A Lost Decade – politicalbetting.com

System

A Lost Decade – politicalbetting.com

Quietly explosive end to Bates' evidence in the #PostOfficeInquiry. He believes that part of the reason that the Post Office threw everything into crushing his claim, was to avert the possibility of criminal appeals in prosecutions that *they already knew were wrong*. ~AA pic.twitter.com/nMWgO38MEc

Read the full story here

DecrepiterJohnL

A powerful header.

Nigelb

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

DecrepiterJohnL

Sometimes it is just inertia. The need to keep going. No-one steps back to look at the big picture and notice the tear in the corner, especially not the conformists who rise to the top of these institutions. Perhaps it comes from the same place as not knowing how goods get to and from France; the acceptance of widespread fraud, which ironically is what the PO originally thought it was fighting. Because it is in their nature, we need robust procedures around whistleblowing, as Cyclefree says.

Sandpit

Well done Alan Bates. Hopefully soon to be Sir Alan, for his two decades of relentless campaigning and whistleblowing.

OldKingCole

To be honest, I think there’s a bit more to the whole story.
What is particularly concerning is the attitude of the investigators who had apparently been briefed to say that nobody else has these problems! That this was dishonest is an understatement.
Those involved need to ask themselves, why they insisted on maintaining their positions; why did they not question themselves?
They remind me of clerics in the middle ages, who insisted that the Pope was always right, and burned as heretics those who disagreed.

MustaphaMondeo

The PO lacked respect. Would we be surprised to see class in the frame?

Anyway, despite my (Marxist?) curiosity, the header is encouraging me take a thoughtful approach to a complaint.

(I disdain the politics / views of a critic and maintaining objectivity is tricky.)

Thank you for this and previous.

ydoethur

OldKingCole said:

To be honest, I think there’s a bit more to the whole story.
What is particularly concerning is the attitude of the investigators who had apparently been briefed to say that nobody else has these problems! That this was dishonest is an understatement.
Those involved need to ask themselves, why they insisted on maintaining their positions; why did they not question themselves?
They remind me of clerics in the middle ages, who insisted that the Pope was always right, and burned as heretics those who disagreed.

Post Office/Royal Mail has always had form on this.

A couple of decades ago, there was a big problem with letters going missing from Gloucester sorting office. Not criminality, just the incompetence of the manager. My father and eight of his friends co-ordinated a ringing in campaign, calling this manager on his personal line in turn half an hour apart to complain about his performance.

His response to every single one was, 'I'm sorry to hear you've had such a bad experience, but you're the only person who's had a problem.'

My father was the eighth caller. He read out the names of the other seven...

(Two weeks later that official surpassed himself by saying to one disgruntled shop owner, 'If you show me the envelopes of the letters that haven't arrived I'll tell you why they got lost.')

DecrepiterJohnL

UK houses so many asylum seekers that over half the foreign aid budget is spent in Britain
Amount given bilaterally to poorer nations fell by nearly 10 per cent in 2023 while the largest spending cuts were made in Asia
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/10/half-of-foreign-aid-budget-is-spent-in-uk-on-asylum-seekers/ (£££)

Maybe the right would be advised to adopt this point to be seen as caring rather than racist.

OldKingCole

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

To be honest, I think there’s a bit more to the whole story.
What is particularly concerning is the attitude of the investigators who had apparently been briefed to say that nobody else has these problems! That this was dishonest is an understatement.
Those involved need to ask themselves, why they insisted on maintaining their positions; why did they not question themselves?
They remind me of clerics in the middle ages, who insisted that the Pope was always right, and burned as heretics those who disagreed.

Post Office/Royal Mail has always had form on this.

A couple of decades ago, there was a big problem with letters going missing from Gloucester sorting office. Not criminality, just the incompetence of the manager. My father and eight of his friends co-ordinated a ringing in campaign, calling this manager on his personal line in turn half an hour apart to complain about his performance.

His response to every single one was, 'I'm sorry to hear you've had such a bad experience, but you're the only person who's had a problem.'

My father was the eighth caller. He read out the names of the other seven...

(Two weeks later that official surpassed himself by saying to one disgruntled shop owner, 'If you show me the envelopes of the letters that haven't arrived I'll tell you why they got lost.')

Thanks for that.

You’d think of my age I’d got over being naive, but I absolutely do not understand how somebody in that position can repeat with a straight face to the eighth complainant that “you’re the only person who had that problem”.

SouthamObserver

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Foxy

DecrepiterJohnL said:

UK houses so many asylum seekers that over half the foreign aid budget is spent in Britain
Amount given bilaterally to poorer nations fell by nearly 10 per cent in 2023 while the largest spending cuts were made in Asia
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/10/half-of-foreign-aid-budget-is-spent-in-uk-on-asylum-seekers/ (£££)

Maybe the right would be advised to adopt this point to be seen as caring rather than racist.

Not only that but much of our remaining aid is through long term agencies like the UN, so this squeezes discretionary British flagged aid even more. Decent British programmes are being closed down.

What the issue has in common with so many aspects of public life is that the whole process is too slow. These people languish for years. If we could greatly reduce the time taken these people could be either working (having been granted asylum) or deported (if unsuccessful). The system is costly because it is vastly inefficient.

Stuartinromford

OldKingCole said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

To be honest, I think there’s a bit more to the whole story.
What is particularly concerning is the attitude of the investigators who had apparently been briefed to say that nobody else has these problems! That this was dishonest is an understatement.
Those involved need to ask themselves, why they insisted on maintaining their positions; why did they not question themselves?
They remind me of clerics in the middle ages, who insisted that the Pope was always right, and burned as heretics those who disagreed.

Post Office/Royal Mail has always had form on this.

A couple of decades ago, there was a big problem with letters going missing from Gloucester sorting office. Not criminality, just the incompetence of the manager. My father and eight of his friends co-ordinated a ringing in campaign, calling this manager on his personal line in turn half an hour apart to complain about his performance.

His response to every single one was, 'I'm sorry to hear you've had such a bad experience, but you're the only person who's had a problem.'

My father was the eighth caller. He read out the names of the other seven...

(Two weeks later that official surpassed himself by saying to one disgruntled shop owner, 'If you show me the envelopes of the letters that haven't arrived I'll tell you why they got lost.')

Thanks for that.

You’d think of my age I’d got over being naive, but I absolutely do not understand how somebody in that position can repeat with a straight face to the eighth complainant that “you’re the only person who had that problem”.

Training.

I've always been close enough to minion level to not have much "how to deal with complaints" training, but the bits I've had have always focused on how to defuse complainants, rather than expedite complaints.

Nigelb

Opposition won in S Korea confirmed.
They won just short of a 2/3 majority - which would have made life impossible for the incumbent President - but sufficient seats to remove any brakes on parliamentary procedure.
The next couple of years should be interesting.
(Highest voter turnout in over three decades.)
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=372467

Peter_the_Punter

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

JosiasJessop

I think this might be an existential crisis for the Post Office.

Does this mean we're living in a post-apocalypse world?

Gallowgate

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Any thoughts as to why? Is it education? Or is it just generational institutional incompetence?

