"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
We have a full inquiry into Grenfell, and I don't think there's much difference as far as 'lives ruined' are concerned. Even if a number of middle rank Post Office staff are convicted of perjury, that still doesn't absolve the people at the top who must have had questions.
But, did they perjure themselves? They were assured that the software was working. They believed the assurances. They lacked the competence to detect software errors.
They were gullible. They were stupid. But, these are not crimes.
Vennells was clearly over-promoted -- though she was lauded at the time as a successful working-class woman leading an important company. She was gullible. She was stupid. These are not crimes.
Any public inquiry will conclude that no crimes were committed by the Post Office and its management. Gross incompetence is not a crime.
I am puzzled as to why the buckets of shit are not being poured over the software compare (Fujitsu) that supplied the crappy software that made the errors.
They are more to blame that the wretched Vennells. They supplied the product that caused the problems, and they repeatedly assured Vennells and the Post Office that there was no problem.
Read the emails Vennells sent- she was not asking for issues with the software to be highlighted but to hidden from her.
Vennells has (properly) resigned from her Directorships -- IMO she should have done so much earlier.
She is incompetent and a poor manager. She has a very serious miscarriage of justice on her conscience.
But, she has a degree in Russian and French. She (probably) has zero understanding of software.
The Post Office was repeatedly told by Fujitsu that there was no problem with the software.
I suspect Vennells lacked the skillset, the competence and the curiosity to get to the bottom of the problem. She has poor leadership skills, and she should certainly have her CBE taken away from her.
But, at the heart of this, it is Fujitsu who made the catastrophic mistake, and denied making it. They are software experts, and they had the expertise to test their software. They should be held responsible.
My question is: why are Fujitsu not paying compensation? Why is it the UK taxpayer, through the Government?
I don't like Vennells & I am not defending her. But, surely Fujitsu should be pursued -- they seem to me to be more blameworthy.
I quite agree. The judges have referred the evidence of some of the Fujitsu employees for further investigation. But the Post Office presumably had a Head of IT. Was he/she another ignoramus who knew nothing about IT and did not have the wit to ask some pretty obvious and basic questions?
I am not an IT expert but pretty much all my cases have involved some serious interrogation of IT systems. You need the ability to ask basic and obvious questions and if you get waffle you don't understand you keep on asking until you do understand. If you cannot manage this much you are not, IMO, fit for anything much more than putting the bins out for collection.
There is nothing in this life so complicated that someone who understands it cannot explain it simply. And if they can't, one of two things is happening: either they don't understand it themselves or they are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Any halfway competent manager - let alone a CEO - should be able to understand IT systems sufficiently, especially when this amount of money is being spent and when problems start appearing. And they should be getting good people working for them with the technical understanding they don't have.
We are far too willing to let people off the hook. These people are being paid good salaries to do their job properly not to behave like monkeys seeing, hearing, saying nothing.
As far as I am concerned Vennells should be in jail. She was the Chief Executive at the time when the Post Office ordered Second Sight to abandon their investigations and destroy any remaining paperwork one day before they were due to issue a damning report into the Horizon scandal. She clearly knew that the PO was at fault and that people were having their lives ruined because of a failure by the Post Office and yet she chose to suppress those findings and allow people to remain in jail or eventually commit suicide rather than admit the Post Office got it wrong.
She deserves no sympathy or understanding for this. She deserve to be prosecuted.
On what charge.
I agree with your core sentiment, she should be punished. She won’t be. She, like all the others who bear some responsibility, will get on with their lives.
Perverting or obstructing the course of justice might be a possibility.
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
No, I don't think so.
Being coldly logical about it I think a Royal Yacht will easily deliver a positive rate of return to the Exchequer.
If the government is serious about cutting crime it should be spending that money on the criminal justice system so victims and defendants don't have to wait 3 or 4 or more years before a case comes to court. Or in training the police and prosecutors in how to comply with the disclosure rules in criminal trials so that we don't get miscarriages like the Post Office case or the collapse of the Serco fraud trial or the many other criminal cases which have collapsed because of this failure. That would provide a much better rate of return and actually do something to deal with crime which is meant to be one of this government's priorities.
But no opportunities for champagne quaffing so obviously nothing will be done.
To be fair to the police, the Post Office were their own prosecutors. Unless I've seriously misread Private Eye!
Correct. These were private prosecutions which continued long after concerns about Horizon were known at every level in the organisation. Fraud prosecutions went from a handful a year to the large relative numbers seen with the scandal.
They were also at a very much greater level than in pre-Horizon days, which surely must have led to head-scratching among management. Why are we employing so many crooks now, when we apparently didn't in the past? Or, how much was siphoned off in the past, if so much is being siphoned off now? So, was there any tightening up of the recruitment process for sub-postmasters? If not, why not?
Alternately, the new Horizon system was doing exactly what it was intended to do, which was to highlight the levels of fraud that had previously gone un-noticed.
If you start from that viewpoint, the way things played out start to make some sense, and partially explains how they managed to go too far down the rabbit hole before they realised what they’d done.
"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
We have a full inquiry into Grenfell, and I don't think there's much difference as far as 'lives ruined' are concerned. Even if a number of middle rank Post Office staff are convicted of perjury, that still doesn't absolve the people at the top who must have had questions.
But, did they perjure themselves? They were assured that the software was working. They believed the assurances. They lacked the competence to detect software errors.
They were gullible. They were stupid. But, these are not crimes.
Vennells was clearly over-promoted -- though she was lauded at the time as a successful working-class woman leading an important company. She was gullible. She was stupid. These are not crimes.
Any public inquiry will conclude that no crimes were committed by the Post Office and its management. Gross incompetence is not a crime.
I am puzzled as to why the buckets of shit are not being poured over the software compare (Fujitsu) that supplied the crappy software that made the errors.
They are more to blame that the wretched Vennells. They supplied the product that caused the problems, and they repeatedly assured Vennells and the Post Office that there was no problem.
Read the emails Vennells sent- she was not asking for issues with the software to be highlighted but to hidden from her.
Vennells has (properly) resigned from her Directorships -- IMO she should have done so much earlier.
She is incompetent and a poor manager. She has a very serious miscarriage of justice on her conscience.
But, she has a degree in Russian and French. She (probably) has zero understanding of software.
The Post Office was repeatedly told by Fujitsu that there was no problem with the software.
I suspect Vennells lacked the skillset, the competence and the curiosity to get to the bottom of the problem. She has poor leadership skills, and she should certainly have her CBE taken away from her.
But, at the heart of this, it is Fujitsu who made the catastrophic mistake, and denied making it. They are software experts, and they had the expertise to test their software. They should be held responsible.
My question is: why are Fujitsu not paying compensation? Why is it the UK taxpayer, through the Government?
I don't like Vennells & I am not defending her. But, surely Fujitsu should be pursued -- they seem to me to be more blameworthy.
I quite agree. The judges have referred the evidence of some of the Fujitsu employees for further investigation. But the Post Office presumably had a Head of IT. Was he/she another ignoramus who knew nothing about IT and did not have the wit to ask some pretty obvious and basic questions?
I am not an IT expert but pretty much all my cases have involved some serious interrogation of IT systems. You need the ability to ask basic and obvious questions and if you get waffle you don't understand you keep on asking until you do understand. If you cannot manage this much you are not, IMO, fit for anything much more than putting the bins out for collection.
There is nothing in this life so complicated that someone who understands it cannot explain it simply. And if they can't, one of two things is happening: either they don't understand it themselves or they are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Any halfway competent manager - let alone a CEO - should be able to understand IT systems sufficiently, especially when this amount of money is being spent and when problems start appearing. And they should be getting good people working for them with the technical understanding they don't have.
We are far too willing to let people off the hook. These people are being paid good salaries to do their job properly not to behave like monkeys seeing, hearing, saying nothing.
As far as I am concerned Vennells should be in jail. She was the Chief Executive at the time when the Post Office ordered Second Sight to abandon their investigations and destroy any remaining paperwork one day before they were due to issue a damning report into the Horizon scandal. She clearly knew that the PO was at fault and that people were having their lives ruined because of a failure by the Post Office and yet she chose to suppress those findings and allow people to remain in jail or eventually commit suicide rather than admit the Post Office got it wrong.
She deserves no sympathy or understanding for this. She deserve to be prosecuted.
If that is true -- that is, if Vennells was responsible for the cover-up -- then I agree with you.
For Vennells to go to jail, she has to be guilt of more than just gross incompetence.
"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
We have a full inquiry into Grenfell, and I don't think there's much difference as far as 'lives ruined' are concerned. Even if a number of middle rank Post Office staff are convicted of perjury, that still doesn't absolve the people at the top who must have had questions.
But, did they perjure themselves? They were assured that the software was working. They believed the assurances. They lacked the competence to detect software errors.
They were gullible. They were stupid. But, these are not crimes.
Vennells was clearly over-promoted -- though she was lauded at the time as a successful working-class woman leading an important company. She was gullible. She was stupid. These are not crimes.
