Having been involved with many IT systems and roll outs, my experience is that bugs and errors are a normal part of system management. I have, however never been in position of not having access to support which was accountable to users to sort out reported transaction errors or erroneous reporting. My guess is that Horizon was poorly designed but probably no worse than scores of business critical systems currently being operated throughout the UK. This is why Fujitsu have tried to present the system as "robust" in the face of evidence of bugs and errors known to Fujitsu and the Post Office.
In the Inquiry Fujitsu tries to show it was a "normal" system - beset with the bugs and errors reported by users any IT system would experience.
In my view the crucial failure and criminal negligence, was less in the system integrity of a poorly designed system, rather the lack of transparency and control of the users to manage the impact of bugs and errors to resolve the resulting problem of non-balancing accounts. Users were oblivious to how their data was being altered and impacted by manual intervention of Fujitsu behind the scenes to get round the effect of bugs. In some IT environments, manual intervention may be the only way to correct an anomaly in advance of a software fix, so what Fujitsu were doing was not extraordinary, except it should only have happened transparently with the full knowledge and agreement of the user and implemented only after re-testing.
Sub-postmasters had no access to any data to prove their innocence in the face of an inept and corrupt investigation and prosecuting process - a perfect recipe for disaster.
I suspect Fujitsu will show they delivered a system that the Post Office accepted and were operating exactly as the Post Office contract required. The Post Office didn't have a clue of the impact on sub-postmasters of what they had delegated and must take the main blame and face the consequences.
While I accept your opening premise is true, I think you might be letting Fujitsu off the hook a bit here. Now my view is largely based on a dramatisation of the facts. Nevertheless, even a dramatisation will not depict scenes which cast aspersions on a major player in a controversial scandal in a negative light, especially a global corp. unless those scenes are substantively true. And Fujitsu are staying very quiet, no lawsuits being hurled at ITV. So, we must assume it’s true that Fujitsu set up that team we saw being visited by the postmasters’ union rep. It was routinely going into postmaster accounts and changing stuff without them knowing. Do you think it ok that nobody senior in Fujitsu questioned the ethics of that? They were operating that team on behalf of the PO and for substantial fees. In my view they need to be held to account, and I notice that some heavy -hitting journos, such as Emily Maitlis are starting to ask questions.
I don’t think we’ve yet heard an explanation for that though have we?
I had assumed they were changing things in an attempt to fix errors/issues not to deliberately create problems for the postmasters ie unintended consequences due I assume to a deeply flawed system.
We need to learn who did what and why. I assume the inquiry will expose that at some point.
While of course your concluding sentence is obviously correct I do not think an “explanation” is needed to conclude that going into the system to change figures without PMs being made aware was wholly unacceptable. Of course one can see why they didnt make them aware. The PMs are independent self-employed people, and the PO and Fujitsu would have been worried that some would have spoken publicly about the obvious flaws in the system, with consequential serious reputational damage to both the PO and Fujitsu. In addition - and someone correct me if I misunderstood the the dramatisation on this point - the helpline was staffed by Fujitsu. The helpline that told all those poor PMs that they were “the only one”. Which as Alan Bates said, was a flat out lie, and absolutely central to the miscarriage of justice.
As you say, we shall see what the inquiry finds, but I would be amazed if the inquiry shows that the facts contradict my current understanding re Fujitsu’s central role in the grotesque treatment of these innocent people.
Well of course the apparent lies about it not being widespread cannot be acceptable.
I tend to assume for now however that (at least initially) the suggested corrections being made were done with good intentions.
Books have to balance so my guess is they maybe thought they identified scenarios that created the ‘wrong’ figures and manually corrected. But likely it was a fudge / did not work as was more complex and they dug a hole they couldn’t get out of. It was maybe something that then got out of hand when/if postmasters also made their own correcting figures out of sheer frustration. Maybe. I don’t know.
My point is I would think that at the start the interventions were being done with the expectation it was the right thing to do but snowballed out of control and not telling users / staff only made it worse.