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

Opposition won in S Korea confirmed.
They won just short of a 2/3 majority - which would have made life impossible for the incumbent President - but sufficient seats to remove any brakes on parliamentary procedure.
The next couple of years should be interesting.
(Highest voter turnout in over three decades.)
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=372467

Presumably billions of won.

OldKingCole

Stuartinromford said:

OldKingCole said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

To be honest, I think there’s a bit more to the whole story.
What is particularly concerning is the attitude of the investigators who had apparently been briefed to say that nobody else has these problems! That this was dishonest is an understatement.
Those involved need to ask themselves, why they insisted on maintaining their positions; why did they not question themselves?
They remind me of clerics in the middle ages, who insisted that the Pope was always right, and burned as heretics those who disagreed.

Post Office/Royal Mail has always had form on this.

A couple of decades ago, there was a big problem with letters going missing from Gloucester sorting office. Not criminality, just the incompetence of the manager. My father and eight of his friends co-ordinated a ringing in campaign, calling this manager on his personal line in turn half an hour apart to complain about his performance.

His response to every single one was, 'I'm sorry to hear you've had such a bad experience, but you're the only person who's had a problem.'

My father was the eighth caller. He read out the names of the other seven...

(Two weeks later that official surpassed himself by saying to one disgruntled shop owner, 'If you show me the envelopes of the letters that haven't arrived I'll tell you why they got lost.')

Thanks for that.

You’d think of my age I’d got over being naive, but I absolutely do not understand how somebody in that position can repeat with a straight face to the eighth complainant that “you’re the only person who had that problem”.

Training.

I've always been close enough to minion level to not have much "how to deal with complaints" training, but the bits I've had have always focused on how to defuse complainants, rather than expedite complaints.

In my prequalifying year, which all pharmacist have to undertake, it was impressed on me by the managers of the pharmacies, in which I worked that one should always do one’s best to to satisfy a complainant “ otherwise they will take it to head office, who will believe them!”

Sandpit

Gallowgate said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Any thoughts as to why? Is it education? Or is it just generational institutional incompetence?

All of the above. Some of it is an MBA attitude, whereby the customers are seen as getting in the way of making money, others are institutional inertia in large organisations and a failure to empower people to make decisions, leading to a “computer says no” attitude.

The next big case study is Boeing, where they replaced senior engineers on the board with finance and MBA types, and totally forgot that their first job was to make good aeroplanes.

Nigelb

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

It's not unreasonable to feel sympathy for someone who has put themselves in such a situation - but it's not something which should for an instant deter prosecutions.

It seems extraordinarily unlikely that there isn't strong prima facie evidence to bring criminal charges against a fairly large number of those involved in this affair.
It would bring the criminal justice system into further disrepute were it not to take notice.

I am slightly more confident than you that this will be the outcome. We'll fairly soon have a new government which has not been in power for a decade and a half, led by a former DOP, with no great incentive to brush things under the carpet.

Foxy

JosiasJessop said:

I think this might be an existential crisis for the Post Office.

Does this mean we're living in a post-apocalypse world?

JosiasJessop said:

I think this might be an existential crisis for the Post Office.

Does this mean we're living in a post-apocalypse world?

All predicted by Kevin Costner. Pandemic and Culture War...

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-postman-1997

malcolmg

OldKingCole said:

To be honest, I think there’s a bit more to the whole story.
What is particularly concerning is the attitude of the investigators who had apparently been briefed to say that nobody else has these problems! That this was dishonest is an understatement.
Those involved need to ask themselves, why they insisted on maintaining their positions; why did they not question themselves?
They remind me of clerics in the middle ages, who insisted that the Pope was always right, and burned as heretics those who disagreed.

OKC, you can guarantee it was MONEY

malcolmg

Sandpit said:

Gallowgate said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Any thoughts as to why? Is it education? Or is it just generational institutional incompetence?

All of the above. Some of it is an MBA attitude, whereby the customers are seen as getting in the way of making money, others are institutional inertia in large organisations and a failure to empower people to make decisions, leading to a “computer says no” attitude.

The next big case study is Boeing, where they replaced senior engineers on the board with finance and MBA types, and totally forgot that their first job was to make good aeroplanes.

That is what happens when bean counters run the show. Just a cell in a spreadsheet.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Sandpit, the 'computer says no' fools are going to be an even bigger problem with AI sometimes being super accurate and sometimes churning out tosh.

malcolmg

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

malcolmg

Foxy said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

UK houses so many asylum seekers that over half the foreign aid budget is spent in Britain
Amount given bilaterally to poorer nations fell by nearly 10 per cent in 2023 while the largest spending cuts were made in Asia
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/10/half-of-foreign-aid-budget-is-spent-in-uk-on-asylum-seekers/ (£££)

Maybe the right would be advised to adopt this point to be seen as caring rather than racist.

Not only that but much of our remaining aid is through long term agencies like the UN, so this squeezes discretionary British flagged aid even more. Decent British programmes are being closed down.

What the issue has in common with so many aspects of public life is that the whole process is too slow. These people languish for years. If we could greatly reduce the time taken these people could be either working (having been granted asylum) or deported (if unsuccessful). The system is costly because it is vastly inefficient.

Wasted money and especially giving it to the UN so the officials can live high on the hog is like throwing it down a drain.

geoffw

System said:

A Lost Decade – politicalbetting.com

Quietly explosive end to Bates' evidence in the #PostOfficeInquiry. He believes that part of the reason that the Post Office threw everything into crushing his claim, was to avert the possibility of criminal appeals in prosecutions that *they already knew were wrong*. ~AA pic.twitter.com/nMWgO38MEc

Read the full story here

Excellent header Cyclefree. Power to your elbow

Stuartinromford

malcolmg said:

Sandpit said:

Gallowgate said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Any thoughts as to why? Is it education? Or is it just generational institutional incompetence?

All of the above. Some of it is an MBA attitude, whereby the customers are seen as getting in the way of making money, others are institutional inertia in large organisations and a failure to empower people to make decisions, leading to a “computer says no” attitude.

The next big case study is Boeing, where they replaced senior engineers on the board with finance and MBA types, and totally forgot that their first job was to make good aeroplanes.

That is what happens when bean counters run the show. Just a cell in a spreadsheet.

Though we might have been better off if those at the top had been numerate enough to understand a spreadsheet.

Maybe better framed as the elevation of Management as a generic thing in itself over knowledge of the thing being managed. That's been around a long time, long enough for "alas, I am an expert and shall rise no higher" to be a trope in Yes, Minister. But it seems to be growing and becoming increasingly toxic.

Sandpit

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

SouthamObserver

How any Tory can look at the treatment David Cameron has received from Putin-backing Republicans in the US and still want Trump to be President is quite beyond me. The GOP is making it very clear that they hold vital UK security, defence and economic interests in absolute contempt.

noneoftheabove

Nigelb said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

It's not unreasonable to feel sympathy for someone who has put themselves in such a situation - but it's not something which should for an instant deter prosecutions.

It seems extraordinarily unlikely that there isn't strong prima facie evidence to bring criminal charges against a fairly large number of those involved in this affair.
It would bring the criminal justice system into further disrepute were it not to take notice.

I am slightly more confident than you that this will be the outcome. We'll fairly soon have a new government which has not been in power for a decade and a half, led by a former DOP, with no great incentive to brush things under the carpet.