Any public inquiry will conclude that no crimes were committed by the Post Office and its management. Gross incompetence is not a crime.
I am puzzled as to why the buckets of shit are not being poured over the software compare (Fujitsu) that supplied the crappy software that made the errors.
They are more to blame that the wretched Vennells. They supplied the product that caused the problems, and they repeatedly assured Vennells and the Post Office that there was no problem.
Read the emails Vennells sent- she was not asking for issues with the software to be highlighted but to hidden from her.
Vennells has (properly) resigned from her Directorships -- IMO she should have done so much earlier.
She is incompetent and a poor manager. She has a very serious miscarriage of justice on her conscience.
But, she has a degree in Russian and French. She (probably) has zero understanding of software.
The Post Office was repeatedly told by Fujitsu that there was no problem with the software.
I suspect Vennells lacked the skillset, the competence and the curiosity to get to the bottom of the problem. She has poor leadership skills, and she should certainly have her CBE taken away from her.
But, at the heart of this, it is Fujitsu who made the catastrophic mistake, and denied making it. They are software experts, and they had the expertise to test their software. They should be held responsible.
My question is: why are Fujitsu not paying compensation? Why is it the UK taxpayer, through the Government?
I don't like Vennells & I am not defending her. But, surely Fujitsu should be pursued -- they seem to me to be more blameworthy.
I quite agree. The judges have referred the evidence of some of the Fujitsu employees for further investigation. But the Post Office presumably had a Head of IT. Was he/she another ignoramus who knew nothing about IT and did not have the wit to ask some pretty obvious and basic questions?
I am not an IT expert but pretty much all my cases have involved some serious interrogation of IT systems. You need the ability to ask basic and obvious questions and if you get waffle you don't understand you keep on asking until you do understand. If you cannot manage this much you are not, IMO, fit for anything much more than putting the bins out for collection.
There is nothing in this life so complicated that someone who understands it cannot explain it simply. And if they can't, one of two things is happening: either they don't understand it themselves or they are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Any halfway competent manager - let alone a CEO - should be able to understand IT systems sufficiently, especially when this amount of money is being spent and when problems start appearing. And they should be getting good people working for them with the technical understanding they don't have.
We are far too willing to let people off the hook. These people are being paid good salaries to do their job properly not to behave like monkeys seeing, hearing, saying nothing.
As far as I am concerned Vennells should be in jail. She was the Chief Executive at the time when the Post Office ordered Second Sight to abandon their investigations and destroy any remaining paperwork one day before they were due to issue a damning report into the Horizon scandal. She clearly knew that the PO was at fault and that people were having their lives ruined because of a failure by the Post Office and yet she chose to suppress those findings and allow people to remain in jail or eventually commit suicide rather than admit the Post Office got it wrong.
She deserves no sympathy or understanding for this. She deserve to be prosecuted.
On what charge.
I agree with your core sentiment, she should be punished. She won’t be. She, like all the others who bear some responsibility, will get on with their lives.
Perverting or obstructing the course of justice might be a possibility.
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
We Tories have a majority of 80, all that matters is what Tory voters think until 2024
Worse than that, isn't it? For the next few years, all that matters really is the views of Conservative MPs.
Now, it's true that the most likely reason MPs would dump the PM is a sense that victory in 2024 is in doubt, but even that transmission mechanism is a bit wonky.
But apart from his backbenchers, the only restraint on the PM is is own sense of shame... which seems to have gone missing a long time ago.
(To be clear, This Is A Bad Thing.)
Last night's thread was compelling and while I ignore @Scott_xP daily anti Boris rantings, @TSE was very interesting and explained many of the allegations against Boris and Carrie and, to be honest if proven, he will have no choice but to resign
Indeed, as the thread continued I became more certain that he is will be out of office sometime this year
All depends how much he wants to keep the job (despite the lack of cash)
I don’t know why he doesn’t do a deal now for his memoirs. Is it illegal? It would certainly look a lot better than asking for donors to pay his childcare
As we discussed last night he will get millions. Problem solved. Unless it’s not allowed
Can't a Tory donor be found to give Carrie a highly-paid non-job so she can pay for the nanny and the wallpaper? Look at George Osborne's 2016 sinecures (2016 being the number and the year).
I though the usual way this was resolved is through speaking opportunities.
Carrie is paid 100 k to go some place and give a speech.
Or - here's an idea - she learns to live within her means, as the rest of the population has to.
I suggested it because Cherie received money to give speeches whilst Tony Blair was premier.
Cherie was a working lawyer and quite a good one. She acted for a friend of mine in an employment claim. She wasn't getting paid for nothing. And if she spent money foolishly it was money she had earned herself.
"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
We have a full inquiry into Grenfell, and I don't think there's much difference as far as 'lives ruined' are concerned. Even if a number of middle rank Post Office staff are convicted of perjury, that still doesn't absolve the people at the top who must have had questions.
But, did they perjure themselves? They were assured that the software was working. They believed the assurances. They lacked the competence to detect software errors.
They were gullible. They were stupid. But, these are not crimes.
Vennells was clearly over-promoted -- though she was lauded at the time as a successful working-class woman leading an important company. She was gullible. She was stupid. These are not crimes.
Any public inquiry will conclude that no crimes were committed by the Post Office and its management. Gross incompetence is not a crime.
I am puzzled as to why the buckets of shit are not being poured over the software compare (Fujitsu) that supplied the crappy software that made the errors.
They are more to blame that the wretched Vennells. They supplied the product that caused the problems, and they repeatedly assured Vennells and the Post Office that there was no problem.
Read the emails Vennells sent- she was not asking for issues with the software to be highlighted but to hidden from her.
Vennells has (properly) resigned from her Directorships -- IMO she should have done so much earlier.
She is incompetent and a poor manager. She has a very serious miscarriage of justice on her conscience.
But, she has a degree in Russian and French. She (probably) has zero understanding of software.
The Post Office was repeatedly told by Fujitsu that there was no problem with the software.
I suspect Vennells lacked the skillset, the competence and the curiosity to get to the bottom of the problem. She has poor leadership skills, and she should certainly have her CBE taken away from her.
But, at the heart of this, it is Fujitsu who made the catastrophic mistake, and denied making it. They are software experts, and they had the expertise to test their software. They should be held responsible.
My question is: why are Fujitsu not paying compensation? Why is it the UK taxpayer, through the Government?
I don't like Vennells & I am not defending her. But, surely Fujitsu should be pursued -- they seem to me to be more blameworthy.
I quite agree. The judges have referred the evidence of some of the Fujitsu employees for further investigation. But the Post Office presumably had a Head of IT. Was he/she another ignoramus who knew nothing about IT and did not have the wit to ask some pretty obvious and basic questions?
I am not an IT expert but pretty much all my cases have involved some serious interrogation of IT systems. You need the ability to ask basic and obvious questions and if you get waffle you don't understand you keep on asking until you do understand. If you cannot manage this much you are not, IMO, fit for anything much more than putting the bins out for collection.
There is nothing in this life so complicated that someone who understands it cannot explain it simply. And if they can't, one of two things is happening: either they don't understand it themselves or they are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Any halfway competent manager - let alone a CEO - should be able to understand IT systems sufficiently, especially when this amount of money is being spent and when problems start appearing. And they should be getting good people working for them with the technical understanding they don't have.
We are far too willing to let people off the hook. These people are being paid good salaries to do their job properly not to behave like monkeys seeing, hearing, saying nothing.
As far as I am concerned Vennells should be in jail. She was the Chief Executive at the time when the Post Office ordered Second Sight to abandon their investigations and destroy any remaining paperwork one day before they were due to issue a damning report into the Horizon scandal. She clearly knew that the PO was at fault and that people were having their lives ruined because of a failure by the Post Office and yet she chose to suppress those findings and allow people to remain in jail or eventually commit suicide rather than admit the Post Office got it wrong.
She deserves no sympathy or understanding for this. She deserve to be prosecuted.
If that is true -- that is, if Vennells was responsible for the cover-up -- then I agree with you.
For Vennells to go to jail, she has to be guilt of more than just gross incompetence.
I find it hard to believe that such a high profile investigation into such serious matters could be stopped and the order given for all the evidence to be handed over or destroyed, without the connivance of the Chief Executive. But the facts need to be examined in court to ascertain this properly. Which is why she should be prosecuted.
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
No, I don't think so.
Being coldly logical about it I think a Royal Yacht will easily deliver a positive rate of return to the Exchequer.
If the government is serious about cutting crime it should be spending that money on the criminal justice system so victims and defendants don't have to wait 3 or 4 or more years before a case comes to court. Or in training the police and prosecutors in how to comply with the disclosure rules in criminal trials so that we don't get miscarriages like the Post Office case or the collapse of the Serco fraud trial or the many other criminal cases which have collapsed because of this failure. That would provide a much better rate of return and actually do something to deal with crime which is meant to be one of this government's priorities.
But no opportunities for champagne quaffing so obviously nothing will be done.
To be fair to the police, the Post Office were their own prosecutors. Unless I've seriously misread Private Eye!
