#sajid david

[ministerforpeas]

Hunger Games: HomeSec Smashdown

First we had the Chancellors, now it's time for the Home Secretaries to battle to the death to become Britain's top HomeSec!

As you can see some people here have returned yet again from previous seasons! We also have a crazy cat Reform lady as well!

Who will win? Find out!!

Hopefully not Patel or Braverman

[hunrising]

Worse than far right conservatives, is far right conservatives of colour who were lucky enough to have parents that made it (got a house, a job, money to sustain a family, sent kids to the best schools) in a western country, and now they don’t feel others like them should get the same opportunities. It’s truly a whole different level of stupid, would be laughable if it weren’t so evil

[wankerwatch]

Commons Vote

On: Finance (No. 2) Bill: Third Reading

Ayes: 215 (98.6% Con, 0.9% Ind, 0.5% DUP) Noes: 19 (94.7% SNP, 5.3% PC) Absent: ~416

Likely Referenced Bill: Finance (No. 2) Act 2010

Description: A Bill to grant certain duties, to alter other duties, and to amend the law relating to the National Debt and the Public Revenue, and to make further provision in connection with finance.

Originating house: Commons Current house: Unassigned Bill Stage: Royal Assent

Individual Votes:

Ayes

Conservative (211 votes)

Aaron Bell Alan Mak Alberto Costa Alec Shelbrooke Alex Burghart Alex Chalk Alicia Kearns Alok Sharma Amanda Milling Andrew Griffith Andrew Jones Andrew Lewer Andrew Murrison Andrew Percy Andrew Selous Andy Carter Angela Richardson Anna Firth Anne Marie Morris Anne-Marie Trevelyan Anthony Browne Antony Higginbotham Ben Everitt Ben Spencer Ben Wallace Bernard Jenkin Bill Wiggin Bim Afolami Bob Blackman Bob Seely Brandon Lewis Caroline Ansell Caroline Nokes Charles Walker Cherilyn Mackrory Chris Clarkson Chris Grayling Chris Green Chris Philp Conor Burns Craig Tracey Craig Williams Damian Hinds Daniel Kawczynski Danny Kruger David Davis David Duguid David Jones David Rutley David Simmonds Dean Russell Dehenna Davison Derek Thomas Desmond Swayne Duncan Baker Edward Argar Edward Leigh Elizabeth Truss Elliot Colburn Esther McVey Felicity Buchan Fiona Bruce Gagan Mohindra Gareth Bacon Gareth Davies Gareth Johnson Gary Sambrook Gavin Williamson Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Gillian Keegan Graham Brady Graham Stuart Greg Hands Greg Smith Guy Opperman Harriett Baldwin Heather Wheeler Helen Whately Holly Mumby-Croft Huw Merriman Iain Duncan Smith Iain Stewart Jack Brereton Jack Lopresti Jackie Doyle-Price Jacob Rees-Mogg Jacob Young James Cartlidge James Cleverly James Davies James Duddridge James Sunderland James Wild Jane Hunt Jane Stevenson Jeremy Quin Jerome Mayhew Jo Churchill John Glen John Howell John Lamont Jonathan Djanogly Jonathan Gullis Julia Lopez Julian Lewis Julian Smith Julian Sturdy Justin Tomlinson Katherine Fletcher Kelly Tolhurst Kemi Badenoch Kevin Hollinrake Kieran Mullan Kit Malthouse Laura Farris Laura Trott Lee Rowley Leo Docherty Lia Nici Liam Fox Lisa Cameron Louie French Lucy Frazer Luke Hall Marcus Jones Mark Fletcher Mark Francois Mark Garnier Mark Logan Martin Vickers Matt Hancock Matt Warman Matthew Offord Mel Stride Michael Ellis Michael Fabricant Michael Gove Michael Tomlinson Mike Freer Mike Wood Mims Davies Neil O'Brien Nick Fletcher Nick Gibb Nicola Richards Nigel Huddleston Paul Beresford Paul Holmes Paul Howell Pauline Latham Penny Mordaunt Peter Aldous Peter Bottomley Philip Dunne Philip Hollobone Priti Patel Ranil Jayawardena Rebecca Harris Rebecca Pow Rehman Chishti Richard Bacon Richard Drax Richard Fuller Rob Butler Robbie Moore Robert Buckland Robert Courts Robert Goodwill Robert Halfon Robert Largan Robert Syms Robin Millar Robin Walker Royston Smith Sajid Javid Sally-Ann Hart Saqib Bhatti Sara Britcliffe Sarah Dines Scott Mann Selaine Saxby Shailesh Vara Sheryll Murray Simon Baynes Simon Clarke Simon Fell Simon Hart Simon Hoare Simon Jupp Stephen Metcalfe Steve Baker Steve Brine Steve Tuckwell Stuart Andrew Suzanne Webb Theo Clarke Theresa May Theresa Villiers Thérèse Coffey Tobias Ellwood Tom Hunt Tom Pursglove Tom Randall Tom Tugendhat Tracey Crouch Vicky Ford Victoria Atkins Victoria Prentis Wendy Morton Will Quince William Cash