The establishment position seems to be criminal charges have to wait for the inquiry to finish and report, and then another wait for the police to review the whole inquiry.

Is there much merit in that? Can't the police interview someone on a narrow case of perjury for example without waiting for the report or having a full understanding of the whole shebang?

OldKingCole

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Led through the streets in chains and pelted with dung by the populace would be my choice!!
Seriously, though, one does wonder whether some of these people are, in fact, expecting trouble. Serious trouble.!
Their time in the witness box at the enquiry has been a long time coming; as I’ve posted before, I wonder whether we going to see some of these people consulting their solicitors before answering each question!

SouthamObserver

Gallowgate said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Any thoughts as to why? Is it education? Or is it just generational institutional incompetence?

Don't rock the boat, don't cause problems is generally how you advance. It's cultural, it's deeply embedded and I think it's rooted in deference.

geoffw

Sandpit said:

Gallowgate said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Any thoughts as to why? Is it education? Or is it just generational institutional incompetence?

All of the above. Some of it is an MBA attitude, whereby the customers are seen as getting in the way of making money, others are institutional inertia in large organisations and a failure to empower people to make decisions, leading to a “computer says no” attitude.

The next big case study is Boeing, where they replaced senior engineers on the board with finance and MBA types, and totally forgot that their first job was to make good aeroplanes.

This could be a meme - the "MBA manager" can join the "PPE politician" as a type to be universally disparaged

Cicero

Foxy said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

UK houses so many asylum seekers that over half the foreign aid budget is spent in Britain
Amount given bilaterally to poorer nations fell by nearly 10 per cent in 2023 while the largest spending cuts were made in Asia
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/10/half-of-foreign-aid-budget-is-spent-in-uk-on-asylum-seekers/ (£££)

Maybe the right would be advised to adopt this point to be seen as caring rather than racist.

Not only that but much of our remaining aid is through long term agencies like the UN, so this squeezes discretionary British flagged aid even more. Decent British programmes are being closed down.

What the issue has in common with so many aspects of public life is that the whole process is too slow. These people languish for years. If we could greatly reduce the time taken these people could be either working (having been granted asylum) or deported (if unsuccessful). The system is costly because it is vastly inefficient.

The deliberate destruction of the UK International Development Department is one of the most outrageous policy decisions by the Conservatives. The UK, by enforcing fairness and best practice in its ID programmes had created arguably the best regarded system of aid in the world. Because it deliberately eschewed the "strings attached" model of other countries, and focused exclusively on the direct goal of each programme, it gave the UK decisive influence in a very large number of places it operated.
To end that principle and explicitly declare UK interests for each programme, and remember these are programmes in the poorest places in the world, has actually reduced the convening power and leadership that the UK had. The forced merger of the FCO and the ID departments has created a department-FCDO- which is weaker than either of its predecessors. It has also drastically reduced the amount of money that the UK gives to the world's poorest.
It may not be the most egregious of Tory crimes, but people have died because of these decisions and British influence reduced still further.

Casino_Royale

Excellent piece.

One has to wonder if any day of justice for any of the sub-postmasters would have been seen were it not for Alan Bates' tenacity.

Casino_Royale

Nigelb said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

For me, this is the model of a good leader.

Carnyx

OldKingCole said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Led through the streets in chains and pelted with dung by the populace would be my choice!!
Seriously, though, one does wonder whether some of these people are, in fact, expecting trouble. Serious trouble.!
Their time in the witness box at the enquiry has been a long time coming; as I’ve posted before, I wonder whether we going to see some of these people consulting their solicitors before answering each question!

I think they already have, given the PO's behaviour at the inquiry passim.

Casino_Royale

You can go a long way in a career by being very nice to all the right people, supporting institutions, being pleasant, giving innocuous help here and there, and word getting around. What you don't want is a reputation as being difficult or a troublemaker, and I suspect that often drives behaviour.

Looking at her CV that appears to be precisely what happened to Paula Vennells:

https://www.gov.uk/government/people/paula-vennells

Sandpit

noneoftheabove said:

Nigelb said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

It's not unreasonable to feel sympathy for someone who has put themselves in such a situation - but it's not something which should for an instant deter prosecutions.

It seems extraordinarily unlikely that there isn't strong prima facie evidence to bring criminal charges against a fairly large number of those involved in this affair.
It would bring the criminal justice system into further disrepute were it not to take notice.

I am slightly more confident than you that this will be the outcome. We'll fairly soon have a new government which has not been in power for a decade and a half, led by a former DOP, with no great incentive to brush things under the carpet.

The establishment position seems to be criminal charges have to wait for the inquiry to finish and report, and then another wait for the police to review the whole inquiry.

Is there much merit in that? Can't the police interview someone on a narrow case of perjury for example without waiting for the report or having a full understanding of the whole shebang?

I can see why bringing prosecutions before the inquiry reports, could be seen to prejudice its findings, and perhaps lead to blame placed on a small number of individual scapegoats rather than institutional failings at the very top of the organisation.

But on the other hand, justice delayed is justice denied, and as everyone involved gets a few years older it means more victims pass on without seeing the end result, and more perpetrators can argue that they’re too old for prison food.

Personally, I hope the report, or even a quick interim report after the evidence, leaves it in no doubt that files on a number of named individuals are being passed to police and prosecutors.

Taz

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Given IANAL what sort of charges would they face ? What would the crime be, or alleged crime ?

MarqueeMark

SouthamObserver said:

How any Tory can look at the treatment David Cameron has received from Putin-backing Republicans in the US and still want Trump to be President is quite beyond me. The GOP is making it very clear that they hold vital UK security, defence and economic interests in absolute contempt.

To be fair, they also hold vital US security, defence and economic interests in absolute contempt.

Nigelb

noneoftheabove said:

Nigelb said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

It's not unreasonable to feel sympathy for someone who has put themselves in such a situation - but it's not something which should for an instant deter prosecutions.

It seems extraordinarily unlikely that there isn't strong prima facie evidence to bring criminal charges against a fairly large number of those involved in this affair.
It would bring the criminal justice system into further disrepute were it not to take notice.

I am slightly more confident than you that this will be the outcome. We'll fairly soon have a new government which has not been in power for a decade and a half, led by a former DOP, with no great incentive to brush things under the carpet.

The establishment position seems to be criminal charges have to wait for the inquiry to finish and report, and then another wait for the police to review the whole inquiry.

Is there much merit in that? Can't the police interview someone on a narrow case of perjury for example without waiting for the report or having a full understanding of the whole shebang?

You'd have to ask a lawyer, but I can't see any convincing reason why it should be necessary.

The cynical (who have proved right so far) would argue the delay is a matter of deliberate policy.
Though I note the enquiry chair this week, in the context of further PO stalling tactics, expressed a wish to finish as soon as possible.

Taz

Casino_Royale said:

Excellent piece.

One has to wonder if any day of justice for any of the sub-postmasters would have been seen were it not for Alan Bates' tenacity.

And for the efforts of MP's/former MP's like James Arbuthnot and Kevan Jones. There are a few heroes here.

Nigelb

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

For me, this is the model of a good leader.