Correct. These were private prosecutions which continued long after concerns about Horizon were known at every level in the organisation. Fraud prosecutions went from a handful a year to the large relative numbers seen with the scandal.
They were also at a very much greater level than in pre-Horizon days, which surely must have led to head-scratching among management. Why are we employing so many crooks now, when we apparently didn't in the past? Or, how much was siphoned off in the past, if so much is being siphoned off now? So, was there any tightening up of the recruitment process for sub-postmasters? If not, why not?
Alternately, the new Horizon system was doing exactly what it was intended to do, which was to highlight the levels of fraud that had previously gone un-noticed.
If you start from that viewpoint, the way things played out start to make some sense, and partially explains how they managed to go too far down the rabbit hole before they realised what they’d done.
It explains why they started. It does not explain why they continued.
It does not explain the failures to comply with the criminal disclosure rules. It does not explain the cover up of the reports showing the Horizon system was flawed. It does not explain the lies told to the sub-postmasters.
These were deliberate actions by people who knew that what they were doing was wrong.
Scientist casually says we’ll bring back masks in the winter, even if Covid has gone. Because they hinder flu
“I find discourse like this so worrying. If we want to create criminal public health sanctions for reduction of other diseases, we need a proper debate about benefits and costs. Not a casual aside and the assumption the state has this right.”
Scientist casually says we’ll bring back masks in the winter, even if Covid has gone. Because they hinder flu
“I find discourse like this so worrying. If we want to create criminal public health sanctions for reduction of other diseases, we need a proper debate about benefits and costs. Not a casual aside and the assumption the state has this right.”
I still think it highly unlikely aliens are visiting us, but there’s enough credible people wondering out loud, to make me ponder
Say and believe what you want about the underlying issue itself. But the speed and scale with which the media and political narrative has changed in America is extraordinary.
I think people outside the US are largely ignorant of this change in narrative, which in of itself should be of material interest to political observers. This is no longer a taboo topic in the US and it is fast moving up the ladder of importance to policy makers, the media and the public.
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
No, I don't think so.
Being coldly logical about it I think a Royal Yacht will easily deliver a positive rate of return to the Exchequer.
If the government is serious about cutting crime it should be spending that money on the criminal justice system so victims and defendants don't have to wait 3 or 4 or more years before a case comes to court. Or in training the police and prosecutors in how to comply with the disclosure rules in criminal trials so that we don't get miscarriages like the Post Office case or the collapse of the Serco fraud trial or the many other criminal cases which have collapsed because of this failure. That would provide a much better rate of return and actually do something to deal with crime which is meant to be one of this government's priorities.
But no opportunities for champagne quaffing so obviously nothing will be done.
To be fair to the police, the Post Office were their own prosecutors. Unless I've seriously misread Private Eye!
Correct. These were private prosecutions which continued long after concerns about Horizon were known at every level in the organisation. Fraud prosecutions went from a handful a year to the large relative numbers seen with the scandal.
They were also at a very much greater level than in pre-Horizon days, which surely must have led to head-scratching among management. Why are we employing so many crooks now, when we apparently didn't in the past? Or, how much was siphoned off in the past, if so much is being siphoned off now? So, was there any tightening up of the recruitment process for sub-postmasters? If not, why not?
Alternately, the new Horizon system was doing exactly what it was intended to do, which was to highlight the levels of fraud that had previously gone un-noticed.
If you start from that viewpoint, the way things played out start to make some sense, and partially explains how they managed to go too far down the rabbit hole before they realised what they’d done.
While I've 'Liked' that, I still agree with Ms Cyclefree; how do the accounts department account for overall deficiencies. As she asks, should the accounts for past years be queried. I don't know whether the accounts for each Post Office are recorded separately or collectively. I'd still like to know what, if any, changes to the recruitment process were made.
"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
We have a full inquiry into Grenfell, and I don't think there's much difference as far as 'lives ruined' are concerned. Even if a number of middle rank Post Office staff are convicted of perjury, that still doesn't absolve the people at the top who must have had questions.
But, did they perjure themselves? They were assured that the software was working. They believed the assurances. They lacked the competence to detect software errors.
They were gullible. They were stupid. But, these are not crimes.
Vennells was clearly over-promoted -- though she was lauded at the time as a successful working-class woman leading an important company. She was gullible. She was stupid. These are not crimes.
Any public inquiry will conclude that no crimes were committed by the Post Office and its management. Gross incompetence is not a crime.
I am puzzled as to why the buckets of shit are not being poured over the software compare (Fujitsu) that supplied the crappy software that made the errors.
They are more to blame that the wretched Vennells. They supplied the product that caused the problems, and they repeatedly assured Vennells and the Post Office that there was no problem.
Read the emails Vennells sent- she was not asking for issues with the software to be highlighted but to hidden from her.
Vennells has (properly) resigned from her Directorships -- IMO she should have done so much earlier.
She is incompetent and a poor manager. She has a very serious miscarriage of justice on her conscience.
But, she has a degree in Russian and French. She (probably) has zero understanding of software.
The Post Office was repeatedly told by Fujitsu that there was no problem with the software.
I suspect Vennells lacked the skillset, the competence and the curiosity to get to the bottom of the problem. She has poor leadership skills, and she should certainly have her CBE taken away from her.
But, at the heart of this, it is Fujitsu who made the catastrophic mistake, and denied making it. They are software experts, and they had the expertise to test their software. They should be held responsible.
My question is: why are Fujitsu not paying compensation? Why is it the UK taxpayer, through the Government?
I don't like Vennells & I am not defending her. But, surely Fujitsu should be pursued -- they seem to me to be more blameworthy.
I quite agree. The judges have referred the evidence of some of the Fujitsu employees for further investigation. But the Post Office presumably had a Head of IT. Was he/she another ignoramus who knew nothing about IT and did not have the wit to ask some pretty obvious and basic questions?
I am not an IT expert but pretty much all my cases have involved some serious interrogation of IT systems. You need the ability to ask basic and obvious questions and if you get waffle you don't understand you keep on asking until you do understand. If you cannot manage this much you are not, IMO, fit for anything much more than putting the bins out for collection.
There is nothing in this life so complicated that someone who understands it cannot explain it simply. And if they can't, one of two things is happening: either they don't understand it themselves or they are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Any halfway competent manager - let alone a CEO - should be able to understand IT systems sufficiently, especially when this amount of money is being spent and when problems start appearing. And they should be getting good people working for them with the technical understanding they don't have.
We are far too willing to let people off the hook. These people are being paid good salaries to do their job properly not to behave like monkeys seeing, hearing, saying nothing.
As far as I am concerned Vennells should be in jail. She was the Chief Executive at the time when the Post Office ordered Second Sight to abandon their investigations and destroy any remaining paperwork one day before they were due to issue a damning report into the Horizon scandal. She clearly knew that the PO was at fault and that people were having their lives ruined because of a failure by the Post Office and yet she chose to suppress those findings and allow people to remain in jail or eventually commit suicide rather than admit the Post Office got it wrong.
She deserves no sympathy or understanding for this. She deserve to be prosecuted.
If that is true -- that is, if Vennells was responsible for the cover-up -- then I agree with you.
For Vennells to go to jail, she has to be guilt of more than just gross incompetence.
Yes - but people who are grossly incompetent need to suffer some penalty eg loss of job, honours, repayment of bonuses, contributions to compensation etc. Most of the time the behaviour is not criminal so everyone shrugs their shoulder. But other sanctions are available and we simply do not make judicious use of these to send the message that actions have consequences - that serious incompetence has adverse consequences. Rather we seem to promote and reward serial failures.
I've had two through the door. They mention climate change a lot.
It's the mood music and what underlies it that worries people.
People will vote for it if it makes their lives better. If it entails lots of sacrifices, taxes and restrictions then they will tell them to get stuffed, regardless of what they tell pollsters now.
It's interesting politics. The Tory core vote hates it passionately. Maybe it appeals to the more middle of the road types, its hard to tell. I suspect it turns as many off as it gains.
The problem for those who think this is unbounded stupidity is that this is the political concensus. There is no serious alternative party to the green/vegan/woke lunacy currently being rammed down our throats - the best we can do is to sit on our hands, which doesn't show up nearly as clearly in the results. We need a UKIP type force which allows us to register our disapproval by eating into the Tory vote in the same way that UKIP's ever growing vote set in motion our path out of the EU, against the wishes of almost every front-bench politican from every party.
I'm quite surprised Farrage isn't making the running on this - he'd be well placed to do so, there is a substantial overlap between being a Brexiter and not being into eco nonsense, with potential for a strong sideswipe at continuing social distancing/mask wear etc after the pandemic has obviously run its course. He also knows a thing or two about how to launch a "pressure group" party from scratch. If he couldn't knock 10% off the Tories poll lead a month after launch I'd probably be willing to fry and eat my flat cap. Maybe he believes in green hair-shirtism, or feels its someone else's turn to shake up British politics.
The Green madness that stops you from buying a car with a petrol engine? The Green madness that prevents you from buying a steak or a McDonalds?
What Green madness?