Honesty is the best policy springs to mind as to how they should have managed it.
Whatever the intent, these alterations were being made anonymously to a live system for which the end user was contractually liable. If the changes were identifiable as having been made by someone other than the user we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Having been involved with many IT systems and roll outs, my experience is that bugs and errors are a normal part of system management. I have, however never been in position of not having access to support which was accountable to users to sort out reported transaction errors or erroneous reporting. My guess is that Horizon was poorly designed but probably no worse than scores of business critical systems currently being operated throughout the UK. This is why Fujitsu have tried to present the system as "robust" in the face of evidence of bugs and errors known to Fujitsu and the Post Office.
In the Inquiry Fujitsu tries to show it was a "normal" system - beset with the bugs and errors reported by users any IT system would experience.
In my view the crucial failure and criminal negligence, was less in the system integrity of a poorly designed system, rather the lack of transparency and control of the users to manage the impact of bugs and errors to resolve the resulting problem of non-balancing accounts. Users were oblivious to how their data was being altered and impacted by manual intervention of Fujitsu behind the scenes to get round the effect of bugs. In some IT environments, manual intervention may be the only way to correct an anomaly in advance of a software fix, so what Fujitsu were doing was not extraordinary, except it should only have happened transparently with the full knowledge and agreement of the user and implemented only after re-testing.
Sub-postmasters had no access to any data to prove their innocence in the face of an inept and corrupt investigation and prosecuting process - a perfect recipe for disaster.
I suspect Fujitsu will show they delivered a system that the Post Office accepted and were operating exactly as the Post Office contract required. The Post Office didn't have a clue of the impact on sub-postmasters of what they had delegated and must take the main blame and face the consequences.
While I accept your opening premise is true, I think you might be letting Fujitsu off the hook a bit here. Now my view is largely based on a dramatisation of the facts. Nevertheless, even a dramatisation will not depict scenes which cast aspersions on a major player in a controversial scandal in a negative light, especially a global corp. unless those scenes are substantively true. And Fujitsu are staying very quiet, no lawsuits being hurled at ITV. So, we must assume it’s true that Fujitsu set up that team we saw being visited by the postmasters’ union rep. It was routinely going into postmaster accounts and changing stuff without them knowing. Do you think it ok that nobody senior in Fujitsu questioned the ethics of that? They were operating that team on behalf of the PO and for substantial fees. In my view they need to be held to account, and I notice that some heavy -hitting journos, such as Emily Maitlis are starting to ask questions.
I don’t think we’ve yet heard an explanation for that though have we?
I had assumed they were changing things in an attempt to fix errors/issues not to deliberately create problems for the postmasters ie unintended consequences due I assume to a deeply flawed system.
We need to learn who did what and why. I assume the inquiry will expose that at some point.
While of course your concluding sentence is obviously correct I do not think an “explanation” is needed to conclude that going into the system to change figures without PMs being made aware was wholly unacceptable. Of course one can see why they didnt make them aware. The PMs are independent self-employed people, and the PO and Fujitsu would have been worried that some would have spoken publicly about the obvious flaws in the system, with consequential serious reputational damage to both the PO and Fujitsu. In addition - and someone correct me if I misunderstood the the dramatisation on this point - the helpline was staffed by Fujitsu. The helpline that told all those poor PMs that they were “the only one”. Which as Alan Bates said, was a flat out lie, and absolutely central to the miscarriage of justice.
As you say, we shall see what the inquiry finds, but I would be amazed if the inquiry shows that the facts contradict my current understanding re Fujitsu’s central role in the grotesque treatment of these innocent people.
Well of course the apparent lies about it not being widespread cannot be acceptable.
I tend to assume for now however that (at least initially) the suggested corrections being made were done with good intentions.
Books have to balance so my guess is they maybe thought they identified scenarios that created the ‘wrong’ figures and manually corrected. But likely it was a fudge / did not work as was more complex and they dug a hole they couldn’t get out of. It was maybe something that then got out of hand when/if postmasters also made their own correcting figures out of sheer frustration. Maybe. I don’t know.