Not just a leader; it's about the whole culture of large organisations.
If it's not embedded, then a single individual at the top will struggle to make any difference.

Sandpit

Taz said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Given IANAL what sort of charges would they face ? What would the crime be, or alleged crime ?

Fraud, false accounting, making false representations, perjury related to the prosecutions of SPMs, misconduct in public office, offences related to evidence at the inquiry and their contempt for it, and probably quite a few more. I think malicious prosecution is a crime as well, from back in the day when police would ‘fit up’ a suspect.

kinabalu

SouthamObserver said:

How any Tory can look at the treatment David Cameron has received from Putin-backing Republicans in the US and still want Trump to be President is quite beyond me. The GOP is making it very clear that they hold vital UK security, defence and economic interests in absolute contempt.

It will probably only cement their view. The sort of Tories who support Trump can't stand Cameron.

SouthamObserver

MarqueeMark said:

SouthamObserver said:

How any Tory can look at the treatment David Cameron has received from Putin-backing Republicans in the US and still want Trump to be President is quite beyond me. The GOP is making it very clear that they hold vital UK security, defence and economic interests in absolute contempt.

To be fair, they also hold vital US security, defence and economic interests in absolute contempt.

Yep, that is true.

kinabalu

Great header. I think there will be prosecutions. I certainly hope there are. I also hope we don't see all the vitriol funnelled onto the one figure of Paula Vennells.

Stocky

SouthamObserver said:

Gallowgate said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

Any thoughts as to why? Is it education? Or is it just generational institutional incompetence?

Don't rock the boat, don't cause problems is generally how you advance. It's cultural, it's deeply embedded and I think it's rooted in deference.

Not deference - it's self-preservation.

People, often mediocre, get appointed to positions with salaries and other benefits that make normal people flinch. The game then is to preserve yourself in this position. Part of this is to create the impression that you are better and busier (therefore not expendable) than is actually the case. This is far more important than other concerns.

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

For me, this is the model of a good leader.

Not just a leader; it's about the whole culture of large organisations.
If it's not embedded, then a single individual at the top will struggle to make any difference.

Yes, a good leader is required but not sufficient, it needs to be embedded in the whole culture of the organisation - and constantly reinforced, lest complacency and inertia set in.

boulay

Casino_Royale said:

You can go a long way in a career by being very nice to all the right people, supporting institutions, being pleasant, giving innocuous help here and there, and word getting around. What you don't want is a reputation as being difficult or a troublemaker, and I suspect that often drives behaviour.

Looking at her CV that appears to be precisely what happened to Paula Vennells:

https://www.gov.uk/government/people/paula-vennells

On a ridiculously complicated financial structure I was working on years ago I was one of the key stakeholders along with two other groups. We would have many calls with potential partners in the structure who were introduced in by one of the other parties.

Every single time we had a new potential partner one of the key parties on the initial group introduction call would follow up my introduction with “yes, Boulay has a problem for every solution” and everyone would laugh away.

The thing was is that the other parties just believed that we could charge headlong and if problems arose then we would work around them later, ignore them, beg people to bend the rules whereas I wanted to identify every possible problem from the start and check if there was an alternative way before we spent a year working on something which we knew could not be done legally, technically or financially. It made me very unpopular in the group and I eventually had to sack them off because they were wasting time and money and blowing up relations with other parties by having false hopes and ignoring problems.

Every institution and company needs people who say “hang on, this won’t work”. They should actually have a specific role of “Director of No” and department of “I don’t think so” to sit at the board table with the directors of “false positivity”, department of “how to spend future bonuses on things you really want” and the “Too Scared to say no” committee.

Casino_Royale

Nigelb said:

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

For me, this is the model of a good leader.

Not just a leader; it's about the whole culture of large organisations.
If it's not embedded, then a single individual at the top will struggle to make any difference.

All organisations end up looking like their leaders. It's the job of the CEO to set the tone and culture of the organisation, and embed it.

To say anything else provides wriggle room and evasion for weak CEOs to say they were powerless to do anything about it.

Stuartinromford

Casino_Royale said:

Excellent piece.

One has to wonder if any day of justice for any of the sub-postmasters would have been seen were it not for Alan Bates' tenacity.

I suspect that anyone working in a largeish organisation or network is aware of a potential scandal or ten. The back pages of Private Eye are full of them. Mostly, the victims just get ground down. NDA if they're lucky.

What's missing is the time, energy and resource to join the dots, and the courage and backing to whistleblow.

And ignoring life advice form my parent- How would you feel if your actions were on the front page of the newspaper?

Casino_Royale

Taz said:

Casino_Royale said:

Excellent piece.

One has to wonder if any day of justice for any of the sub-postmasters would have been seen were it not for Alan Bates' tenacity.

And for the efforts of MP's/former MP's like James Arbuthnot and Kevan Jones. There are a few heroes here.

Indeed, who would never have come onto the scene were it not for Alan Bates.

Textbook example of high-integrity quiet leadership by him, and how powerful that can be.

Nigelb

Sandpit said:

Taz said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Given IANAL what sort of charges would they face ? What would the crime be, or alleged crime ?

Fraud, false accounting, making false representations, perjury related to the prosecutions of SPMs, misconduct in public office, offences related to evidence at the inquiry and their contempt for it, and probably quite a few more. I think malicious prosecution is a crime as well, from back in the day when police would ‘fit up’ a suspect.

The last is a civil tort. Victims could sue for damages under it.

Taz

OldKingCole said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Led through the streets in chains and pelted with dung by the populace would be my choice!!
Seriously, though, one does wonder whether some of these people are, in fact, expecting trouble. Serious trouble.!
Their time in the witness box at the enquiry has been a long time coming; as I’ve posted before, I wonder whether we going to see some of these people consulting their solicitors before answering each question!

They just keep kicking the can further down the road and buying time. I doubt any of these people will face justice and no lessons will be learned. I suspect this is all a farce, a show for public consumption to be seen to be doing something.

MattW

Good morning everyone.

An excellent header, thank-you.

Nigelb

Heavy bombardment of Ukraine again last night. As usual, the vast majority of targets were civilian infrastructure. And civilians.

It is unbearable. russia has just struck the Odesa district w ballistic missiles, killing four, including a 10yo girl and injuring seven. One man lost both legs, doctors fight for his life. Ffs, the West has enough Patriots, which were produced to save people, not collect dust
https://twitter.com/OlenaHalushka/status/1778102937857765690

SteveS

I quite like this quote from Adaptive Leadership by Heifetz….

There is a myth that drives many change initiatives into the ground: that the organization needs to change because it is broken. The reality is that any social system (including an organization or a country or a family) is the way it is because the people in that system (at least those individuals and factions with the most leverage) want it that way. In that sense, on the whole, on balance, the system is working fine, even though it may appear to be “dysfunctional” in some respects to some members and outside observers, and even though it faces danger just over the horizon. As our colleague Jeff Lawrence poignantly says, “There is no such thing as a dysfunctional organization, because every organization is perfectly aligned to achieve the results it currently gets.”

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

Sandpit said:

Taz said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Given IANAL what sort of charges would they face ? What would the crime be, or alleged crime ?