The UK offers some fairly modest tax benefits for cutting down your carbon consumption. But you know what, even if global warming wasn't a thing, they would still be a good idea, because they'd reduce our dependence on foreigners who don't like us very much. Minimising the amount of British pounds shipped off the Middle East to buy oil sounds like quite a sensible strategy, irrespective of whether global warming is real or not.
And for all the talk of woke, I struggle to see any actual "woke" in my actual life.
The sum total of people who have asked me to call the by an obscure pronoun is... ummmm... none. I read more about woke on-line, and here people bewailing it, but the reality is that outside the fevered imagination of Meghan, it doesn't really exist for 99% of people. But you know what, if someone said to me, please call me "she" I'd do it anyway. That's not woke, that's common courtesy, just as I'd call someone Moon Unit, if that was what they wanted to be called.
And vegans? They exist. So what? In my 46 years on Planet Earth, exactly one person (a rather attractive young German lady) has ever prostheliyzed veganism. Which led me to say "show me a man who's a vegan, and I'll show you a man who's trying to shag a vegan". Suffice to say, it didn't go down well.
It seems that you (and Farage these days as well) like railing against a threat that doesn't really exist.
>The green madness that means in 10 years time I probably won't be able to buy an affordable car that's suitable for my needs.
I just don't believe that. That problem is well on the way to being fixed.
>The green madness that is currently making my electricity so expensive I might as well be generating it from natural gas myself (we've discussed this before).
Electricity is not really that expensive. UK prices are below most of Western Europe. Plus you get the option to switch (which usually saves 20-30% first time) or invest in your property to use less.
>The green madness that has passed binding future commitments on emissions that if followed through mean an end to natural gas for home heating in the next 20 years.
I don't see a problem with that.
>The green madness that's just prevented a coal mine being opened in Cumbria, because that's the sort of job we'd rather export abroad.
Agree on that one, as the emissions from the coal mine can be absorbed perfectly well within the overall targets. For me this is more about the serious problem of national campaign groups being able to negate local democracy so easily.
>The green madness that is about to outlaw the use of domestic house coal (mainly used by a small number of older people in rural areas) despite there being no real alternative that works in most of the appliances that burn it.
Good thing to do on public health grounds. Taking out major sources of PM2.5s is excellent. The numbers are so small (I make it about 0.25%) that we can finally get rid of it, and have measures to help people improve their homes.
>Currently there is an obvious concerted effort to shift the Overton window on stuff like meat eating - give it 10 years, and there will probably be a special meat tax of some sort.
>An Australian government lost office over much milder attempt at emission reduction via a carbon tax. "The great big tax on everything" the successful opposition dubbed it, so this is definitely can have electoral salience - it just requires a fairly politically skillful operator to smash the current political concensus. As I say, I'm surprised Farage isn't up for this gig - it wouldn't sweep him to power, but it would force the Tories to change tack pretty promptly.
Australia is ... Australia.
A single general carbon tax would be an excellent idea - IF it let us take out all the other specific taxes aimed at carbon.
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
No, I don't think so.
Being coldly logical about it I think a Royal Yacht will easily deliver a positive rate of return to the Exchequer.
If the government is serious about cutting crime it should be spending that money on the criminal justice system so victims and defendants don't have to wait 3 or 4 or more years before a case comes to court. Or in training the police and prosecutors in how to comply with the disclosure rules in criminal trials so that we don't get miscarriages like the Post Office case or the collapse of the Serco fraud trial or the many other criminal cases which have collapsed because of this failure. That would provide a much better rate of return and actually do something to deal with crime which is meant to be one of this government's priorities.
But no opportunities for champagne quaffing so obviously nothing will be done.
To be fair to the police, the Post Office were their own prosecutors. Unless I've seriously misread Private Eye!
Correct. These were private prosecutions which continued long after concerns about Horizon were known at every level in the organisation. Fraud prosecutions went from a handful a year to the large relative numbers seen with the scandal.
They were also at a very much greater level than in pre-Horizon days, which surely must have led to head-scratching among management. Why are we employing so many crooks now, when we apparently didn't in the past? Or, how much was siphoned off in the past, if so much is being siphoned off now? So, was there any tightening up of the recruitment process for sub-postmasters? If not, why not?
Alternately, the new Horizon system was doing exactly what it was intended to do, which was to highlight the levels of fraud that had previously gone un-noticed.
If you start from that viewpoint, the way things played out start to make some sense, and partially explains how they managed to go too far down the rabbit hole before they realised what they’d done.
It explains why they started. It does not explain why they continued.
It does not explain the failures to comply with the criminal disclosure rules. It does not explain the cover up of the reports showing the Horizon system was flawed. It does not explain the lies told to the sub-postmasters.
These were deliberate actions by people who knew that what they were doing was wrong.
Exactly.
But after you’ve got a couple of people committing suicide or in jail, are you going to admit you fcuked up, or carry on and hope you’re right? (Obviously I don’t mean *you*, you’d have been the one banging loudly on Ms Vennells’ office door!)
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul Sweepstake on Thursday's elections now open. Guess: Hartlepool 2nd place in Scotland Will Drakeford stay as FM in Wales West Midlands Tie-break: Labour’s projected national share of vote in local elections All completely free
What’s your thoughts on Hartlepool and Tees mayor now ? After the weekend polls ?
I still think Hartlepool will be a clear Con win but I'm slightly less sure than I was.
Ben Houchen is nailed on to win in any case, I think. Even I'd probably vote for him.
Yep, I would too. I think he’s done a grand job and deserves a second term.
Journalist Sherelle Jacobs, who I follow on Twitter, was up in Hartlepool and found no enthusiasm for labour at all but it was not, or didn’t have the feel, of 2019. She called the landslide in the red wall well before the 2019 election but thinks this is different. I respect her commentary.
If labour do well Thursday it should be no comfort to,them as it will all be due to Tory implosion and little to do with their offer. Starmer and Rayner will likely never come to Hartlepool again after the end of next week and National labour care little for the inhabitants only their votes. Labour have learnt nothing from the fall of the red wall and if it goes back to them due to Johnson’s numerous flaws as a politician then they have no reason to do anything for the region.
There are her most recent two comments:
Too close to call in Hartlepool. Voters less concerned with Tory sleaze than Labour’s track record of corrupt complacency in its old stronghold. But historic dislike of Tories persists. Locals also doubt Tory biz credentials.
Tories don’t have Hartlepool in bag. Gold wallpaper has no cut through. But neither does vaccine “bounce”. Anti-Labour sentiment is palpable. But atmosphere here feels different to 2019 when I met endless Red Wall Tory switchers. In Hartlepool haven’t met even one. Seems v tight
If the Conservatives had won Hartlepool in 2019 it would only have been by a narrow majority.
So 'too close to call' currently would suggest little change from then.
No Labour to Conservative switchers isn't unexpected either - all those moving from Labour would have done so in 2019 either to BXP or Conservative.
So the key points continue to be what happens to the 2019 BXP voters and which party is able to motivate its 2019 voters to go and vote again.
I the Tories had won Hartlepool I n 2019 I wouldn't have been a narrow victory it would have been by thousands
Unlikely to have been more than two thousand, the Conservatives were too far behind for a big win - they needed a 9.2% swing to get any majority and that was more than the average swing in the other Cleveland constituencies or the Durham constituencies.
And two thousand votes is 'too close to call' and 'not in the bag' journo speak.
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul Sweepstake on Thursday's elections now open. Guess: Hartlepool 2nd place in Scotland Will Drakeford stay as FM in Wales West Midlands Tie-break: Labour’s projected national share of vote in local elections All completely free
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul Sweepstake on Thursday's elections now open. Guess: Hartlepool 2nd place in Scotland Will Drakeford stay as FM in Wales West Midlands Tie-break: Labour’s projected national share of vote in local elections All completely free
Hartlepool - Labour Scotland 2nd - Labour Drakeford to stay... West Mids - Conservative Labour 33%
Scientist casually says we’ll bring back masks in the winter, even if Covid has gone. Because they hinder flu
“I find discourse like this so worrying. If we want to create criminal public health sanctions for reduction of other diseases, we need a proper debate about benefits and costs. Not a casual aside and the assumption the state has this right.”
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul Sweepstake on Thursday's elections now open. Guess: Hartlepool 2nd place in Scotland Will Drakeford stay as FM in Wales West Midlands Tie-break: Labour’s projected national share of vote in local elections All completely free
Hartlepool - Labour Scotland 2nd - Labour Drakeford to stay... West Mids - Conservative Labour 33%
Scientist casually says we’ll bring back masks in the winter, even if Covid has gone. Because they hinder flu
“I find discourse like this so worrying. If we want to create criminal public health sanctions for reduction of other diseases, we need a proper debate about benefits and costs. Not a casual aside and the assumption the state has this right.”
I think more people may voluntarily wear masks when they are sick, like in the Far East. Pretty harmless really.
But you’re most infectious before you show symptoms...
Surely anyone with so much as a sniffle will work from home (if an option).
