Forum Topic

Yes, Steven, I think we are in basic agreement. It's not just Vennells who needs to be held to account: many have remarked across various social media that its interesting that Adam Crozier who left the Royal Mail to go to ITV didn't get a mention in the drama - isn't he now Chairman at BT? Also, Ed Davey and other ministers overseeing the PO have been involved along the way. The actions of many PO and Fujitsu staff, as well as lawyers and some judges seem suspect in my view as well.I agree that in the scheme of things the CBE isn't the most important aspect although perhaps it was seen as a blatant symbol of a reward for failure by many and she was in the hotspot as PO CEO. As an atheist I believe that she, as an ordained Christian, should set an example so has done the right thing in handing her CBE back. It would somehow seem hypocritical for her not to do that, but that's just a personal opinion. (I'm actually fed up with people of all religions saying how people should behave, creating a mess of the world and interfering with others' lives - I suppose I need to be slightly careful as veganism is a also protected belief - but not a religion!)However, as Jane has pointed out Vennells and others often seem to implicate the scandal on the poorly constructed and faulty Horizon system. One could argue that ought to have been just a commercial issue between the customer, The Post Office, and the supplier, Fujitsu; after all IT system faiures or problems aren't uncommon - I've been involved in attempts to prevent or rescue some myself! The problem here wasn't technical, it was plain dishonesty in failing to be open about the issues, shift blame and a lack of strong leadership and good management to address the problems swiftly and effectively. Let's hope the enquiry and the Met investigation highlight the real culprits and they are sanctioned appropriately.

Michael Ixer ● 532d

Public outrage over the dreadful treatment of the postmasters is more than understandable.I do not agree with trial by media but am really delighted that ITV has broadcast Mr Bates vs the Post Office.  This is when the matter took momentum because before, Post Office executives, our elected politicians were not "paying attention" to the plight.  As for the online petition (there are two by the way - the second one I learnt about in the rolling BBC news at 9:42am today.  There is a photograph of the back of a man with a T-shirt on saying:  change.org/postofficetrial), it is one of the few means we have to express condemnation quickly and efficiently.It is election year and many will be very keen to appear to be acting on the online petition, to be supporting the request of this petition but above all, all politicians will want to appear to be on the side of justice.....Paula Vennells was named as she was CEO when this whole issue was taking place.  As the saying goes, "the buck stops with the head banana".  Many more should be made to attend and/or stand trial.  We do not have all the relevant background to pass judgement, but we are all suitably intelligent to react angrily at this horrific situation.  While all responsible should be brought to trial, the government must ensure that all those postmasters whose life has been made a misery are not only exhonerated but also compensated.  Pity some of them have died in the meantime.But talking about Paula Vennells, the righteous ex-vicar, it beggars belief that she seems to be so callous at the moment.

Ivonne Holliday ● 533d

Steven, I'm not sure how long you've been following this but I think describing this as "incompetence" is being generous. Some involved were obviously ignorant of the complexity of IT systems and others may have been dis- or mis-informed by those reporting to them; one has to question whether they were fit to hold those positions. However, I believe it was David Davis (someone I would disagree on other topics!) who has pointed out that PO employees at one time told the victims that (1) they were the only individual affected and (2) only they had access to change the data in their accounts. The first is obviously untrue given the numbers prosecuted and I believe it is now on record that Fujitsu employees had access to the database to correct data errors (or attempt to!) so it appears that was also untrue. (Data fixes would not be unusual where systems corrupt data but one would expect a full audit trail of change requests, authorisation and sign off on completion.) I don't know what statements were made under oath as I wasn't in court but the Met police are looking at whether perjury, perversion of the course of justice and/or fraud was committed by those in the PO and Fujitsu involved in this. I hope it isn't some poor programmer pressurised by their management to make a statement in court who is hung out to dry; poor culture starts at the top of organisations so the leaders need to be held to account. In my mind this goes far beyond "incompetence"; I've seen posts on LinkedIn from industry leaders that are concerned it's taken a TV drama to get politicians and lawyers to take action. 

Michael Ixer ● 533d