My point is I would think that at the start the interventions were being done with the expectation it was the right thing to do but snowballed out of control and not telling users / staff only made it worse.
Honesty is the best policy springs to mind as to how they should have managed it.
Whatever the intent, these alterations were being made anonymously to a live system for which the end user was contractually liable. If the changes were identifiable as having been made by someone other than the user we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Agreed hence why I said honesty is the best policy.
I expect the papers will find a way to blame Davey or Starmer though tbf.
Yes, we must only blame people linked to the Conservative Party. Criticism of anyone else is a right wing conspiracy theory.
Well, that wasn't what I said.
Regardless, do you think the press pointing fingers at Davey, trying to pin it on him, or indulging in whataboutery over the handful of CPS cases taken on Starmer's watch has been equitable to any criticism of the party that's actually been in a position to do something about it for a decade or more?
Look at the Times piece above for example. Blair gets warned there may be issues with the system, Blair asks for further enquiries to be made, the system gets independently assessed, Blair gets reassured there's not a problem but there might be some political/economic fallout if the plug gets pulled, so it goes ahead. What exactly has Blair done wrong or differently to any other PM to generate the tone of the Times piece?
There are a lot of people responsible for this appalling situation. However it seems to me the red flags for the authorities should’ve been when more than one issue emerged at different ends of the country. The powers at the Post Office refused to accept they might have a problem that might warrant investigation, and decided ‘these corner shop scum, they’re all at it’. So they went into attack mode and ruined lives up and down the land. Because there are a lot of forces involved everybody can blame everybody else.
Everyone involved in the scandal and cover-up should have the spotlight put on them, but as @Bournemouth Addick says we have had one party in power, in one form or another for the last 13 years. Paula Vennells should never have been given a CBE for 'Services to the Post Office and charity' by the party in charge at that time. The scandal had come to light by then and serious questions should have been asked about her role in the cover-up, instead she was rewarded.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
Everyone involved in the scandal and cover-up should have the spotlight put on them, but as @Bournemouth Addick says we have had one party in power, in one form or another for the last 13 years. Paula Vennells should never have been given a CBE for 'Services to the Post Office and charity' by the party in charge at that time. The scandal had come to light by then and serious questions should have been asked about her role in the cover-up, instead she was rewarded.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
Have you not played a part in bringing politics into the thread ?
Everyone involved in the scandal and cover-up should have the spotlight put on them, but as @Bournemouth Addick says we have had one party in power, in one form or another for the last 13 years. Paula Vennells should never have been given a CBE for 'Services to the Post Office and charity' by the party in charge at that time. The scandal had come to light by then and serious questions should have been asked about her role in the cover-up, instead she was rewarded.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
Have you not played a part in bringing politics into the thread ?
I've mentioned it in connection with the scandal, I have not purely made a post criticising someone for making a political point. This thread cannot be divorced from politics, it runs through the heart of it.
Everyone involved in the scandal and cover-up should have the spotlight put on them, but as @Bournemouth Addick says we have had one party in power, in one form or another for the last 13 years. Paula Vennells should never have been given a CBE for 'Services to the Post Office and charity' by the party in charge at that time. The scandal had come to light by then and serious questions should have been asked about her role in the cover-up, instead she was rewarded.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
Have you not played a part in bringing politics into the thread ?
I've mentioned it in connection with the scandal, I have not purely made a post criticising someone for making a political point. This thread cannot be divorced from politics, it runs through the heart of it.
But sadly you just want to point the finger of blame at the Conservative party .
Whereas more reasoned voices have explained to you, the fault lies across the the whole political spectrum.
The Times yesterday carried a long and very informative piece about the role of Fujitsu in all this. The article pointed out it was as long ago as 1998 the government was told there was a serious risk Horizon would fail to deliver on its objectives and would in the long run prove unsatisfactory, leaving the Post Office and government dependent on a hugely expensive, inflexible, inappropriate and possibly unreliable system.