I am quite confident that masks will be gone by June. Compliance seems to have broken down on mass. Transport police don’t even bother trying to enforce it any more, or they’d be fining half to two thirds of passengers.
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
We Tories have a majority of 80, all that matters is what Tory voters think until 2024
Worse than that, isn't it? For the next few years, all that matters really is the views of Conservative MPs.
Now, it's true that the most likely reason MPs would dump the PM is a sense that victory in 2024 is in doubt, but even that transmission mechanism is a bit wonky.
But apart from his backbenchers, the only restraint on the PM is is own sense of shame... which seems to have gone missing a long time ago.
(To be clear, This Is A Bad Thing.)
Last night's thread was compelling and while I ignore @Scott_xP daily anti Boris rantings, @TSE was very interesting and explained many of the allegations against Boris and Carrie and, to be honest if proven, he will have no choice but to resign
Indeed, as the thread continued I became more certain that he is will be out of office sometime this year
All depends how much he wants to keep the job (despite the lack of cash)
I don’t know why he doesn’t do a deal now for his memoirs. Is it illegal? It would certainly look a lot better than asking for donors to pay his childcare
As we discussed last night he will get millions. Problem solved. Unless it’s not allowed
Can't a Tory donor be found to give Carrie a highly-paid non-job so she can pay for the nanny and the wallpaper? Look at George Osborne's 2016 sinecures (2016 being the number and the year).
I though the usual way this was resolved is through speaking opportunities.
Carrie is paid 100 k to go some place and give a speech.
Or - here's an idea - she learns to live within her means, as the rest of the population has to.
I suggested it because Cherie received money to give speeches whilst Tony Blair was premier.
Cherie was a working lawyer and quite a good one. She acted for a friend of mine in an employment claim. She wasn't getting paid for nothing. And if she spent money foolishly it was money she had earned herself.
"For a government struggling with the perception that lucrative opportunities are available if you know the right people — rules and merit be damned — not requiring an interrogation of Vennells and her senior colleagues under oath is, to put it lightly, not a great look.
Sub-postmasters and their families are not calling for an indiscriminate witch-hunt — that, after all, would make them no different from the faceless bureaucracy at the Post Office that pursued them so relentlessly without care for evidence or consequence. But “lessons learnt” without any repercussions for those who necessitated those lessons in the first place is not justice; it is absolution. We need a full, statutory inquiry, empowered by the state to hear all pertinent evidence and testimony."
We have a full inquiry into Grenfell, and I don't think there's much difference as far as 'lives ruined' are concerned. Even if a number of middle rank Post Office staff are convicted of perjury, that still doesn't absolve the people at the top who must have had questions.
But, did they perjure themselves? They were assured that the software was working. They believed the assurances. They lacked the competence to detect software errors.
They were gullible. They were stupid. But, these are not crimes.
Vennells was clearly over-promoted -- though she was lauded at the time as a successful working-class woman leading an important company. She was gullible. She was stupid. These are not crimes.
Any public inquiry will conclude that no crimes were committed by the Post Office and its management. Gross incompetence is not a crime.
I am puzzled as to why the buckets of shit are not being poured over the software compare (Fujitsu) that supplied the crappy software that made the errors.
They are more to blame that the wretched Vennells. They supplied the product that caused the problems, and they repeatedly assured Vennells and the Post Office that there was no problem.
Read the emails Vennells sent- she was not asking for issues with the software to be highlighted but to hidden from her.
Vennells has (properly) resigned from her Directorships -- IMO she should have done so much earlier.
She is incompetent and a poor manager. She has a very serious miscarriage of justice on her conscience.
But, she has a degree in Russian and French. She (probably) has zero understanding of software.
The Post Office was repeatedly told by Fujitsu that there was no problem with the software.
I suspect Vennells lacked the skillset, the competence and the curiosity to get to the bottom of the problem. She has poor leadership skills, and she should certainly have her CBE taken away from her.
But, at the heart of this, it is Fujitsu who made the catastrophic mistake, and denied making it. They are software experts, and they had the expertise to test their software. They should be held responsible.
My question is: why are Fujitsu not paying compensation? Why is it the UK taxpayer, through the Government?
I don't like Vennells & I am not defending her. But, surely Fujitsu should be pursued -- they seem to me to be more blameworthy.
I quite agree. The judges have referred the evidence of some of the Fujitsu employees for further investigation. But the Post Office presumably had a Head of IT. Was he/she another ignoramus who knew nothing about IT and did not have the wit to ask some pretty obvious and basic questions?
I am not an IT expert but pretty much all my cases have involved some serious interrogation of IT systems. You need the ability to ask basic and obvious questions and if you get waffle you don't understand you keep on asking until you do understand. If you cannot manage this much you are not, IMO, fit for anything much more than putting the bins out for collection.
There is nothing in this life so complicated that someone who understands it cannot explain it simply. And if they can't, one of two things is happening: either they don't understand it themselves or they are trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Any halfway competent manager - let alone a CEO - should be able to understand IT systems sufficiently, especially when this amount of money is being spent and when problems start appearing. And they should be getting good people working for them with the technical understanding they don't have.
We are far too willing to let people off the hook. These people are being paid good salaries to do their job properly not to behave like monkeys seeing, hearing, saying nothing.
As far as I am concerned Vennells should be in jail. She was the Chief Executive at the time when the Post Office ordered Second Sight to abandon their investigations and destroy any remaining paperwork one day before they were due to issue a damning report into the Horizon scandal. She clearly knew that the PO was at fault and that people were having their lives ruined because of a failure by the Post Office and yet she chose to suppress those findings and allow people to remain in jail or eventually commit suicide rather than admit the Post Office got it wrong.
She deserves no sympathy or understanding for this. She deserve to be prosecuted.
If that is true -- that is, if Vennells was responsible for the cover-up -- then I agree with you.
For Vennells to go to jail, she has to be guilt of more than just gross incompetence.
Yes - but people who are grossly incompetent need to suffer some penalty eg loss of job, honours, repayment of bonuses, contributions to compensation etc. Most of the time the behaviour is not criminal so everyone shrugs their shoulder. But other sanctions are available and we simply do not make judicious use of these to send the message that actions have consequences - that serious incompetence has adverse consequences. Rather we seem to promote and reward serial failures.
And also, the people who appoint the grossly incompetent.
After all, Vennells simply accepted a job she was not competent to do, but there was a board who appointed her as a competent individual.
As we are spraying around the blame, let's not forget the Church of England who have been defending Vennells to the hilt. Here is the Bish of St Albans
One of the significant factors in this case is that there is a difference between allegations made against Post Office Limited and allegations of personal wrongdoing by Ms Vennells. I entirely appreciate that the Chief Executive Officer is the lead officer in an organisation. However, the law - which I must apply when dealing with complaints against priests - only allows me to act on the basis of allegations, supported with evidence, of wrongdoing by the priest. My view, taken following legal advice, is that I cannot simply impute to Ms Vennells all of the failures found to have been committed by Post Office Limited. If I were to do so, I would be making assumptions about the management practices at Post Office Limited, and of Ms Vennells’ state of knowledge throughout the period of this dispute.
Justin Welby has found plenty of time to criticise all & sundry ... but it is always so difficult to criticise one of your own.
Welby has failed. Not a peep about Vennells, as far as I am aware.
Scientist casually says we’ll bring back masks in the winter, even if Covid has gone. Because they hinder flu
“I find discourse like this so worrying. If we want to create criminal public health sanctions for reduction of other diseases, we need a proper debate about benefits and costs. Not a casual aside and the assumption the state has this right.”
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul Sweepstake on Thursday's elections now open. Guess: Hartlepool 2nd place in Scotland Will Drakeford stay as FM in Wales West Midlands Tie-break: Labour’s projected national share of vote in local elections All completely free
Hartlepool - Labour Scotland 2nd - Labour Drakeford to stay... West Mids - Conservative Labour 33%
Hatlepool - Con 2nd in Scotland in seats - Con Drakeford - yes West Midlands - Lab Labour 35%
Scientist casually says we’ll bring back masks in the winter, even if Covid has gone. Because they hinder flu
“I find discourse like this so worrying. If we want to create criminal public health sanctions for reduction of other diseases, we need a proper debate about benefits and costs. Not a casual aside and the assumption the state has this right.”
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
No, I don't think so.
Being coldly logical about it I think a Royal Yacht will easily deliver a positive rate of return to the Exchequer.
If the government is serious about cutting crime it should be spending that money on the criminal justice system so victims and defendants don't have to wait 3 or 4 or more years before a case comes to court. Or in training the police and prosecutors in how to comply with the disclosure rules in criminal trials so that we don't get miscarriages like the Post Office case or the collapse of the Serco fraud trial or the many other criminal cases which have collapsed because of this failure. That would provide a much better rate of return and actually do something to deal with crime which is meant to be one of this government's priorities.
But no opportunities for champagne quaffing so obviously nothing will be done.
To be fair to the police, the Post Office were their own prosecutors. Unless I've seriously misread Private Eye!