Fraud, false accounting, making false representations, perjury related to the prosecutions of SPMs, misconduct in public office, offences related to evidence at the inquiry and their contempt for it, and probably quite a few more. I think malicious prosecution is a crime as well, from back in the day when police would ‘fit up’ a suspect.

The last is a civil tort. Victims could sue for damages under it.

I have wondered out loud, if there was the possibility of civil action against individuals by the SPMs, for some of the more egregious offences.

Most of those affected do not have good lives at the moment, whereas all of the senior people involved appear to be living somewhat comfortably on very large pensions, and even a few months inside won’t particularly change their lifestyle afterwards.

DecrepiterJohnL

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Nigelb

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

For me, this is the model of a good leader.

Not just a leader; it's about the whole culture of large organisations.
If it's not embedded, then a single individual at the top will struggle to make any difference.

All organisations end up looking like their leaders. It's the job of the CEO to set the tone and culture of the organisation, and embed it.

To say anything else provides wriggle room and evasion for weak CEOs to say they were powerless to do anything about it.

There's an element of truth in that - but the larger the organisation, the less so.
Private companies can fail - but public institutions have to be able to survive sub-optimal changes in leadership.

Big_G_NorthWales

SouthamObserver said:

How any Tory can look at the treatment David Cameron has received from Putin-backing Republicans in the US and still want Trump to be President is quite beyond me. The GOP is making it very clear that they hold vital UK security, defence and economic interests in absolute contempt.

This conservative supports David Cameron who is proving to be an excellent Foreign Secretary and any so called conservative who supports Trump should join Reform, the party of the Trump worshipping Farage

boulay

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

It’s less of an issue now for the Tories, the huge breaking news today that Labour PM Harold Wilson had an affair will swing voters back to the Blues.

I'm guessing that’s the case given the amount of coverage the story has had on R4 this morning and Nick Robinson’s excitement.

Sandpit

Nigelb said:

Heavy bombardment of Ukraine again last night. As usual, the vast majority of targets were civilian infrastructure. And civilians.

It is unbearable. russia has just struck the Odesa district w ballistic missiles, killing four, including a 10yo girl and injuring seven. One man lost both legs, doctors fight for his life. Ffs, the West has enough Patriots, which were produced to save people, not collect dust
https://twitter.com/OlenaHalushka/status/1778102937857765690

If Sunak really wants to cement a legacy, something undoubtedly good he achieved with his time in office, he’d act unilaterally now to send every spare weapon we can get our hands on to Ukraine. JFDI.

Bonus points if he can set aside political rivalries, and brings Starmer and Johnson into the programme as well.

TimS

Stuartinromford said:

Casino_Royale said:

Excellent piece.

One has to wonder if any day of justice for any of the sub-postmasters would have been seen were it not for Alan Bates' tenacity.

I suspect that anyone working in a largeish organisation or network is aware of a potential scandal or ten. The back pages of Private Eye are full of them. Mostly, the victims just get ground down. NDA if they're lucky.

What's missing is the time, energy and resource to join the dots, and the courage and backing to whistleblow.

And ignoring life advice form my parent- How would you feel if your actions were on the front page of the newspaper?

And a similar piece of advice: would you be happy if Panorama had planted a hidden camera in this meeting room?

BlancheLivermore

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

For me, this is the model of a good leader.

Not just a leader; it's about the whole culture of large organisations.
If it's not embedded, then a single individual at the top will struggle to make any difference.

All organisations end up looking like their leaders. It's the job of the CEO to set the tone and culture of the organisation, and embed it.

To say anything else provides wriggle room and evasion for weak CEOs to say they were powerless to do anything about it.

The Tory party is going to be really small..

eek

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

I hope there will be an accurate collection of the number of people turned away from voting.

And then a sane approach to voter id sorted out for the next election - it shouldn't be easier for me to vote via post than for my wife to vote in person...

OnlyLivingBoy

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Of course, that's why they've done it.

boulay

BlancheLivermore said:

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

Casino_Royale said:

Nigelb said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

A powerful header.

Cyclfree’s point about the willingness to accept real challenge is a great one.

For me, this is the model of a good leader.

Not just a leader; it's about the whole culture of large organisations.
If it's not embedded, then a single individual at the top will struggle to make any difference.

All organisations end up looking like their leaders. It's the job of the CEO to set the tone and culture of the organisation, and embed it.

To say anything else provides wriggle room and evasion for weak CEOs to say they were powerless to do anything about it.

The Tory party is going to be really small..

Talking of which, Rishi can send the cool kids mad and boost his stature by buying these new editions below.

Taz

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Sandpit

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Heavy bombardment of Ukraine again last night. As usual, the vast majority of targets were civilian infrastructure. And civilians.

It is unbearable. russia has just struck the Odesa district w ballistic missiles, killing four, including a 10yo girl and injuring seven. One man lost both legs, doctors fight for his life. Ffs, the West has enough Patriots, which were produced to save people, not collect dust
https://twitter.com/OlenaHalushka/status/1778102937857765690

If Sunak really wants to cement a legacy, something undoubtedly good he achieved with his time in office, he’d act unilaterally now to send every spare weapon we can get our hands on to Ukraine. JFDI.

Bonus points if he can set aside political rivalries, and brings Starmer and Johnson into the programme as well.

To add, it appears that in recent weeks most countries appears to have replaced actions with discussions with regard to Ukraine, with the possible exception, I hate to say, of the French.

The Germans are heading for a severe recession, the Americans are more interested in Israel and on domestic spending in an election year, Eastern European countries are more concerned about supporting the Ukranian refugees and have already given much in military aid given their own position, and the Baltics and Finland are concentrating on their own threat from the angry bear.

Hell, I wouldn’t even mind if Sunak teams up with Macron, that’s how bad the situation is now. Let them announce a new Concorde project, getting everyone together from both countries to quickly get new production lines of Ukranian weapons running.

MattW

Hmmm. Police Scotland.

One reason? "It was THEM, officer".

“Police Scotland inherited an ageing estate with many buildings not fit for modern policing and we are working hard to provide our people with appropriate working conditions.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce7r17w89x0o

Not that I can throw any stones - Notts police are in Special Measures.

TimS

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Yes it was done by Survation. The fact B4B is the sponsor and it's a message they care about (and we should all care about) doesn't make this a voodoo poll.

The responses by age group show why the Tories introduced this measure: 27% of 18-24 year olds were unaware of the voter ID requirement (and of course they're the least likely to have ID), vs 6% of the over-65s.

It's little games like this that could save the party from wipeout.

DavidL

I think, slightly uncharacteristically, @Cyclefree is cutting Mr Leighton too much slack here. The Horizon program was not some incidental or side issue for what became Post Office Counters. It was, and remains, the core management tool for the business allowing the business to monitor the hundreds of thousands of remote transactions being carried out on its behalf by hundreds of staff and self employed contractors. Any suggestion that it had some serious flaws which made that information flow inaccurate really went to the heart of the business and the senior management and the Chairman should have been all over it looking for reassurance.

It is the stunning lack of curiosity and reluctance to glance under the bonnet even when some rather odd noises were being emitted which frankly makes you wonder whether this was indeed gross neglect or wilful blindness.

DecrepiterJohnL

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Survation.