It went on to say Blair was given the option to renegotiate or cancel the Horizon contract but in May 1999 he gave the order to proceed
As I said before, some people just can't help themselves.
My point proved.
Yes, proved by yourself.
You make some very valid points, but then you just have to start getting overly political with your choice of language and as we've seen countless times before that only leads in one direction.
You say it's a shame the House of Commoners section was closed. It is. But there's a reason it got closed.
This thread should not be used as a substitute. It really is too wide and serious an issue to be used for political point scoring.
The reason the HoC got closed is because people avoided the issues, and personalised stuff to specific individuals who posted instead. I don’t know why especially, but I suspect a lot of people are unable to make their case and sustain that case when either an alternative was posted or their case was challenged for what it contained.
One significant element in all this was the power of Drama, the power to change the narrative, to challenge and to touch places systems can’t touch, and to interact with people viscerally. The power of a creative art. The concinnity of all the creative arts in the UK earns more money for this country than manufacturing, and just a shade less than the financial industries. But creative arts can challenge the status quo, can unsettle. The government wish to diminish creative education in schools, and oblige everybody to learn mathematics, I wonder why. And yes, this post is a political one.
Threads were closed because people felt the need to involve the mods in their petty spats with other posters. It was pathetic school kid stuff from people old enough to know better.
Everyone involved in the scandal and cover-up should have the spotlight put on them, but as @Bournemouth Addick says we have had one party in power, in one form or another for the last 13 years. Paula Vennells should never have been given a CBE for 'Services to the Post Office and charity' by the party in charge at that time. The scandal had come to light by then and serious questions should have been asked about her role in the cover-up, instead she was rewarded.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
Have you not played a part in bringing politics into the thread ?
I've mentioned it in connection with the scandal, I have not purely made a post criticising someone for making a political point. This thread cannot be divorced from politics, it runs through the heart of it.
But sadly you just want to point the finger of blame at the Conservative party .
Whereas more reasoned voices have explained to you, the fault lies across the the whole political spectrum.
The Times yesterday carried a long and very informative piece about the role of Fujitsu in all this. The article pointed out it was as long ago as 1998 the government was told there was a serious risk Horizon would fail to deliver on its objectives and would in the long run prove unsatisfactory, leaving the Post Office and government dependent on a hugely expensive, inflexible, inappropriate and possibly unreliable system.
It went on to say Blair was given the option to renegotiate or cancel the Horizon contract but in May 1999 he gave the order to proceed
Wasn't a great decision, was it?
I have started to read Nick Wallis' excellent book, The Great Post Office Scandal' and he dealt with the early days and why it was necessary to computerise the Post Office.
It was set in motion in 1992 as the DHSS was concerned at the level of fraud, from people using paper methods to receive their pensions and benefits via the Post Office. The DHSS wanted to issue people with electronic swipe cards that would enable them to get cash from the Post Office and would be less liable to fraud.
Fujitsu/ICL won the contract in 1996.
May 1997 Labour came to power.
In November 1997 the scheduled trial failed and in April 1998 The Post Office assumed full line management of the Horizon project.
The DHSS issued Fujitsu a formal notice of breach of contract in May 1998, but Fujitsu refused to accept it.
The Government commissioned an independent review of the Horizon project in June 1998.
The Benefits Agency abandoned the Horizon Project in May1999.In October 1999 the Horizon roll out began.
In 2000 the prosecution of sub masters began.
2009 Computer weekly publishes an investigation into Horizon.
October 2009 James Arbuthnot (Conservative) first contacted by sub post master from his constituency.
May 2010 Coalition Government assumes power - Tories the major party, with Lib Dems junior partners.
The timeline from there on is too long to post here, but Conservative Government assumed full power in May 2016.
Yes, every political party involved but it has taken 15 years for any meaningful action be taken to put right the wrongs of the whole sorry saga.