Correct. These were private prosecutions which continued long after concerns about Horizon were known at every level in the organisation. Fraud prosecutions went from a handful a year to the large relative numbers seen with the scandal.
They were also at a very much greater level than in pre-Horizon days, which surely must have led to head-scratching among management. Why are we employing so many crooks now, when we apparently didn't in the past? Or, how much was siphoned off in the past, if so much is being siphoned off now? So, was there any tightening up of the recruitment process for sub-postmasters? If not, why not?
Alternately, the new Horizon system was doing exactly what it was intended to do, which was to highlight the levels of fraud that had previously gone un-noticed.
If you start from that viewpoint, the way things played out start to make some sense, and partially explains how they managed to go too far down the rabbit hole before they realised what they’d done.
It explains why they started. It does not explain why they continued.
It does not explain the failures to comply with the criminal disclosure rules. It does not explain the cover up of the reports showing the Horizon system was flawed. It does not explain the lies told to the sub-postmasters.
These were deliberate actions by people who knew that what they were doing was wrong.
Exactly.
But after you’ve got a couple of people committing suicide or in jail, are you going to admit you fcuked up, or carry on and hope you’re right? (Obviously I don’t mean *you*, you’d have been the one banging loudly on Ms Vennells’ office door!)
Quite. It takes courage to ask questions, to speak up, to question authority, to admit you don't know, to say that you have made a mistake.
Cowardice is one reason why matters go wrong and don't get sorted even when it is obvious something is amiss. Most people are too cowardly to challenge. (They won't see it like that: it'll be rationalised away as not wanting to put your job, career, family, mortgage on the line etc etc.) But brutally that is what it is. And it's because we reward the cowardly and do not reward the courageous that we get more of the former and far too little of the latter.
I was once told that the reason I got given all the difficult investigations and difficult conversations with the CEO was because I wasn't afraid of anyone. But it was also the reason I was unlikely to get to the very highest positions - I wasn't going to toe the party line just because ....
We all make our own decisions on where we will be on this continuum and this may change at different stages in our careers and life. But as a society I think we tend to reward the wrong things: the second-rate, the nodding donkeys, those without honour or shame or integrity, those who cannot see the wood for the trees. So that is what we get - and scandals like Grenfell and the Post Office and Operation Midland and much else besides are the consequence of that.
Additionally, there is no problem with Ms Symmonds getting a job if she wants to decorate the flat at one go, rather than do a few rooms at a time.
She has one as Head of Something Or Other at an animal charity. Presumably her nightly exposure to Johnson on the vinegars was good preparation for working with gorillas.
No she doesn't - I do know about the animal welfare sector. She's a patron of the Conservative Animal Welfare Foundation, which is literally just lending her name to a voluntary campaign group (the counterpart to the Labour Animal Welfare Society), at a salary of £0.
As I said yesterday, the attempt to have a go at Johnson's partner as a proxy for attacking him is dodgy and has an element of misogyny. She's keen on animals, but to be fair he has quite a good record on the issue too (as I expect we shall see on Tuesday week in the Queen's Speech). Others may disagree, but if so they should criticise Johnson. not his partner who happens to be of similar mind on this.
So she doesn’t have a full time job, but still needs a full time nanny?
I don't know if she has a full-time job - just not in the animal welfare sector as Dura thought. I'm not especially concerned by them wanting a nanny and finding a Tory donor willing to pay for it, so long as it was properly declared and there's no suggestion that said donor expected a favour in return.
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
No, I don't think so.
Being coldly logical about it I think a Royal Yacht will easily deliver a positive rate of return to the Exchequer.
If the government is serious about cutting crime it should be spending that money on the criminal justice system so victims and defendants don't have to wait 3 or 4 or more years before a case comes to court. Or in training the police and prosecutors in how to comply with the disclosure rules in criminal trials so that we don't get miscarriages like the Post Office case or the collapse of the Serco fraud trial or the many other criminal cases which have collapsed because of this failure. That would provide a much better rate of return and actually do something to deal with crime which is meant to be one of this government's priorities.
But no opportunities for champagne quaffing so obviously nothing will be done.
To be fair to the police, the Post Office were their own prosecutors. Unless I've seriously misread Private Eye!
Correct. These were private prosecutions which continued long after concerns about Horizon were known at every level in the organisation. Fraud prosecutions went from a handful a year to the large relative numbers seen with the scandal.
They were also at a very much greater level than in pre-Horizon days, which surely must have led to head-scratching among management. Why are we employing so many crooks now, when we apparently didn't in the past? Or, how much was siphoned off in the past, if so much is being siphoned off now? So, was there any tightening up of the recruitment process for sub-postmasters? If not, why not?
Alternately, the new Horizon system was doing exactly what it was intended to do, which was to highlight the levels of fraud that had previously gone un-noticed.
If you start from that viewpoint, the way things played out start to make some sense, and partially explains how they managed to go too far down the rabbit hole before they realised what they’d done.
It explains why they started. It does not explain why they continued.
It does not explain the failures to comply with the criminal disclosure rules. It does not explain the cover up of the reports showing the Horizon system was flawed. It does not explain the lies told to the sub-postmasters.
These were deliberate actions by people who knew that what they were doing was wrong.
Exactly.
But after you’ve got a couple of people committing suicide or in jail, are you going to admit you fcuked up, or carry on and hope you’re right? (Obviously I don’t mean *you*, you’d have been the one banging loudly on Ms Vennells’ office door!)
Quite. It takes courage to ask questions, to speak up, to question authority, to admit you don't know, to say that you have made a mistake.
Cowardice is one reason why matters go wrong and don't get sorted even when it is obvious something is amiss. Most people are too cowardly to challenge. (They won't see it like that: it'll be rationalised away as not wanting to put your job, career, family, mortgage on the line etc etc.) But brutally that is what it is. And it's because we reward the cowardly and do not reward the courageous that we get more of the former and far too little of the latter.
I was once told that the reason I got given all the difficult investigations and difficult conversations with the CEO was because I wasn't afraid of anyone. But it was also the reason I was unlikely to get to the very highest positions - I wasn't going to toe the party line just because ....
We all make our own decisions on where we will be on this continuum and this may change at different stages in our careers and life. But as a society I think we tend to reward the wrong things: the second-rate, the nodding donkeys, those without honour or shame or integrity, those who cannot see the wood for the trees. So that is what we get - and scandals like Grenfell and the Post Office and Operation Midland and much else besides are the consequence of that.
It’s a constant in human history that many people who are prepared to brave bullets still lack moral courage.
‘It has been confirmed that there are mysterious vehicles flying through our skies with technological capabilities so advanced that we cannot comprehend what they are or how they do what they do. This seems like a big deal and I don't know why we aren't treating it like that.‘
Quite remarkable article from Laura K about Boris's lying that amazingly fails to mention the multiple times he's been sacked for lying. Instead we get a bizarre comparison with Stevie Jobs.
‘It has been confirmed that there are mysterious vehicles flying through our skies with technological capabilities so advanced that we cannot comprehend what they are or how they do what they do. This seems like a big deal and I don't know why we aren't treating it like that.‘
I think maybe for two reasons, as moonshine's excellent New Yorker article explains ; there've been several decades of attempts to play the sightings down for reasons of undermining confidence in airspace security, and now that understanding that some of these aerial phenomena are genuinely inexplicable is more familiar and widespread, and somewhat less mocked, our current scientific understanding is still far too incompatible with them for much to made of that for now.
I agree on the general point , though, that the level of public ridicule doesn't match the facts - if it ever did.
‘It has been confirmed that there are mysterious vehicles flying through our skies with technological capabilities so advanced that we cannot comprehend what they are or how they do what they do. This seems like a big deal and I don't know why we aren't treating it like that.‘
I think maybe for two reasons, as moonshine's excellent New Yorker article explains ; there've been several decades of attempts to play this down for reasons of undermining confidence in airspace security, and now that understanding that these aerial phenomena are inexplicable is more familiar and widespread, and somewhat less mocked, our current scientific understanding is still far too incompatible with them for much to made of that for now.
I agree on the general point , though, that the public ridicule doesn't match the facts.
Some people are claiming they are hyper advanced chinese drones. Or projected holograms. Or ‘birds’
No - it's an utter waste of money. A vanity project for a vainglorious government.
No, I don't think so.
Being coldly logical about it I think a Royal Yacht will easily deliver a positive rate of return to the Exchequer.
If the government is serious about cutting crime it should be spending that money on the criminal justice system so victims and defendants don't have to wait 3 or 4 or more years before a case comes to court. Or in training the police and prosecutors in how to comply with the disclosure rules in criminal trials so that we don't get miscarriages like the Post Office case or the collapse of the Serco fraud trial or the many other criminal cases which have collapsed because of this failure. That would provide a much better rate of return and actually do something to deal with crime which is meant to be one of this government's priorities.
But no opportunities for champagne quaffing so obviously nothing will be done.
To be fair to the police, the Post Office were their own prosecutors. Unless I've seriously misread Private Eye!
Correct. These were private prosecutions which continued long after concerns about Horizon were known at every level in the organisation. Fraud prosecutions went from a handful a year to the large relative numbers seen with the scandal.