Independent (2 votes)

Mark Menzies William Wragg

Democratic Unionist Party (1 vote)

Jim Shannon

Noes

Scottish National Party (18 votes)

Allan Dorans Amy Callaghan Angela Crawley Anne McLaughlin Brendan O'Hara Chris Law Chris Stephens David Linden Deidre Brock Joanna Cherry John Nicolson Kirsty Blackman Marion Fellows Owen Thompson Peter Grant Philippa Whitford Richard Thomson Stewart Malcolm McDonald

Plaid Cymru (1 vote)

Hywel Williams

[53rdcenturyhero]

UK politics. Not available MP for next parliament, they're not standing for election. Source ITV 24 May 2024.

How I found out my own MP is going to not campaign. Some voices who speak up with relative sense will not be there in the next parliament.

Conservative

– Adam Afriyie, Windsor (MP since 2005; majority 20,079)

– Nickie Aiken, Cities of London & Westminster (MP since 2019; majority 3,953)

– Lucy Allan, Telford (MP since 2015; majority 10,941)

– Stuart Andrew, Pudsey (MP since 2010; majority 3,517)

– Richard Bacon, South Norfolk (MP since 2001; majority 21,275)

– John Baron, Basildon & Billericay (MP since 2001; majority 20,412)

– Sir Paul Beresford, Mole Valley (MP since 1997; majority 12,041)

– Sir Graham Brady, Altrincham & Sale West (MP since 1997; majority 6,139)

– Steve Brine, Winchester (MP since 2010; majority 985)

– Lisa Cameron, East Kilbride, Strathaven & Lesmahagow (elected as SNP MP in 2015; majority 13,322; defected to Conservatives in 2023)

– Andy Carter, Warrington South (MP since 2019; majority 2,010)

– Sir Bill Cash, Stone (previously MP for Stafford 1984-97, then Stone since 1997; majority 19,945)

– Jo Churchill, Bury St Edmunds (MP since 2015; majority 24,988)

– Greg Clark, Tunbridge Wells (MP since 2005; majority 14,645)

– Chris Clarkson, Heywood & Middleton (MP since 2019; majority 663)

Dame Tracey Crouch, Chatham & Aylesford (MP since 2010; majority 18,540)

– Dehenna Davison, Bishop Auckland (MP since 2019; majority 7,962)

– Jonathan Djanogly, Huntingdon (MP since 2001; majority 19,383)

– Sir James Duddridge, Rochford & Southend East (MP since 2005; majority 12,286)

– Philip Dunne, Ludlow (MP since 2005; majority 23,648)

– Sir Michael Ellis, Northampton North (MP since 2010; majority 5,507)

– George Eustice, Camborne & Redruth (MP since 2010; majority 8,700)

– Sir David Evennett, Bexleyheath & Crayford (MP since 2005; majority 13,103)

Mike Freer, Finchley & Golders Green (MP since 2010; majority 6,562)

– Nick Gibb, Bognor Regis & Littlehampton (MP since 1997; majority 22,503)

– Jo Gideon, Stoke-on-Trent Central (MP since 2019; majority 670)

– Michael Gove, Surrey Health (MP since 2005; majority 18,349)

– Sir Robert Goodwill, Scarborough & Whitby (MP since 2005; majority 10,270)

– Chris Grayling, Epsom & Ewell (MP since 2001; majority 17,873)

– James Grundy, Leigh (MP since 2019; majority 1,965)

– Robert Halfon, Harlow (MP since 2010; majority 14,063)

– Stephen Hammond, Wimbledon (MP since 2005; majority 628)

majority 1,805)

– Sir Sajid Javid, Bromsgrove (MP since 2010; majority 23,106)

– David Jones, Clwyd West (MP since 2005; majority 6,747)