From the Best for Britain site:-
The massive Best for Britain MRP poll of more than 15,000 people undertaken by Survation found that 16% of respondents don’t know about new voter ID rules suggesting that around 5 million voters could be turned away when they try to cast their vote in the upcoming local and General Elections with 1.85 million in marginal and ultra marginal seats.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/5_million_to_be_disenfranchised_voter_id_rules

MattW

On Notts Police, an interesting conversation.

Lab activist pointing out that we (town of 50k) lost our police station because of the Ashfield Independents.

I gently point out that at the time Labour were in control of the District Council, and the County Council, and the Police and Crime Commissioner, and had been for some time before.

(This being before Ashfield Labour reduced themselves from 22 councillors to 1 councillor in a short period of time.)

Lab Local Council candidate comes back with County Councils and PCCs have no power or influence, the police do it all themselves and it is all due to Govt funding cuts anyway.

That's only about 1/4 true, in the context. We have a Govt of Salami Slicers, but Councillors and PCCs do have influence and are key stakeholders in inputting to police priorities.

But I'm not sure if the point should be being made by a Lab Council candidate about 16 days before Labour are about 95% certain to get their man in as the new PCC.

Happy days are yours and mine .

TimS

Sandpit said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Heavy bombardment of Ukraine again last night. As usual, the vast majority of targets were civilian infrastructure. And civilians.

It is unbearable. russia has just struck the Odesa district w ballistic missiles, killing four, including a 10yo girl and injuring seven. One man lost both legs, doctors fight for his life. Ffs, the West has enough Patriots, which were produced to save people, not collect dust
https://twitter.com/OlenaHalushka/status/1778102937857765690

If Sunak really wants to cement a legacy, something undoubtedly good he achieved with his time in office, he’d act unilaterally now to send every spare weapon we can get our hands on to Ukraine. JFDI.

Bonus points if he can set aside political rivalries, and brings Starmer and Johnson into the programme as well.

To add, it appears that in recent weeks most countries appears to have replaced actions with discussions with regard to Ukraine, with the possible exception, I hate to say, of the French.

The Germans are heading for a severe recession, the Americans are more interested in Israel and on domestic spending in an election year, Eastern European countries are more concerned about supporting the Ukranian refugees and have already given much in military aid given their own position, and the Baltics and Finland are concentrating on their own threat from the angry bear.

Hell, I wouldn’t even mind if Sunak teams up with Macron, that’s how bad the situation is now. Let them announce a new Concorde project, getting everyone together from both countries to quickly get new production lines of Ukranian weapons running.

There do seem to have been a lot of announcements in recent weeks of Eastern European countries managing to find shells on the global market. That, alongside air defence, seems to be the main need of Ukraine at the moment - ammunition.

BartholomewRoberts

DavidL said:

I think, slightly uncharacteristically, @Cyclefree is cutting Mr Leighton too much slack here. The Horizon program was not some incidental or side issue for what became Post Office Counters. It was, and remains, the core management tool for the business allowing the business to monitor the hundreds of thousands of remote transactions being carried out on its behalf by hundreds of staff and self employed contractors. Any suggestion that it had some serious flaws which made that information flow inaccurate really went to the heart of the business and the senior management and the Chairman should have been all over it looking for reassurance.

It is the stunning lack of curiosity and reluctance to glance under the bonnet even when some rather odd noises were being emitted which frankly makes you wonder whether this was indeed gross neglect or wilful blindness.

"Lack of curiosity"

There are none so blind as those who do not wish to see.

Barnesian

OldKingCole said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

To be honest, I think there’s a bit more to the whole story.
What is particularly concerning is the attitude of the investigators who had apparently been briefed to say that nobody else has these problems! That this was dishonest is an understatement.
Those involved need to ask themselves, why they insisted on maintaining their positions; why did they not question themselves?
They remind me of clerics in the middle ages, who insisted that the Pope was always right, and burned as heretics those who disagreed.

Post Office/Royal Mail has always had form on this.

A couple of decades ago, there was a big problem with letters going missing from Gloucester sorting office. Not criminality, just the incompetence of the manager. My father and eight of his friends co-ordinated a ringing in campaign, calling this manager on his personal line in turn half an hour apart to complain about his performance.

His response to every single one was, 'I'm sorry to hear you've had such a bad experience, but you're the only person who's had a problem.'

My father was the eighth caller. He read out the names of the other seven...

(Two weeks later that official surpassed himself by saying to one disgruntled shop owner, 'If you show me the envelopes of the letters that haven't arrived I'll tell you why they got lost.')

Thanks for that.

You’d think of my age I’d got over being naive, but I absolutely do not understand how somebody in that position can repeat with a straight face to the eighth complainant that “you’re the only person who had that problem”.

It's because they are a liar. Simple as that. Some people are congenital liars. They think nothing of it. Second nature. I can think of examples.

Malmesbury

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

This isn’t just U.K. Management culture problem.

South Korean airlines had a culture problem with juniors not challenging the senior pilots actions.

We’ve see the Boeing approach to problems made known from below.

NASA killed two Space Shuttles of astronauts in this way.

Building a work culture that doesn’t have this issue is hard. It requires commitment and training. And above all, leadership.

The_Woodpecker

Excellent header @Cyclefree, and not too long :-)

It reminded me that, like Alan Bates, back around 2002/2003 I too sent an email personally to Allan Leighton. It was not about the Post Office but about his role as a director at Leeds United, then on the verge of bankruptcy. I actually did receive a reply, unlike Alan Bates. I guess this shows, again, how the plight of the sub-postmasters was of no interest to the likes of Leighton.

DecrepiterJohnL

boulay said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

It’s less of an issue now for the Tories, the huge breaking news today that Labour PM Harold Wilson had an affair will swing voters back to the Blues.

I'm guessing that’s the case given the amount of coverage the story has had on R4 this morning and Nick Robinson’s excitement.

The story seems to be that everyone thought Harold Wilson had an affair with one woman but actually it was with a different woman. It is hard to see how it changes recent political history one way or the other. At first glance, it barely merits a footnote. (So I dare say there will be a documentary on Channel 5 and a drama on ITV before the summer is out.)

Sandpit

TimS said:

Sandpit said:

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Heavy bombardment of Ukraine again last night. As usual, the vast majority of targets were civilian infrastructure. And civilians.

It is unbearable. russia has just struck the Odesa district w ballistic missiles, killing four, including a 10yo girl and injuring seven. One man lost both legs, doctors fight for his life. Ffs, the West has enough Patriots, which were produced to save people, not collect dust
https://twitter.com/OlenaHalushka/status/1778102937857765690

If Sunak really wants to cement a legacy, something undoubtedly good he achieved with his time in office, he’d act unilaterally now to send every spare weapon we can get our hands on to Ukraine. JFDI.

Bonus points if he can set aside political rivalries, and brings Starmer and Johnson into the programme as well.

To add, it appears that in recent weeks most countries appears to have replaced actions with discussions with regard to Ukraine, with the possible exception, I hate to say, of the French.

The Germans are heading for a severe recession, the Americans are more interested in Israel and on domestic spending in an election year, Eastern European countries are more concerned about supporting the Ukranian refugees and have already given much in military aid given their own position, and the Baltics and Finland are concentrating on their own threat from the angry bear.