I've had numerous occasions when I have had to challenge "you're the first to raise this" and "the computer isn't wrong". Both usually arise because such occurrences are not made widely known within the company in question and/or certainly not divulged to the public for fear of the commercial implications of doing so. Next time that happens I will simply offer "that's what the Post Office and Fujitsu said" and ask the company in question to categorically confirm that they have had no such similar incidents and that their computer system is totally infallible. I won't be holding my breath for that though!!!
As I said before, some people just can't help themselves.
My point proved.
Yes, proved by yourself.
You make some very valid points, but then you just have to start getting overly political with your choice of language and as we've seen countless times before that only leads in one direction.
You say it's a shame the House of Commoners section was closed. It is. But there's a reason it got closed.
This thread should not be used as a substitute. It really is too wide and serious an issue to be used for political point scoring.
Exactly, so why are some people being so touchy when politics is mentioned, I don't want to see this thread shut down but others clearly do.
Political decisions such as the awarding of a CBE to Paula Vennells cannot be justified.
Everyone involved in the scandal and cover-up should have the spotlight put on them, but as @Bournemouth Addick says we have had one party in power, in one form or another for the last 13 years. Paula Vennells should never have been given a CBE for 'Services to the Post Office and charity' by the party in charge at that time. The scandal had come to light by then and serious questions should have been asked about her role in the cover-up, instead she was rewarded.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
Have you not played a part in bringing politics into the thread ?
I've mentioned it in connection with the scandal, I have not purely made a post criticising someone for making a political point. This thread cannot be divorced from politics, it runs through the heart of it.
But sadly you just want to point the finger of blame at the Conservative party .
Whereas more reasoned voices have explained to you, the fault lies across the the whole political spectrum.
The Times yesterday carried a long and very informative piece about the role of Fujitsu in all this. The article pointed out it was as long ago as 1998 the government was told there was a serious risk Horizon would fail to deliver on its objectives and would in the long run prove unsatisfactory, leaving the Post Office and government dependent on a hugely expensive, inflexible, inappropriate and possibly unreliable system.
It went on to say Blair was given the option to renegotiate or cancel the Horizon contract but in May 1999 he gave the order to proceed
Wasn't a great decision, was it?
I have started to read Nick Wallis' excellent book, The Great Post Office Scandal' and he dealt with the early days and why it was necessary to computerise the Post Office.
It was set in motion in 1992 as the DHSS was concerned at the level of fraud, from people using paper methods to receive their pensions and benefits via the Post Office. The DHSS wanted to issue people with electronic swipe cards that would enable them to get cash from the Post Office and would be less liable to fraud.
Fujitsu/ICL won the contract in 1996.
May 1997 Labour came to power.
In November 1997 the scheduled trial failed and in April 1998 The Post Office assumed full line management of the Horizon project.
The DHSS issued Fujitsu a formal notice of breach of contract in May 1998, but Fujitsu refused to accept it.
The Government commissioned an independent review of the Horizon project in June 1998.
The Benefits Agency abandoned the Horizon Project in May1999.In October 1999 the Horizon roll out began.
In 2000 the prosecution of sub masters began.
2009 Computer weekly publishes an investigation into Horizon.
October 2009 James Arbuthnot (Conservative) first contacted by sub post master from his constituency.
May 2010 Coalition Government assumes power - Tories the major party, with Lib Dems junior partners.
The timeline from there on is too long to post here, but Conservative Government assumed full power in May 2016.
Yes, every political party involved but it has taken 15 years for any meaningful action be taken to put right the wrongs of the whole sorry saga.
Do you know, we are probably agreed on 95% of stuff.
It is scandalous the prosecution of sub postmasters ever happened; it is scandalous they have had to wait all this time for justice; it is scandalous it took a TV drama to spur the powers that be to take action to get this scandal properly sorted.
And yes, I want those who were responsible for these injustices - both individuals and companies - charged and brought before the courts.
And yes, the current government could - and should have - done more and much more quickly.