– Sir Greg Knight, East Yorkshire (previously MP for Derby North 1983-97, then East Yorkshire since 2001; majority 22,787)

– Kwasi Kwarteng, Spelthorne (MP since 2010; majority 18,393)

– Dame Eleanor Laing, Epping Forest (MP since 1997; majority 22,173)

– Pauline Latham, Mid Derbyshire (MP since 2010; majority 15,385)

– Sir Brandon Lewis, Great Yarmouth (MP since 2010; majority 17,663)

– Tim Loughton, East Worthing & Shoreham (MP since 1997; majority 7,474)

– Craig Mackinlay, South Thanet (MP since 2015; majority 10,587)

– Theresa May, Maidenhead (MP since 1997; majority 18,846)

Stephen McPartland, Stevenage (MP since 2010; majority 8,562)

– Huw Merriman, Bexhill & Battle (MP since 2015; majority 26,059)

– Kieran Mullan, Crewe & Nantwich (MP since 2019; majority 8,508)

– Sir Bob Neill, Bromley & Chislehurst (MP since 2006; majority 10,891)

– Matthew Offord, Hendon (MP since 2010; majority 4,230)

– Mark Pawsey, Rugby (MP since 2010; majority 13,447)

– Sir Mike Penning, Hemel Hempstead (MP since 2005; majority 14,563)

– Andrew Percy, Brigg & Goole (MP since 2010; majority 21,941)

– Will Quince, Colchester (MP since 2015; majority 9,423)

– Dominic Raab, Esher & Walton (MP since 2010; majority 2,743)

– Sir John Redwood, Wokingham (MP since 1987; majority 7,383)

– Nicola Richards, West Bromwich East (MP since 2019; majority 1,593)

– Douglas Ross, Moray (MP since 2017; majority 513)

– Paul Scully, Sutton & Cheam (MP since 2015; majority 8,351)

– Sir Alok Sharma, Reading West (MP since 2010; majority 4,117)

– Chloe Smith, Norwich North (MP since 2009; majority 4,738)

– Henry Smith, Crawley (MP since 2010; majority 8,360)

– Royston Smith, Southampton Itchen (MP since 2015; majority 4,498)

– Bob Stewart, Beckenham (MP since 2010; majority 14,258)

- Sir Gary Streeter, Devon South West (previously MP for Plymouth Sutton 1992-97, then Devon South West since 1997; majority 21,430)

– Edward Timpson, Eddisbury (previously MP for Crewe & Nantwich 2008-2017, then Eddisbury since 2019; majority 18,443)

– Sir Charles Walker, Broxbourne (MP since 2005; majority 19,807)

– Robin Walker, Worcester (MP since 2010; majority 6,758)

– Ben Wallace, Wyre & Preston North (previously MP for Lancaster & Wyre 2005-10, then Wyre & Preston North since 2010; majority 16,781)

– Jamie Wallis, Bridgend (MP since 2019; majority 1,157)

– Craig Whittaker, Calder Valley (MP since 2010; majority 5,774)

– Nadhim Zahawi, Stratford-on-Avon (MP since 2010; majority 19,972)

Labour

– Dame Margaret Beckett, Derby South (previously MP for Lincoln 1974-79, then Derby South since 1983; majority 6,019)

– Paul Blomfield, Sheffield Central (MP since 2010; majority 27,273)

– Sir Ben Bradshaw, Exeter (MP since 1997; majority 10,403)

- Karen Buck, Westminster North (previously MP for Regent’s Park & Kensington North 1997-2010, then Westminster North since 2010; majority 10,759)

– Jon Cruddas, Dagenham & Rainham (previously MP for Dagenham 2001-10, then Dagenham & Rainham since 2010; majority 293)

– Alex Cunningham, Stockton North (MP since 2010; majority 1,027)

– Wayne David, Caerphilly (MP since 2001; majority 6,833)

– Natalie Elphicke, Dover (elected as Conservative MP in 2019; majority 12,278; defected to Labour in 2024)

- Colleen Fletcher, Coventry North East (MP since 2015; majority 7,692)

- Yvonne Fovargue, Makerfield (MP since 2010; majority 4,740)

– Margaret Greenwood, Wirral West (MP since 2015; majority 3,003)

– Harriet Harman, Camberwell & Peckham (previously MP for Peckham 1982-97, then Camberwell & Peckham since 1997; majority 33,780)

– Dame Margaret Hodge, Barking (MP since 1994; majority 15,427)

