office Counters Automation and are contained on pages 015 and 016 of the
document POL00028522 [WITN0637_01/1, POL00028522].
7. As best as I can recall Post Office Counters Limited would write to the CWU
updating us on the development of the system e.g. document CWU00000089
[WITN0637_01/2, CWU00000089].
8. As set out in POL00028522 our first direct involvement would be with the
Working Group set up by the new Minister for the DTI (May1999). Outside of
and prior to this the CWU would have been in contact with POCL through our
normal industrial relations interface, again as set out in POLO0028522
[WITN0637_01/1, POLO0028522).
HORIZON WORKING GROUP
9. I would attend meetings of the Horizon Project Working Group alongside the
then General Secretary, Derek Hodgson to both a) listen to and understand
what the intentions of Govt and POCL were with regard to the future of the Post
Office Network and the Horizon Project b) to determine what (if any)
implications this would have on CWU members c) raise any points relevant to
the same.
10.From memory my understanding of the purpose of the Horizon Working Group
was to ensure that the automation project begun under the previous Govt was
implemented and to understand how the migration to automation would occur
and to understand how the proposed changes by the Benefits Agency to the
methods of paying pensions, child benefit etc. would be impacted by this
change. This was a part of the discussion around the purpose of the working
Page 3 of 8
WITNO06370100
WITN06370100
group to enable POCL to continue to provide the contracted Govt services and
to contribute to the long term sustainability of the Post Office network.
41.From memory I do not recall that the Horizon Working group was tasked with
examining nor reporting on the technical issues (faults) with the development
of the system and as such I cannot recall if any specific questions on this issue
were raised.
12. Apart from a reference in document NFSP00000471 page 14 to the Post Office
giving assurances to the NFSP that any systems faults would be cured I do not
recall what either POCL or ICL did in this regard [WITN0637_01/4,
NFSP00000471].
13.As I stated above the CWU were not involved in the technical design of this
system and its deployment would have been deemed as fit for purpose by
POCL.
14.1 cannot recall such questions were raised by me or the CWU as we were not
asked to agree the technical specifications of the system.
45. I cannot recall any issues with regard to this matter.
16.From memory I understand that there was a commercial contract between
POCL and ICL that dealt with these matters but we (CWU) were not a party to
that agreement nor as to how POCL and ICL resolved any issues they may
have arisen.
47. From memory and as can be seen by various minutes from the Horizon Working
group the Govt was certainly keen for the Horizon project to be rolled out as
quickly as possible as it believed it to be key to the provision, via automation of
anumber of Govt services. To what extent the Govt may have brought pressure
on those concerned (POCL and ICL) to roll out the project I do not know.
Page 4 of 8
WITNO06370100
WITN06370100
PERFORMANCE AND INNOVATION UNIT
18.1 would have had no direct involvement with the Performance and Innovation
Unit. I would have assisted in compiling the submission “CWU/CMA
Submission to The Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit on the
Future of the Post Office Network” contained within document CWU00000087
[WITN0637_01/5, CWU00000087].
49.From memory, my understanding of what the purpose of the Performance and
Innovation Unit was, in broad terms, was to ensure that Post Office Counter
services could be provided throughout the whole of the UK, to ensure Govt
services were provided effectively and efficiently through this network and to
look at developing new objectives for the network including expanding on the
(then) existing work carried out i.e. to expand the range of services on offer.
20.No, I do not recall any discussion with the Performance and Innovation Unit on
technical issues with Horizon other than those set out in the submission
contained in CWU00000087 page 4 “Background — Delays to the Horizon
Project [WITN0637_01/5, CWU00000087].
GENERAL
21.The CWU were never asked by POCL to agree or sign off that the system they
were introducing was “fit for purpose”. Their approach, from memory, was that
they had worked with partners (ICL Pathway) and that as far as they were
concerned the technology they intended to roll out would work. I recall, in a
general sense, issues being raised by the NFSP about issues during the initial
trial, we would have sought assurances that any issues would have been
Page 5 of 8
WITNO06370100
WITN06370100
resolved prior to roll out but POCL, as far as I can remember treated this as an
issue between themselves and the developer. We were not asked to approve
the system. Our role at that point was to ensure that our members would have
the appropriate/relevant training on the new (Horizon) system. We would
negotiate around the ergonomics i.e. how it would physically fit on a Post Office
counter, how this would impact upon our members, what would that transition
arrangements be regarding moving between the old (manual) systems and the
new (electronic) system.
22.We weren't involved with “the technical issues relating to Horizon” as per my
statement in answer to question 21 this was not a matter that POCL sought to
negotiate with us. They along with Government had determined that the work
undertaken by staff would be modernised (automated) by this new technology
and that between them and their partners they had developed a technology that
worked. We would have informed our members of this message, because that
was our role and we would have informed them of what the arrangements would
be in relation to the points set out in 21 above. I am not able to be specific on
this as this was over 20 plus years ago, save to say that this was how we carried
out our role in a general sense, that is we would engage with the employer
(POCL) and inform our members via various methods as to the outcome of
those negotiations, consultations or discussions. In this matter the technical
aspects of the Horizon Project were not open to negotiation with us. Without
wishing to sound repetitive we had no role in the technical development of the
system.
23.Again, we were not asked to play a part in the acceptance of the system, that
was an issue for POCL to sign off with the developer. I generally recall being
Page 6 of 8
WITNO06370100
WITN06370100
appraised of delays to the system, although I believe this is well known. As I
recall we would ask why this was and ask what was being done, would be
informed/reassured that such matters would be dealt with and resolved before
roll out. Again, we were never asked to agree that system i.e. it’s technical
aspects would work.
24.1 cannot recall any other matters that I can comment upon that would assist the
Chair.
I believe the content of this statement to be true.
Signed: I G RO
Dated: 12.10.2022
Page 7 of 8
WITN06370100
WITN06370100
Index to First Witness Statement of Tony Kearns
INo. Exhibit number [Document (Control URN
[Description Number
4 TNO637_01/1 Email from KathrynIPOL-0025004 + IPOL00028522
[Hollingsworth to
[Martin Walsh,
David Simpson
land Keith Hardie reI
IDTI Select
Committee Hearing
lon Horizon -
reports and written
submissions
2 ITN0637_01/2 Circular: CWU 1S00007763 ICWU00000089
Circular 153/97
(PE) re:Horizon
3 ITNO637_01/3 Circular: CWU 1S00007764 ICWU00000090
Circular 322/98
(PE) 'B' re:Horizon
Programme: Post
Office Counters Ltd}
4 ITNO637_01/4 Report of meeting VISO0008929 INFSP00000471
lof the NEC held on
21, 22 and 23 June}
1999
5 ITN0637_01/5 Circular: CWU 1S00007761 ICWU00000087
Circular on Horizon
Project: Post Office
Network (17/2000
(PE) 'A’)
Page 8 of 8