But the fault does not lie purely with the current government. It really doesn't.
I think the problem comes when most people are saying "no-one comes out of this well" whilst some are saying "it's all the Conservatives fault." It offers no balance, and is often the same 5-10 people on a zealous vendetta.
It's weird, predictable and ceaseless.
I'd bring back the HoC and ban certain people from the main forum!
Everyone involved in the scandal and cover-up should have the spotlight put on them, but as @Bournemouth Addick says we have had one party in power, in one form or another for the last 13 years. Paula Vennells should never have been given a CBE for 'Services to the Post Office and charity' by the party in charge at that time. The scandal had come to light by then and serious questions should have been asked about her role in the cover-up, instead she was rewarded.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
Have you not played a part in bringing politics into the thread ?
I've mentioned it in connection with the scandal, I have not purely made a post criticising someone for making a political point. This thread cannot be divorced from politics, it runs through the heart of it.
But sadly you just want to point the finger of blame at the Conservative party .
Whereas more reasoned voices have explained to you, the fault lies across the the whole political spectrum.
The Times yesterday carried a long and very informative piece about the role of Fujitsu in all this. The article pointed out it was as long ago as 1998 the government was told there was a serious risk Horizon would fail to deliver on its objectives and would in the long run prove unsatisfactory, leaving the Post Office and government dependent on a hugely expensive, inflexible, inappropriate and possibly unreliable system.
It went on to say Blair was given the option to renegotiate or cancel the Horizon contract but in May 1999 he gave the order to proceed
Wasn't a great decision, was it?
I have started to read Nick Wallis' excellent book, The Great Post Office Scandal' and he dealt with the early days and why it was necessary to computerise the Post Office.
It was set in motion in 1992 as the DHSS was concerned at the level of fraud, from people using paper methods to receive their pensions and benefits via the Post Office. The DHSS wanted to issue people with electronic swipe cards that would enable them to get cash from the Post Office and would be less liable to fraud.
Fujitsu/ICL won the contract in 1996.
May 1997 Labour came to power.
In November 1997 the scheduled trial failed and in April 1998 The Post Office assumed full line management of the Horizon project.
The DHSS issued Fujitsu a formal notice of breach of contract in May 1998, but Fujitsu refused to accept it.
The Government commissioned an independent review of the Horizon project in June 1998.
The Benefits Agency abandoned the Horizon Project in May1999.In October 1999 the Horizon roll out began.
In 2000 the prosecution of sub masters began.
2009 Computer weekly publishes an investigation into Horizon.
October 2009 James Arbuthnot (Conservative) first contacted by sub post master from his constituency.
May 2010 Coalition Government assumes power - Tories the major party, with Lib Dems junior partners.
The timeline from there on is too long to post here, but Conservative Government assumed full power in May 2016.
Yes, every political party involved but it has taken 15 years for any meaningful action be taken to put right the wrongs of the whole sorry saga.
Do you know, we are probably agreed on 95% of stuff.
It is scandalous the prosecution of sub postmasters ever happened; it is scandalous they have had to wait all this time for justice; it is scandalous it took a TV drama to spur the powers that be to take action to get this scandal properly sorted.
And yes, I want those who were responsible for these injustices - both individuals and companies - charged and brought before the courts.
And yes, the current government could - and should have - done more and much more quickly.
But the fault does not lie purely with the current government. It really doesn't.
And there I am going to let matters rest.
Everyone connected with the scandal should come under the spotlight, whomever they are.
What I find unforgivable is that Fujitsu are still being awarded contracts, often when there are markers that make others more suitable.
Fujitsu and Post Office executives who were in power at a time, when both were still denying that there was a problem, being moved into Government appointed roles is also wrong, people like Simon Blagdon and Michael Keegan.