- Sir George Howarth, Knowsley (previously MP for Knowsley North 1986-97, then Knowsley North & Sefton East 1997-2010, then Knowsley since 2010; majority 39,942)

– Kevan Jones, North Durham (MP since 2001; majority 4,742)

– Holly Lynch, Halifax (MP since 2015; majority 2,569)

– Ian Mearns, Gateshead (MP since 2010; majority 7,200)

– Dan Poulter, Central Suffolk & North Ipswich (elected as Conservative MP in 2010; majority 23,391; defected to Labour in 2024)

– Christina Rees, Neath (MP since 2015; majority 5,637)

- Barry Sheerman, Huddersfield (previously MP for Huddersfield East 1979-83, then Huddersfield since 1983; majority 9,437)

– Alan Whitehead, Southampton Test (MP since 1997; majority 6,213)

– Dame Rosie Winterton, Doncaster Central (MP since 1997; majority 2,278)

SNP

– Mhairi Black, Paisley & Renfrewshire South (MP since 2015; majority 10,679)

– Ian Blackford, Ross, Skye & Lochaber (MP since 2015; majority 9,443)

– Douglas Chapman, Dunfermline & West Fife (MP since 2015; majority 10,699)

– Angela Crawley, Lanark & Hamilton East (MP since 2015; majority 5,187)

– Patrick Grady, Glasgow North (MP since 2015; majority 5,601)

– Peter Grant, Glenrothes (MP since 2015; majority 11,757)

– Stewart Hosie, Dundee East (MP since 2005; majority 13,375)

– John McNally, Falkirk (MP since 2015; majority 14,948)

– Philippa Whitford, Central Ayrshire (MP since 2015; majority 5,304)

Sinn Fein

– Mickey Brady, Newry & Armagh (MP since 2015; majority 9,287)

– Michelle Gildernew, Fermanagh & South Tyrone (MP for seat from 2001-2015 and since 2017; majority 57)

– Francie Molloy, Mid Ulster (MP since 2013; majority 9,537)

Green

– Caroline Lucas, Brighton Pavilion (MP since 2010; majority 19,940)

Plaid Cymru - one

– Hywel Williams, Arfon (previously MP for Caernarfon 2001-10, then Arfon since 2010; majority 2,781)

Independent - seven

– Crispin Blunt, Reigate (MP since 1997; formerly Conservative; majority 18,310)

– Nick Brown, Newcastle upon Tyne East (MP since 1983; formerly Labour; majority 15,463)

– Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, Lagan Valley (MP since 1997; formerly DUP; 2019 majority 6,499)

- Julian Knight, Solihull (MP since 2015; formerly Conservative; majority 21,273)

– Conor McGinn, St Helens North (MP since 2015; formerly Labour; majority 12,209)

– Mark Menzies, Fylde (MP since 2010; formerly Conservative; majority 16,611)

– William Wragg, Hazel Grove (MP since 2015; formerly Conservative; majority 4,423

[olko71]

New Post has been published on All about business online

New Post has been published on https://yaroreviews.info/2024/02/cameron-government-knew-post-office-ditched-horizon-it-investigation

Cameron government knew Post Office ditched Horizon IT investigation

By Andy Verity

BBC economics correspondent

David Cameron’s government knew the Post Office had ditched a secret investigation that might have helped wrongly accused postmasters prove their innocence, the BBC can reveal.

The 2016 investigation trawled 17 years of records to find out how often, and why, cash accounts on the Horizon IT system had been tampered with remotely.

Ministers were told an investigation was happening.

But after postmasters began legal action, it was suddenly stopped.

The secret investigation adds to evidence that the Post Office knew Horizon’s creator, Fujitsu, could remotely fiddle with sub-postmaster’s cash accounts – even as it argued in court, two years later, that it was impossible.

The revelations have prompted an accusation that the Post Office may have broken the law – and the government did nothing to prevent it. Paul Marshall, a barrister who represented some sub-postmasters, said: “On the face of it, it discloses a conspiracy by the Post Office to pervert the course of justice.”

Why were hundreds of Post Office workers prosecuted?

Senopathy Narenthiran, known as Naren, a convicted sub-postmaster from Ramsgate in Kent who joined the legal action, wiped away a tear as he learned about the information that might have helped his case.

“By knowing all this, why do we waste all our time in the prison and separate from our family? I don’t know,” he told the BBC. “I’m 69 years old – too old to go through all these things.”