Hell, I wouldn’t even mind if Sunak teams up with Macron, that’s how bad the situation is now. Let them announce a new Concorde project, getting everyone together from both countries to quickly get new production lines of Ukranian weapons running.

There do seem to have been a lot of announcements in recent weeks of Eastern European countries managing to find shells on the global market. That, alongside air defence, seems to be the main need of Ukraine at the moment - ammunition.

Yes, it does appear that the world wasn’t really prepared for how much ammunition gets used in a land war. It doesn’t help that there’s two ammunition standards as well, the NATO 155mm and the Soviet 152mm, which means needing two supply lines.

I suspect that, as well as new Western production, a concerted effort looking around Africa and South America, possibly using unconventional procurement techniques, could also uncover a fair amount of weapons and ammunition. There’s also a lot of neutral states in the Middle East who rely on NATO countries for their procurement, who might be persuaded to quietly hand over some ammo now, in exchange for its gradual replacement over time. Something similar might work with India, with the added stick of threats of sanctions on their black market oil business.

Malmesbury

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

How does Vennels et al sleep at night?

I suggest you find some gloss magazine interviews with some Big Cheese(s) a couple of years downstream from the Big Scandal.

In a spread, which often contains shots of nice country house in summer, Our Victim explains how he/she was Victimised. Despite being a super achiever, somehow they got saddled with the responsibility they were legally responsible for.

It was a hard time. Maybe even a stay at the posh end of Priory Chain. But he/she found another 6 figure job, where he/she is Doing Good Work for The Public Benefit.

In every such story, what is missing?

MattW

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Survation.

From the Best for Britain site:-
The massive Best for Britain MRP poll of more than 15,000 people undertaken by Survation found that 16% of respondents don’t know about new voter ID rules suggesting that around 5 million voters could be turned away when they try to cast their vote in the upcoming local and General Elections with 1.85 million in marginal and ultra marginal seats.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/5_million_to_be_disenfranchised_voter_id_rules

I'd summarise that as "Best for Britain" not Survation. Gina Miller's mob maintain their rather questionable reputation.

Checking the numbers I can find, last time awareness was about the same at 87%.

And only "at least 0.25%" of people trying to vote at polling stations were turned away for lack of ID.

The actual number disenfranchised would be lowered, due to whatever the numbers were voting by post, as well as potentially increased for the reasons quoted by the EC.

Plus it says 'bring ID' on my polling card.

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/research-reports-and-data/our-reports-and-data-past-elections-and-referendums/voter-id-may-2023-local-elections-england-interim-analysis

Northern_Al

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Survation.

From the Best for Britain site:-
The massive Best for Britain MRP poll of more than 15,000 people undertaken by Survation found that 16% of respondents don’t know about new voter ID rules suggesting that around 5 million voters could be turned away when they try to cast their vote in the upcoming local and General Elections with 1.85 million in marginal and ultra marginal seats.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/5_million_to_be_disenfranchised_voter_id_rules

Funnily enough, I reckon that's quite good news; I thought it would be much higher than 16%. Once the GE, in particular, is called, I'd expect the opposition parties to drive that figure down to a very low % through a bombardment of messages, particularly aimed at the young.
I think voter ID could negatively affect turnout in the locals and mayorals, though.

Malmesbury

Casino_Royale said:

You can go a long way in a career by being very nice to all the right people, supporting institutions, being pleasant, giving innocuous help here and there, and word getting around. What you don't want is a reputation as being difficult or a troublemaker, and I suspect that often drives behaviour.

Looking at her CV that appears to be precisely what happened to Paula Vennells:

https://www.gov.uk/government/people/paula-vennells

An important piece is being “a safe pair of hands” and “a team player”

This means a demonstrated instinct to cover up issues that involve people at your level or above.

So anyone appointing you knows that you are providing a defensive barrier in that area. For the appointer….

MattW

TimS said:

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Yes it was done by Survation. The fact B4B is the sponsor and it's a message they care about (and we should all care about) doesn't make this a voodoo poll.

The responses by age group show why the Tories introduced this measure: 27% of 18-24 year olds were unaware of the voter ID requirement (and of course they're the least likely to have ID), vs 6% of the over-65s.

It's little games like this that could save the party from wipeout.

I thought we had acknowledgement recently that Voter ID had actually worked against the Tories?

DecrepiterJohnL

Malmesbury said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

This isn’t just U.K. Management culture problem.

South Korean airlines had a culture problem with juniors not challenging the senior pilots actions.

We’ve see the Boeing approach to problems made known from below.

NASA killed two Space Shuttles of astronauts in this way.

Building a work culture that doesn’t have this issue is hard. It requires commitment and training. And above all, leadership.

The problem is that universal conventional wisdom (in politics as well as management) is to throw out the sceptics, the squeaky wheels, those who are damned as not team players. This is why diversity can be valuable, and a few firms use red teaming and the mediaeval papacy had devil's advocates.

Pulpstar

MattW said:

On Notts Police, an interesting conversation.

Lab activist pointing out that we (town of 50k) lost our police station because of the Ashfield Independents.

I gently point out that at the time Labour were in control of the District Council, and the County Council, and the Police and Crime Commissioner, and had been for some time before.

(This being before Ashfield Labour reduced themselves from 22 councillors to 1 councillor in a short period of time.)

Lab Local Council candidate comes back with County Councils and PCCs have no power or influence, the police do it all themselves and it is all due to Govt funding cuts anyway.

That's only about 1/4 true, in the context. We have a Govt of Salami Slicers, but Councillors and PCCs do have influence and are key stakeholders in inputting to police priorities.

But I'm not sure if the point should be being made by a Lab Council candidate about 16 days before Labour are about 95% certain to get their man in as the new PCC.

Happy days are yours and mine .

Still can't believe the Tories are letting Henry run again. They'd have probably been better off putting 5 jobs Bradley forward for both jobs tbh.

Malmesbury

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Malmesbury said:

SouthamObserver said:

“They didn’t like me standing up to them, in the first instance; they were finding it awkward; and I don’t think they could answer these questions. I think they had a feeling I was going to carry on in a similar vein going forward.”

This goes way beyond what happened at the Post Office. It summarises the inability of the UK management class generally - in the public and private sector - to engage with anything that challenges comfortable assumptions and established ways of doing things. The immediate reaction to someone asking awkward questions or raising difficult points is not to engage but to ignore them, to label them a trouble maker or to try to make them go away - or a combination of all three. In the absence of dynamic, open-minded senior leadership - and how often is that found anywhere? - this means problems fester and get worse.

The PO is a particularly egregious example and one that has directly ruined a lot of lives but this is something that is deeply embedded in how things are run across the board in this country. It's at the root of so many of our problems.

This isn’t just U.K. Management culture problem.

South Korean airlines had a culture problem with juniors not challenging the senior pilots actions.

We’ve see the Boeing approach to problems made known from below.

NASA killed two Space Shuttles of astronauts in this way.

Building a work culture that doesn’t have this issue is hard. It requires commitment and training. And above all, leadership.

The problem is that universal conventional wisdom (in politics as well as management) is to throw out the sceptics, the squeaky wheels, those who are damned as not team players. This is why diversity can be valuable, and a few firms use red teaming and the mediaeval papacy had devil's advocates.