7 prime ministers and 20 different postal ministers on the time line. They all have had a role to play and all have questions to answer whatever party they are in.
cover ups, arse covering, deception and telling lies, white and black, all of these are fairly commonplace I am certain in government departments, the NHS, quangos, the privatised utilities, banks, the BBC, ITV and anywhere else where a scandal, big or small will result in a drop in share price or profits, or embarrassment to public figures or useless managers and directors, will result from gross mismanagement or criminal behaviour if they became known .. I suppose the thing with this one is the sheer scale, nastiness and widespread vindictiveness involved. Prison sentences should be handed out to the perpetrators of the many miscarriages of justice, perjury and fraud carried out on behalf of the Post Office by some of its employees. As has been said on here many times and as I know from my own experience within govt/quango bureaucracies, all too often useless individuals who fail miserably in one area can move seamlessly to another plum often unrelated job as if nothing untoward had happened. For example Vennells moved from the P O to nice jobs in the Cabinet Office and then in the NHS, your life in her hands !! .. I have a couple of nice stories to tell about all this, but here and now is not the place to tell them
Can I just point out to a few people that @ME14addick started this thread. More importantly, if you have read all her posts you might want to ask yourself if you have immersed yourself in the story to the level of detail she clearly has done. I for one cannot claim that. Can you?
The issue about the thread is surely not "introducing politics" - you cannot avoid it if you wish to discuss current affairs or even the business of football with any level of perceptiveness - but the excessive tribalism that some people fall into. This is stoked up by certain newspapers which are being quoted here. People should not fall for it or fall into it.
I think the problem comes when most people are saying "no-one comes out of this well" whilst some are saying "it's all the Conservatives fault." It offers no balance, and is often the same 5-10 people on a zealous vendetta.
It's weird, predictable and ceaseless.
I'd bring back the HoC and ban certain people from the main forum!
I know you are aware of this, as we have exchanged messages in the past, I am probably well placed to give balance, having been a staunch Tory voter from when I first voted in the 70s until 2016. My views changed drastically in 2020.
It is sad that the outrage created by a tv drama, has been the catalyst to greater action against those who perpetrated the injustice and matters weren't dealt with much earlier.
Comments
Regardless, do you think the press pointing fingers at Davey, trying to pin it on him, or indulging in whataboutery over the handful of CPS cases taken on Starmer's watch has been equitable to any criticism of the party that's actually been in a position to do something about it for a decade or more?
Look at the Times piece above for example. Blair gets warned there may be issues with the system, Blair asks for further enquiries to be made, the system gets independently assessed, Blair gets reassured there's not a problem but there might be some political/economic fallout if the plug gets pulled, so it goes ahead. What exactly has Blair done wrong or differently to any other PM to generate the tone of the Times piece?
However it seems to me the red flags for the authorities should’ve been when more than one issue emerged at different ends of the country.
The powers at the Post Office refused to accept they might have a problem that might warrant investigation, and decided ‘these corner shop scum, they’re all at it’. So they went into attack mode and ruined lives up and down the land.
Because there are a lot of forces involved everybody can blame everybody else.
We also have people who have held senior positions in both Fujitsu and The Post Office, being given senior roles in other Government Departments. There is a revolving door of people being rewarded for failure and that must stop.
Politics runs through every strand of our lives and it is very difficult for it to be excluded, especially in a thread such as this. It is sad that should anyone try to bring politics into the thread, there are people ready to try their best to get the thread shut down.
It's also sad that the House of Commons side of the forum has been shut down again, especially in an election year in which politics will dominate the news.
?
Whereas more reasoned voices have explained to you, the fault lies across the the whole political spectrum.
The Times yesterday carried a long and very informative piece about the role of Fujitsu in all this. The article pointed out it was as long ago as 1998 the government was told there was a serious risk Horizon would fail to deliver on its objectives and would in the long run prove unsatisfactory, leaving the Post Office and government dependent on a hugely expensive, inflexible, inappropriate and possibly unreliable system.
It went on to say Blair was given the option to renegotiate or cancel the Horizon contract but in May 1999 he gave the order to proceed
Wasn't a great decision, was it?
You make some very valid points, but then you just have to start getting overly political with your choice of language and as we've seen countless times before that only leads in one direction.