The secret investigation was uncovered through a BBC analysis of confidential government documents, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, from a time in 2015 and 2016 when the Post Office was under growing pressure to get to the bottom of sub-postmasters’ claims of injustice.

Hundreds of sub-postmasters had been prosecuted and jailed for cash shortfalls which were in fact caused by the Horizon IT system. They had long suspected that remote tinkering may have contributed to the problem.

The documents show how the secret 2016 investigation – looking into Fujitsu’s use of remote access from 1999 onwards – had come out of a review by former top Treasury lawyer Jonathan Swift QC. The Swift review had been ordered by the government, with approval from then-business secretary Sajid Javid.

It would conclude that it had found “real issues” for the Post Office.

Mr Swift had found a briefing for the Post Office board from an earlier review in 2014, carried out by auditors from Deloitte and codenamed Project Zebra, detailing how Fujitsu could change branch accounts.

Having seen that evidence, the Swift review said the Post Office must carry out a further investigation into how often and why this capability was used.

Deloitte returned in February 2016 to begin the trawl of all Horizon transactions since its launch 17 years earlier.

Ministers, including Mr Javid, were told this new work was under way to “address suggestions that branch accounts might have been remotely altered without complainants’ knowledge”.

But in June 2016, when sub-postmasters launched their legal action, the government was told through Post Office minister Baroness Neville-Rolfe that the investigation had been scrapped on “very strong advice” from the senior barrister representing them.

There is no evidence in the documents that then-prime minister David Cameron knew about the investigation or that it had been ditched.

It meant that over two years, the Post Office had spent millions of pounds on three separate reviews into remote access – Project Zebra, the Swift review and the 2016 Deloitte investigation – while publicly claiming it was impossible.

But all three were buried by the Post Office. Neither the Swift review nor Project Zebra were disclosed to sub-postmasters, depriving them of vital information that could have helped them in court; and the Deloitte investigation was halted before it could deliver its findings.

Project Zebra, the first of the three reviews, was described as a “desktop review”. The Post Office board had hoped it would give “comfort about the Horizon system” to them and others outside the business who had concerns about it.

The consultants examined Horizon documents and talked to employees at Fujitsu and the Post Office to check how the system was functioning and whether it was achieving its objectives.

Unredacted documents obtained by the BBC show that in April 2014, members of a sub-committee of the Post Office board discussed Deloitte’s Project Zebra work.

The sub-committee included chief executive Paula Vennells, general counsel Chris Aujard and Richard Callard, a senior civil servant at the government body which owned the Post Office.

The next month, Deloitte submitted its full report and in June it wrote a briefing for the Post Office board, which outlined two separate ways Fujitsu could alter branch accounts. Extracts from the board briefing are quoted verbatim by the Swift review but the briefing itself has not been released.

It said the auditors had learned that authorised Fujitsu staff with the right database access privileges could use fake digital signatures or keys to delete, create or amend data on customer purchases that had been electronically signed by sub-postmasters. Fujitsu staff could then “re-sign it with a fake key”.

Deloitte said Fujitsu staff had also been able to correct errors using an emergency process known as a “balancing transaction”, which can “create transactions directly in branch ledgers”.

It noted the process “does not require positive acceptance or approval by the sub-postmaster”.

Yet the findings of Project Zebra were never disclosed to investigating accountants Second Sight who, since 2012, had been publicly tasked by the Post Office with looking in to sub-postmasters’ claims.

The Post Office continued to claim for a further five years that it was impossible for remote tinkering by Fujitsu to alter cash balances in Post Office branch accounts.

In 2015, it lied to BBC executives as it sought to prevent the broadcast of the first Panorama expose of the scandal, briefing them that there was “simply no evidence” that remote tinkering by Fujitsu could have caused branch losses.

The documents that have now been analysed by the BBC reveal that following the Panorama broadcast, Post Office minister Baroness Neville-Rolfe wrote to the incoming chairman, Tim Parker, asking him to give the concerns about possible miscarriages of justice his “earliest attention” and take any necessary action. Business Secretary Sajid Javid approved the letter.

Mr Parker said he would undertake a review of the Horizon system and “various claims that sub-postmasters had been wrongly prosecuted as a result of faults in the system”, according to a briefing sent to Mr Javid on 20 November 2015, which was heavily redacted in the released documents.

Mr Parker appointed Jonathan Swift QC and barrister Christopher Knight. They were so concerned about the implications of the Project Zebra documents, they said it was “incumbent” on the Post Office to find out how often these two means of altering branch accounts had been used, “in the light of the consistent impression given that they don’t exist at all”.