And a major problem is that "diversity" has been captured to mean "people who look different, but exactly the same attitudes and beliefs"

squareroot2

I wonder how many will end up.in prison?

PJH

Northern_Al said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Survation.

From the Best for Britain site:-
The massive Best for Britain MRP poll of more than 15,000 people undertaken by Survation found that 16% of respondents don’t know about new voter ID rules suggesting that around 5 million voters could be turned away when they try to cast their vote in the upcoming local and General Elections with 1.85 million in marginal and ultra marginal seats.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/5_million_to_be_disenfranchised_voter_id_rules

Funnily enough, I reckon that's quite good news; I thought it would be much higher than 16%. Once the GE, in particular, is called, I'd expect the opposition parties to drive that figure down to a very low % through a bombardment of messages, particularly aimed at the young.
I think voter ID could negatively affect turnout in the locals and mayorals, though.

I also wonder if it will affect young people as disproportionately as we think. They are used to having to produce ID. It is the oldies who don't and are less likely to carry a driving licence/passport around with them.

Outside London, does everybody have a bus pass now?

DecrepiterJohnL

MattW said:

TimS said:

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Yes it was done by Survation. The fact B4B is the sponsor and it's a message they care about (and we should all care about) doesn't make this a voodoo poll.

The responses by age group show why the Tories introduced this measure: 27% of 18-24 year olds were unaware of the voter ID requirement (and of course they're the least likely to have ID), vs 6% of the over-65s.

It's little games like this that could save the party from wipeout.

I thought we had acknowledgement recently that Voter ID had actually worked against the Tories?

Yes, from Jacob Rees-Mogg. Even before its introduction, some Conservatives (even on pb) were wondering if it might be harmful amongst their newer voters who are less likely to have passports.

Stuartinromford

Malmesbury said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

How does Vennels et al sleep at night?

I suggest you find some gloss magazine interviews with some Big Cheese(s) a couple of years downstream from the Big Scandal.

In a spread, which often contains shots of nice country house in summer, Our Victim explains how he/she was Victimised. Despite being a super achiever, somehow they got saddled with the responsibility they were legally responsible for.

It was a hard time. Maybe even a stay at the posh end of Priory Chain. But he/she found another 6 figure job, where he/she is Doing Good Work for The Public Benefit.

In every such story, what is missing?

But the reason that remorse is missing is because of the selection and formation processes people have undergone to get to the top. Any empathy for others or willingness to admit fault tends to have been internally suppressed and externally trained out of them.

And that's not surprising, given the head-on-a-spike treatment given to those who come off on the wrong side of a scandal. Aggressive cover-ups are just playing the odds rationally.

Deep down, we all know (I think) that an approach to management that is humbler and more honest would be better. Accepting that mistakes happen and the important thing is to find and fix them quickly. Less reputation management, more like aviation.

What we don't know is how to get there from here.

Carnyx

Sandpit said:

Nigelb said:

Sandpit said:

Taz said:

Sandpit said:

malcolmg said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Thank you, CF, for another excellent piece on this subject.

Following this scandal has proved not only enlightening but personally helpful in my own jousts with large organisations in recent years. In my case it has been Gloucestershire Police and British Gas, but it could equally well have been others, and I'm sure PBers will be able to quote their own examples.

Lessons have been learned, by me at least. Don't accept that they are either competent or honest. Do not accept what you know not to be true, even if it is offered as a compromise deal. Fight your corner, and if possible, connect with others who have been mistreated.

I'm still hoping to see prosecutions in the PO case. Although part of me feels some sympathy with Vennels - how does she sleep nights? - I think we have to see her and her colleagues in the dock if the message is ever to get through to the senior management of large organisations that they are not immune, however well-connected they may be. If that can be demonstrated in the PO case, there is some hope that others will truly learn lessons.

I am not holding my breath but I remain hopeful. Your efforts, and those of other like you, Ms CF, nurture that hope.

Peter, nice thoughts but Vennels will be enjoying her millions and believing she has been badly treated by a bunch of oicks. These people have no shame and believe they are always right.

Which is exactly why she - and a dozen or two more that were involved at a senior level in this scandal - need to spend some time eating prison food.

Given IANAL what sort of charges would they face ? What would the crime be, or alleged crime ?

Fraud, false accounting, making false representations, perjury related to the prosecutions of SPMs, misconduct in public office, offences related to evidence at the inquiry and their contempt for it, and probably quite a few more. I think malicious prosecution is a crime as well, from back in the day when police would ‘fit up’ a suspect.

The last is a civil tort. Victims could sue for damages under it.

I have wondered out loud, if there was the possibility of civil action against individuals by the SPMs, for some of the more egregious offences.

Most of those affected do not have good lives at the moment, whereas all of the senior people involved appear to be living somewhat comfortably on very large pensions, and even a few months inside won’t particularly change their lifestyle afterwards.

Cost. I believe no win no fee is illegal in the UK? And legal aid cuts. And the individual targets aren't necessarily very rich cash wise, house ownership aside, and much of that money would disappear in legal fees. So you'd be doing the legal system's job for it and bankrupting yourself in the process when you are already poor, if you could find a lawyer to take it on.

Plus a lot of those people will have only been working at the PO for a short period, and there is therefore no "very large pension" specific to the PO period.

PJH

PJH said:

Northern_Al said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Taz said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Rishi Sunak and Tory MPs at risk of election wipe out could keep seats over voter ID confusion, poll suggests
https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-and-tory-mps-at-risk-of-election-wipe-out-could-keep-seats-over-voter-id-confusion-poll-suggests-13112590

Was the actual polling done by a reputable pollster, all I can see in the article is it is based on something from the hardly impartial group "Best For Britain".

Survation.

From the Best for Britain site:-
The massive Best for Britain MRP poll of more than 15,000 people undertaken by Survation found that 16% of respondents don’t know about new voter ID rules suggesting that around 5 million voters could be turned away when they try to cast their vote in the upcoming local and General Elections with 1.85 million in marginal and ultra marginal seats.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/5_million_to_be_disenfranchised_voter_id_rules

Funnily enough, I reckon that's quite good news; I thought it would be much higher than 16%. Once the GE, in particular, is called, I'd expect the opposition parties to drive that figure down to a very low % through a bombardment of messages, particularly aimed at the young.
I think voter ID could negatively affect turnout in the locals and mayorals, though.

I also wonder if it will affect young people as disproportionately as we think. They are used to having to produce ID. It is the oldies who don't and are less likely to carry a driving licence/passport around with them.

Outside London, does everybody have a bus pass now?

I mean do all over 60s (or is it pensioners? I'm out of the loop on this now!) have a bus pass?

Simon_Peach

Has anyone seen any documentation relating to the set-up of the Horizon programme (or parent programme, if it was part of some broader change initiative)? In particular, the weight given to the reduction of Sub-postmaster fraud in any cost-benefit-risk analysis and whether the realisation of those benefits, specifically fraud reduction, was embedded in senior management bonus schemes.

Looking for what incentives motivated those who behaved appallingly, it may have simply been the threat of having to lose and even pay back the bonuses that were paying for school fees and a second holiday every year.