You say it's a shame the House of Commoners section was closed. It is. But there's a reason it got closed.
This thread should not be used as a substitute. It really is too wide and serious an issue to be used for political point scoring.
I don’t know why especially, but I suspect a lot of people are unable to make their case and sustain that case when either an alternative was posted or their case was challenged for what it contained.
The power of a creative art.
The concinnity of all the creative arts in the UK earns more money for this country than manufacturing, and just a shade less than the financial industries.
But creative arts can challenge the status quo, can unsettle.
The government wish to diminish creative education in schools, and oblige everybody to learn mathematics, I wonder why.
And yes, this post is a political one.
I plead not guilty to that, I hardly complained to any mod when there was an opportunity to stand up for myself and fight back.
It was set in motion in 1992 as the DHSS was concerned at the level of fraud, from people using paper methods to receive their pensions and benefits via the Post Office. The DHSS wanted to issue people with electronic swipe cards that would enable them to get cash from the Post Office and would be less liable to fraud.
Fujitsu/ICL won the contract in 1996.
May 1997 Labour came to power.
In November 1997 the scheduled trial failed and in April 1998 The Post Office assumed full line management of the Horizon project.
The DHSS issued Fujitsu a formal notice of breach of contract in May 1998, but Fujitsu refused to accept it.
The Government commissioned an independent review of the Horizon project in June 1998.
The Benefits Agency abandoned the Horizon Project in May1999.In October 1999 the Horizon roll out began.
In 2000 the prosecution of sub masters began.
2009 Computer weekly publishes an investigation into Horizon.
October 2009 James Arbuthnot (Conservative) first contacted by sub post master from his constituency.
May 2010 Coalition Government assumes power - Tories the major party, with Lib Dems junior partners.
The timeline from there on is too long to post here, but Conservative Government assumed full power in May 2016.
Yes, every political party involved but it has taken 15 years for any meaningful action be taken to put right the wrongs of the whole sorry saga.
Political decisions such as the awarding of a CBE to Paula Vennells cannot be justified.
And they will get their way.
It is scandalous the prosecution of sub postmasters ever happened; it is scandalous they have had to wait all this time for justice; it is scandalous it took a TV drama to spur the powers that be to take action to get this scandal properly sorted.
And yes, I want those who were responsible for these injustices - both individuals and companies - charged and brought before the courts.
And yes, the current government could - and should have - done more and much more quickly.
But the fault does not lie purely with the current government. It really doesn't.
And there I am going to let matters rest.
It's weird, predictable and ceaseless.
I'd bring back the HoC and ban certain people from the main forum!
What I find unforgivable is that Fujitsu are still being awarded contracts, often when there are markers that make others more suitable.
Fujitsu and Post Office executives who were in power at a time, when both were still denying that there was a problem, being moved into Government appointed roles is also wrong, people like Simon Blagdon and Michael Keegan.
Leave it unmoderated
if people wanna slag others off then so be it. Enter at your own risk and cannot bleat to mods
Prison sentences should be handed out to the perpetrators of the many miscarriages of justice, perjury and fraud carried out on behalf of the Post Office by some of its employees.
As has been said on here many times and as I know from my own experience within govt/quango bureaucracies, all too often useless individuals who fail miserably in one area can move seamlessly to another plum often unrelated job as if nothing untoward had happened. For example Vennells moved from the P O to nice jobs in the Cabinet Office and then in the NHS, your life in her hands !! .. I have a couple of nice stories to tell about all this, but here and now is not the place to tell them
The issue about the thread is surely not "introducing politics" - you cannot avoid it if you wish to discuss current affairs or even the business of football with any level of perceptiveness - but the excessive tribalism that some people fall into. This is stoked up by certain newspapers which are being quoted here. People should not fall for it or fall into it.
It is sad that the outrage created by a tv drama, has been the catalyst to greater action against those who perpetrated the injustice and matters weren't dealt with much earlier.