The Swift review, dated 8 February 2016, noted that the Post Office “had always known” about the balancing transaction capability.

It also said the Post Office may be obliged by law to show the documents to postmasters who were seeking to overturn their convictions.

In response to a recommendation in the Swift review, Deloitte was asked within days to return to the Post Office to carry out a full independent review of Horizon, following up on its work on Project Zebra.

The mammoth and expensive task was to trawl back through all the transactions since Horizon began operating – work which was anticipated to take three months.

In a letter of 4 March 2016, Post Office chair Tim Parker wrote to Baroness Neville-Rolfe about the Swift review’s findings and recommendations. That included informing her about Deloitte’s follow-up work.

He said it would “address suggestions that branch accounts might have been remotely altered without complainants’ knowledge” and review “security controls governing access to the digitally sealed electronic audit store of branch accounts”.

He added that he had “commissioned independent persons to undertake the necessary work”, and in a later briefing informed the minister that this was Deloitte.

The letter did not explicitly mention Project Zebra or Deloitte’s earlier findings about how branch accounts could be remotely altered.

In April, the Post Office notified the government that the sub-postmasters had begun their group legal action against it. Baroness Neville-Rolfe and Mr Javid were sent a briefing, updating them on the investigation’s progress and discussing how the legal action would affect it.

The briefing, sent before a meeting with Mr Parker, was heavily redacted when it was released under a Freedom of Information Act request. But it said Mr Parker was on track to complete the follow-up work by the end of May and would update Baroness Neville-Rolfe on its progress.

However, the documents seen by the BBC reveal that in June, Deloitte’s three-month investigation was suddenly stopped just before it could be completed.

On 21 June 2016, Tim Parker told Baroness Neville-Rolfe he had taken the decision on the advice of an unnamed senior barrister for the Post Office.

He told her the detailed work being carried out by Deloitte was “complex, costly and time consuming” but that good progress had been made. “I had hoped that by now I would be in a position to draw my investigation to a close,” Mr Parker wrote.

“However, given the High Court proceedings to which I refer above, Post Office Limited has received very strong advice from Leading Counsel that the work being undertaken under the aegis of my review should come to an immediate end… I have therefore instructed that the work being undertaken pursuant to my review should now be stopped.”

In response to the BBC’s questions, Mr Parker said he had “sought and acted upon the legal advice he was given”, but said it would not be appropriate to comment further while the public inquiry into the Horizon scandal was ongoing.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe told the BBC she had said publicly that she had instructed the Post Office chairman to commission an independent review, but declined to comment further while the inquiry was ongoing. Mr Javid also declined to comment because of the public inquiry.

In his High Court judgment at the end of the sub-postmasters’ legal action in 2019, judge Sir Peter Fraser found the Post Office’s defence claim – that Fujitsu could not insert transactions in branch accounts – was “simply untrue”. He said the Post Office had “expressly denied” that remote access was possible “and that denial is now shown to be wrong”.

The barrister who represented a number of wrongly prosecuted sub-postmasters, Mr Marshall, told the BBC it looked as though the Post Office had conspired to pervert the course of justice.

“The important feature of all of this is that in 2014, it appears that the Post Office board was alive to the true position – that remote access by Fujitsu was possible,” he said.

“And yet the Post Office board was responsible for maintaining and advancing the Post Office’s defence to the sub-postmasters’ claim in 2019 – that it was impossible. That was false – and, it would appear, known to be so.”

PA Media

Paula Vennells, the former chief executive of the Post Office, did not respond to the BBC’s requests for comment. Chris Aujard, then Post Office general counsel, and Richard Callard, the civil servant who represented the government on the board, declined to comment while the public inquiry was ongoing.

UK Government Investments (UKGI), the government body which owns the Post Office, addressed what the board knew about these successive reviews and investigations in an opening statement in 2022 to the ongoing public inquiry into the Horizon scandal.

It said there was no indication in the minutes of the Post Office board meeting in June 2014 that the board had received the Project Zebra briefing. UKGI said Mr Callard “does not recall ever receiving such a briefing”.

The statement said the board had not asked for a copy of Deloitte’s full report at the time of Project Zebra. UKGI said the board had been given an executive summary by the Post Office general counsel Chris Aujard, which was “focused on Deloitte’s approach to the review but importantly did not set out its findings”.