They were also at a very much greater level than in pre-Horizon days, which surely must have led to head-scratching among management. Why are we employing so many crooks now, when we apparently didn't in the past? Or, how much was siphoned off in the past, if so much is being siphoned off now? So, was there any tightening up of the recruitment process for sub-postmasters? If not, why not? </ <blockquote class="UserQuote">
‘It has been confirmed that there are mysterious vehicles flying through our skies with technological capabilities so advanced that we cannot comprehend what they are or how they do what they do. This seems like a big deal and I don't know why we aren't treating it like that.‘
I think there is a reasonable likelihood that Boris will step down after the country opens up again. Claim to be the PM who led the vaccine programme and start on the newly re-opened speech circuit making millions.
He has just procured and had painted (at vast expense and with taxpayers' money) a VVIP A321 - not to be confused with VIP A330 and its million quid paint job. There is zero chance he (and FLOTUK) are going to relinquish the post-covid junkets in that to the Goldman-Sachs Elf and his Mrs any time soon.
I agree. Giving up PM to ponce around on the speech circuit and write memoirs? No. Johnson won't go unless he has to. Health. Polling collapse. Criminal charges. GE defeat.
Yes. Possibly true
And while the present rumours look bad for him, remember what Sturgeon has survived. British politics is quite forgiving
Or indeed what Blair survived.
I think Carrie may soon come to be the nation's favourite hate figure, as Cherie was.
I don't think the public take a view on PM spouses like May Wilson, Denis Thatcher, Norma Major, Sarah Brown, Samantha Cameron or Peter May. It is the ones influencing government policy without electoral accountability that rightly get the media interested.
What’s your thoughts on Hartlepool and Tees mayor now ? After the weekend polls ?
I still think Hartlepool will be a clear Con win but I'm slightly less sure than I was.
Ben Houchen is nailed on to win in any case, I think. Even I'd probably vote for him.
Yep, I would too. I think he’s done a grand job and deserves a second term.
Journalist Sherelle Jacobs, who I follow on Twitter, was up in Hartlepool and found no enthusiasm for labour at all but it was not, or didn’t have the feel, of 2019. She called the landslide in the red wall well before the 2019 election but thinks this is different. I respect her commentary.
If labour do well Thursday it should be no comfort to,them as it will all be due to Tory implosion and little to do with their offer. Starmer and Rayner will likely never come to Hartlepool again after the end of next week and National labour care little for the inhabitants only their votes. Labour have learnt nothing from the fall of the red wall and if it goes back to them due to Johnson’s numerous flaws as a politician then they have no reason to do anything for the region.
There are her most recent two comments:
Too close to call in Hartlepool. Voters less concerned with Tory sleaze than Labour’s track record of corrupt complacency in its old stronghold. But historic dislike of Tories persists. Locals also doubt Tory biz credentials.
Tories don’t have Hartlepool in bag. Gold wallpaper has no cut through. But neither does vaccine “bounce”. Anti-Labour sentiment is palpable. But atmosphere here feels different to 2019 when I met endless Red Wall Tory switchers. In Hartlepool haven’t met even one. Seems v tight
If the Conservatives had won Hartlepool in 2019 it would only have been by a narrow majority.
So 'too close to call' currently would suggest little change from then.
No Labour to Conservative switchers isn't unexpected either - all those moving from Labour would have done so in 2019 either to BXP or Conservative.
So the key points continue to be what happens to the 2019 BXP voters and which party is able to motivate its 2019 voters to go and vote again.
I saw on LinkedIn the chancellor, Ben Houchen and the Tory candidate were at a TT Electronics factory in the seat on Friday really pushing the jobs, prosperity and business side.
Hartlepool May be remote but it isn’t humberside or Norfolk remoteness. It is close to the A19 and A1. There is no reason it cannot benefit from the industry that is looking to come to the region.
I agree on BXP voters. People,automatically assume they are all Tories or will go to the Tories but many of them came from labour in places like this. These are voters that labour now desperately want to woo but were labelled thick, uneducated, voting against their own interests and racist by many labour supporters and remain supporters over brexit.
If I lived there I’d vote Tory to send a message.
It is always possible some of the brexit vote will stay with the BP in its new form. Reform are running a candidate and Tice has campaigned in Hartlepool. Tice has made the offer very distinct from the tories and labour.
Imagine labour squeaking home by 500 and the Reform candidate polling a couple of thousand.
Personally I would be skeptical of polls that showed a labour resurgence. The narrative of some the paymasters is that Boris's flat is an important story and so its no surprise to me that some polls have a swing to labour in the wake of all the reporting on this really really important story. Flatlining polls make fools out of people screeching about curtains/
A bit like some US pollsters had Biden sweeping Ohio, Iowa, Florida and Texas for months. Some sponsors of polls had a narrative and it certainly wasn't Trump holding on in these states. These people are human.
It only is his, or any of ours, business, if it is indeed the case that the PM sought someone else to pay for that nanny, as public officials being supported in such a way opens them up to possibilities of being influenced by whoever pays.
If he didn't it is not our business, but if he did it is.
‘the UFO stuff is pretty obviously some kind attempt to confuse foreign powers into thinking we have some advanced weapon capability that we are testing’
I do not expect him to go on his own accord, but if he has broken the ministerial code and the other enquiries condemn him then he will have to resign whenever that occurs
The Big Problem with that argument is "if he has broken the ministerial code". Patel broke the code. Officially. Formally. But the final arbiter is the PM, who dismissed the report and reversed the decision.
Once the formal report into Boris Johnson's egregious and now seemingly multiple breaches of the code is published, the final arbiter is the PM who will dismiss the report and reverse the decision.
In any other walk of life, the person under investigation would not be allowed to simply reverse the official report into their transgressions. In Boris world, not only can he, but he will do so with the full support of delusional fanboi wazzocks on here.
Plague might turn out to be only the third biggest story of 2020, behind the arrival of true artificial intelligence and the confirmation of aliens visiting earth. That’s quite a newsy year
What’s your thoughts on Hartlepool and Tees mayor now ? After the weekend polls ?
Ben Houchen couldn't lose the mayoral election if he got his cock out on the street started plucking it and shouting "willy banjo". His re-election was nailed on as soon as Labour chose not to run a candidate against him and instead imposed the Jessie Joe Jacobs.
As for the Pools by-election I have heard ground reports that its a rerun of Copeland.
Is the proposal to spend £200 million on another Royal Yacht a serious one?
If so, just no.
The Royal Family can buy their own bloody yacht. And government ministers don't need one.
There’s actually decent evidence that the “royal yacht” is the most effective form of trade promotion we used to have. The Queen used to use Britannia for a couple of weeks a year to justify the name and then the rest of the timeout was a working ship
Of your many transient neuroses this is the most bizarre.
I’m so bored of Scotland, wallpaper, fucking Hartlepool, and possibly dead postmen
ALIENS ARE HERE is much better. You have to admit
Not really interested in aliens per se, but if they have been here for millennia and have hi def video of everything that has ever happened, we can talk.
Additionally, there is no problem with Ms Symmonds getting a job if she wants to decorate the flat at one go, rather than do a few rooms at a time.
She has one as Head of Something Or Other at an animal charity. Presumably her nightly exposure to Johnson on the vinegars was good preparation for working with gorillas.
No she doesn't - I do know about the animal welfare sector. She's a patron of the Conservative Animal Welfare Foundation, which is literally just lending her name to a voluntary campaign group (the counterpart to the Labour Animal Welfare Society), at a salary of £0.
As I said yesterday, the attempt to have a go at Johnson's partner as a proxy for attacking him is dodgy and has an element of misogyny. She's keen on animals, but to be fair he has quite a good record on the issue too (as I expect we shall see on Tuesday week in the Queen's Speech). Others may disagree, but if so they should criticise Johnson. not his partner who happens to be of similar mind on this.
I believe she is head of PR for whatever the Goldsmith family charity is called (Aspinal’s zoo but more focused on breeding and reintroducing endangered animals)
Plague might turn out to be only the third biggest story of 2020, behind the arrival of true artificial intelligence and the confirmation of aliens visiting earth. That’s quite a newsy year
Are the alients visiting Earth or visiting America?
‘the UFO stuff is pretty obviously some kind attempt to confuse foreign powers into thinking we have some advanced weapon capability that we are testing’
Of your many transient neuroses this is the most bizarre.
I’m so bored of Scotland, wallpaper, fucking Hartlepool, and possibly dead postmen
ALIENS ARE HERE is much better. You have to admit
Not really interested in aliens per se, but if they have been here for millennia and have hi def video of everything that has ever happened, we can talk.
Star Wars, and many sci-fi movies and TV shows, have taught us that as technology increases our video quality for some reason decreases.
Of your many transient neuroses this is the most bizarre.
I’m so bored of Scotland, wallpaper, fucking Hartlepool, and possibly dead postmen
ALIENS ARE HERE is much better. You have to admit
We discussed this briefly some days ago. @moonshine is, ISTR, your go to guy for it.