It said the board had also never received the 2016 Swift report, nor been briefed in detail on its findings. The statement said Tim Parker did not send Swift’s full report to the Post Office Board and that his letter of 4 March 2016 to Baroness Neville-Rolfe did not make clear how serious the Swift review’s findings were.

The revelations uncovered by the BBC also raise serious questions for the public inquiry by Sir Wyn Williams, as to whether it is adequately scrutinising what the government knew about the Post Office’s internal investigations.

In UKGI’s 2022 statement to the inquiry, there was no reference to Tim Parker’s letter to Baroness Neville-Rolfe of 21 June 2016, notifying her he was calling off Deloitte’s investigation.

In 2018, two years after completing his review, Sir Jonathan Swift, formerly First Treasury Counsel – the top civil lawyer at Her Majesty’s Treasury – was appointed to be a High Court judge. He received a knighthood in the same year.

However, in the list of upcoming witnesses at the Williams inquiry, his name is absent.

Timeline: What ministers knew and when

June 2014: Deloitte submits a briefing for the Post Office board on Project Zebra, outlining how Fujitsu can alter branch accounts or change records of transactions remotely.

10 September 2015: Business Secretary Sajid Javid approves a letter from Post Office minister Baroness Neville-Rolfe to Post Office chair Tim Parker, urging him to take “any necessary action” about Horizon, after a Panorama whistleblower reveals how Fujitsu can remotely alter postmaster’s accounts.

20 November 2015: Mr Javid is briefed that Mr Parker is undertaking a review into the Post Office IT system to look into claims that sub-postmasters have been wrongly prosecuted as a result of faults in the system.

8 February 2016: The resulting report by Jonathan Swift QC and barrister Christopher Knight recommends a full independent investigation into how often and why Fujitsu altered accounts and records “throughout the lifetime” of Horizon.

4 March 2016: Mr Parker tells Baroness Neville-Rolfe and Mr Javid he has commissioned “independent persons” to address “suggestions that branch accounts might have been remotely altered without complainants’ knowledge”.

21 June 2016: In a letter, Mr Parker tells Baroness Neville-Rolfe that in the light of the sub-postmasters’ group legal action, on “very strong advice from leading counsel”, the investigation by Deloitte has been immediately stopped. It never completes its work.

Are you affected by the issues raised in this story? Share your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.

Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:

WhatsApp: +44 7756 165803

Tweet: @BBC_HaveYourSay

Upload pictures or video

Please read our terms & conditions and privacy policy

If you are reading this page and can’t see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.

Related Topics

Post Office Inquiry

Post Office Ltd

Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy

Sajid Javid

More on this story

Post Office accused of secret documents cover-up

26 January

Post Office threatened BBC over whistleblower

12 January

[cricketfun]

Third Test, Day 1 highlights, results, latest updates; Steve Smith produces priceless reaction to Pat Cummins wicket; Mitchell Marsh costs himself a wicket with no-ball; Shaheen Afridi rested; David Warner's baggy green stolen Australia vs Pakistan 3rd Test - TeamsA... #usa #uk

[creatiview]