Yes, he got me on to it. I am now waaaaay down the rabbit hole. It’s brilliant
Raised more questions than answers for me. Which is always intriguing.
Me too. I kinda agree with THIS dude
‘This is one of those topics where I am constantly trying to maintain a high level of skepticism, and stuff keeps coming out where I don't get to "believer" status, but creep a little bit closer.’
I think there are just some very sick people about.
The tree used for the nest at Loch Garten was attacked when it was the home of the first ospreys returning to the UK. Some psychotic ghillies and gamekeepers in Scotland.
Plague might turn out to be only the third biggest story of 2020, behind the arrival of true artificial intelligence and the confirmation of aliens visiting earth. That’s quite a newsy year
Are the alients visiting Earth or visiting America?
For some reason, they always choose to visit America.
Plague might turn out to be only the third biggest story of 2020, behind the arrival of true artificial intelligence and the confirmation of aliens visiting earth. That’s quite a newsy year
We might as well combine them. Aliens brought the virus, not Wuhan bats or otherwise, and the only reason we know that is because they communicated with our new nascent AIs.
What’s your thoughts on Hartlepool and Tees mayor now ? After the weekend polls ?
Ben Houchen couldn't lose the mayoral election if he got his cock out on the street started plucking it and shouting "willy banjo". His re-election was nailed on as soon as Labour chose not to run a candidate against him and instead imposed the Jessie Joe Jacobs.
As for the Pools by-election I have heard ground reports that its a rerun of Copeland.
Hopefully parts 1 and 2 of Copeland. Tories take a trad Labour seat in a by-election. Less than 4 months later they lose their majority in a GE.
Plague might turn out to be only the third biggest story of 2020, behind the arrival of true artificial intelligence and the confirmation of aliens visiting earth. That’s quite a newsy year
Are the alients visiting Earth or visiting America?
For some reason, they always choose to visit America.
After due research they've obviously decided that it's the nation most deserving of a programme of anal probing.
Of your many transient neuroses this is the most bizarre.
I’m so bored of Scotland, wallpaper, fucking Hartlepool, and possibly dead postmen
ALIENS ARE HERE is much better. You have to admit
Not really interested in aliens per se, but if they have been here for millennia and have hi def video of everything that has ever happened, we can talk.
I hope they have no footage of me from the evening of 25th June 2000 in Vienna.
Comments
If you start from that viewpoint, the way things played out start to make some sense, and partially explains how they managed to go too far down the rabbit hole before they realised what they’d done.
For Vennells to go to jail, she has to be guilt of more than just gross incompetence.
Not something we need, something we want.
It would bring jobs to Cammell Laird and would be available for many different uses
It does not explain the failures to comply with the criminal disclosure rules. It does not explain the cover up of the reports showing the Horizon system was flawed. It does not explain the lies told to the sub-postmasters.
These were deliberate actions by people who knew that what they were doing was wrong.
“I find discourse like this so worrying. If we want to create criminal public health sanctions for reduction of other diseases, we need a proper debate about benefits and costs. Not a casual aside and the assumption the state has this right.”
https://twitter.com/justrowena/status/1388782286540353536?s=21
Get stuffed, four eyes
Britain Elects
@BritainElects
·
3m
Scottish parliament voting intention(s):
Constituency:
SNP: 49% (+1)
LAB: 21% (+1)
CON: 19% (-2)
LDEM: 9% (+1)
List:
SNP: 37% (-5)
CON: 22% (-)
LDEM: 17% (-)
GRN: 9% (+1)
LDEM: 8% (-)
ALBA: 4% (+4)
REFUK: 1% (-)
via
@BMGResearch
, 27 - 30 Apr
Chgs. w/ 19 Mar
I think people outside the US are largely ignorant of this change in narrative, which in of itself should be of material interest to political observers. This is no longer a taboo topic in the US and it is fast moving up the ladder of importance to policy makers, the media and the public.
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6251336408001#sp=show-clips
I don't know whether the accounts for each Post Office are recorded separately or collectively.
I'd still like to know what, if any, changes to the recruitment process were made.
But after you’ve got a couple of people committing suicide or in jail, are you going to admit you fcuked up, or carry on and hope you’re right? (Obviously I don’t mean *you*, you’d have been the one banging loudly on Ms Vennells’ office door!)
@JohnRentoul
Sweepstake on Thursday's elections now open. Guess:
Hartlepool
2nd place in Scotland
Will Drakeford stay as FM in Wales
West Midlands
Tie-break: Labour’s projected national share of vote in local elections
All completely free
And two thousand votes is 'too close to call' and 'not in the bag' journo speak.
Not on seats
Yes
Lose
34%
Scotland 2nd - Labour
Drakeford to stay...
West Mids - Conservative
Labour 33%
Surely anyone with so much as a sniffle will work from home (if an option).
I have not got a guage on how many Tory MPs have been going for Boris, apart from political frenemies.
After all, Vennells simply accepted a job she was not competent to do, but there was a board who appointed her as a competent individual.
As we are spraying around the blame, let's not forget the Church of England who have been defending Vennells to the hilt. Here is the Bish of St Albans
One of the significant factors in this case is that there is a difference between allegations made against Post Office Limited and allegations of personal wrongdoing by Ms Vennells. I entirely appreciate that the Chief Executive Officer is the lead officer in an organisation. However, the law - which I must apply when dealing with complaints against priests - only allows me to act on the basis of allegations, supported with evidence, of wrongdoing by the priest. My view, taken following legal advice, is that I cannot simply impute to Ms Vennells all of the failures found to have been committed by Post Office Limited. If I were to do so, I would be making assumptions about the management practices at Post Office Limited, and of Ms Vennells’ state of knowledge throughout the period of this dispute.
Justin Welby has found plenty of time to criticise all & sundry ... but it is always so difficult to criticise one of your own.
Welby has failed. Not a peep about Vennells, as far as I am aware.
2nd in Scotland in seats - Con
Drakeford - yes
West Midlands - Lab
Labour 35%
Cowardice is one reason why matters go wrong and don't get sorted even when it is obvious something is amiss. Most people are too cowardly to challenge. (They won't see it like that: it'll be rationalised away as not wanting to put your job, career, family, mortgage on the line etc etc.) But brutally that is what it is. And it's because we reward the cowardly and do not reward the courageous that we get more of the former and far too little of the latter.
I was once told that the reason I got given all the difficult investigations and difficult conversations with the CEO was because I wasn't afraid of anyone. But it was also the reason I was unlikely to get to the very highest positions - I wasn't going to toe the party line just because ....
We all make our own decisions on where we will be on this continuum and this may change at different stages in our careers and life. But as a society I think we tend to reward the wrong things: the second-rate, the nodding donkeys, those without honour or shame or integrity, those who cannot see the wood for the trees. So that is what we get - and scandals like Grenfell and the Post Office and Operation Midland and much else besides are the consequence of that.
That Kate Garraway Times Radio interview started a few minutes ago:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/radio
https://twitter.com/brokenbottleboy/status/1388800870545084416?s=20
BBC News - Bid to lure ospreys to new nest after chainsaw attack
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-56957549
@Theuniondivvie was lamenting it as well.
I think there are just some very sick people about.
https://twitter.com/mattwalshblog/status/1388175463634329607?s=21
https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1388628783893073922?s=21
I agree on the general point , though, that the level of public ridicule doesn't match the facts - if it ever did.
Anyway, we are not alone - in our obsession
‘I am obsessed with this story.’
https://twitter.com/evargastv/status/1388634880301543425?s=21
‘Former Sen. Harry Reid: I was told Lockheed Martin had UFO crash fragments’
https://twitter.com/salon/status/1388750862248448000?s=21
OK, America has gone mad
Imagine labour squeaking home by 500 and the Reform candidate polling a couple of thousand.
Nightmare for Johnson. Could well happen.
ALIENS ARE HERE is much better. You have to admit
A bit like some US pollsters had Biden sweeping Ohio, Iowa, Florida and Texas for months. Some sponsors of polls had a narrative and it certainly wasn't Trump holding on in these states. These people are human.
If he didn't it is not our business, but if he did it is.
@moonshine is, ISTR, your go to guy for it.
‘the UFO stuff is pretty obviously some kind attempt to confuse foreign powers into thinking we have some advanced weapon capability that we are testing’
https://twitter.com/lionel_trolling/status/1388505101485191169?s=21
Once the formal report into Boris Johnson's egregious and now seemingly multiple breaches of the code is published, the final arbiter is the PM who will dismiss the report and reverse the decision.
In any other walk of life, the person under investigation would not be allowed to simply reverse the official report into their transgressions. In Boris world, not only can he, but he will do so with the full support of delusional fanboi wazzocks on here.
As for the Pools by-election I have heard ground reports that its a rerun of Copeland.
Which is always intriguing.
‘This is one of those topics where I am constantly trying to maintain a high level of skepticism, and stuff keeps coming out where I don't get to "believer" status, but creep a little bit closer.’
https://twitter.com/matthewsaintcyr/status/1388517595318571010?s=21