[ad_1] EY has come under fire over its switch from adviser to administrator of failed battery start-up Britishvolt as questions mount over a possible conflict of interest created by its twin roles. The Big Four consultancy was a longstanding adviser to Britishvolt, playing a central role in devising its failed strategy, seconding a team to the company for almost two years, and collecting millions of pounds in fees. Last month administrators from EY were ushered in to find a buyer for the business when it collapsed, igniting concerns over conflicts of interest in a sector MPs have branded a “wild west”.EY’s move from adviser to administrator “must be a conflict of interest”, said one industry figure who was close to the Britishvolt process. “You have to laugh,” said an EY insider of the firm’s dual duties. Several Britishvolt employees also questioned the validity of EY’s twin responsibilities during a heated video call between staff and the administrators last month, according to two people. It is not unusual for advisers to be subsequently appointed as administrators.EY is processing four separate offers for the failed battery start-up © Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty ImagesWhile some insolvency specialists argue that administrators have an advantage if they know the business well, critics say such arrangements create a risk that advisory firms will in effect be marking their own homework, threatening their independence.EY was on Friday still processing four separate offers for the business, having received bids on Wednesday, according to people briefed on the process. These included a group of current shareholders, Australian battery group Recharge Industries, private equity group Greybull Capital, and another bid, believed to be from a finance group. A decision was expected by Monday morning, the people said.EY’s administrators’ fees will be paid in priority to amounts owed to Britishvolt’s creditors, as is normal in an insolvency. Since the firm was appointed as administrator, new details have come to light that expose the closeness of the existing relationship between the companies. Before the company’s collapse, Britishvolt paid EY £500,000 a month, according to two people. During some months, the start-up spent more money paying consultants, which included EY, than it did its own staff, one of the people said. EY was involved from a very early stage, and was instrumental in helping Britishvolt position itself as a functioning enterprise, according to multiple people who worked with or for the start-up. “They wrote the whole business plan from scratch, they did everything,” said a person who had close involvement at the time. EY’s ties to the battery start-up became even closer when Britishvolt’s chief financial officer, its head of finance systems and innovation, and the chief of staff to its chief executive were all hired from the consultancy in 2021. In addition, EY used its relationship with the start-up to boost its corporate sustainability credentials, despite its global boss criss-crossing the world in a private jet dubbed “EY One”. The project was one of a select few the firm highlighted as it reported its annual global revenues in September. The Britishvolt project was also a chance for EY to demonstrate its connections with the UK government. Its team advising the start-up included Mats Persson, a former chief of staff to Sajid Javid during his spell as UK chancellor, and special adviser to David Cameron when he was prime minister.Ministers offered Britishvolt a support package worth £100mn if the company raised private funding and began construction work. In the end, Britishvolt hit neither target, and the money was never paid out.EY declined to answer whether Persson was involved in lobbying for Britishvolt as it sought taxpayer funding.In response to a detailed list of questions about Britishvolt, EY said it “was an unsecured creditor of the company at the time of the appointment of administrators

[because of fees owed to it for its earlier advice], but will not vote on any creditor resolutions that may be required as part of the administration process”.It added that “creditors of Britishvolt and monies owed will be disclosed in due course as part of the administrators report”, and declined to comment further.Although EY has not been accused of breaking any rules, questions over its role come at a sensitive time for the sector, as the government considers overhauling the way the insolvency profession is regulated. The sector has also faced a backlash after high-profile fines against Deloitte in 2020 and KPMG in 2022 over misconduct by their insolvency teams. In a public consultation on oversight of the sector, which closed in March, the government said the scandals had “contributed to a perception of a lack of objectivity and integrity generally by insolvency practitioners”. This “is almost as damaging to the reputation of the insolvency profession as a lack of objectivity and integrity itself”.The government’s proposed changes include replacing self-regulation by professional bodies, which detractors say is insufficiently robust, with a statutory regulator. A bird’s-eye view of the site for Britishvolt’s planned gigafactory © Owen Humphreys/PAUnlike other professions such as auditors and lawyers, insolvency practitioners are also regulated as individuals rather than at firm level.Government proposals for the sector include replacing its current system with one where firms employing insolvency experts are directly accountable for their conduct and the management of conflicts of interests. The government has yet to publish its response to submissions made during the consultation. “I would hope that the government’s report would at least in part address the problem of perceived or potential conflicts of interest by moving towards the regulation of firms rather than individual practitioners,” said David Ereira, partner at law firm Paul Hastings, and former chair of the government’s Insolvency Service.“But until the government publishes its response, we just don’t know.” [ad_2] Source link

[ministerforpeas]

Hunger Games: Chancellor Battle Royale (Crack Edition) Part 2

Arena Event

HOLY SHIT ITS FIRE WOO WOO WOO 🚨

WE START WITH LAWSON GETTING BURNT

KWARTENG ACTUALLY BEING GOOD FOR ONCE EVEN THO IT WAS FOR HIS OWN GAIN

GOOD RIDDANCE CUNT

WHAT THE HELL SMITH THATS ONE OF YOUR MATES!

THIS LOSER DIES

HOWARD GETS SLAIN BY FIRE ALONG WITH HAMMOND

AND MAJOR DIES AGAIN NOOOOOOOOOO 😭😭😭

Fallen Tributes 2

OHHHHH PLEASE LET SMITH WIN PLEASE LET SMITH WIN

Night 2

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 😭

The Winner

LITERALLY ANYBODY ELSE SHOULD'VE WON

Placements

Less actual kills this time thanks to the arena events.

Summary

And as you can see, the summary is so short that I didn't have to zoom out to take a screenshot!

Statistics

It should be noted that poor Howard didn't even get to feed on anyone this round! At least Major got a kill...

[drkhaliddhakki]

Always right: dangerous

Most of the time right and wrong are relative terms. Right and wrong in one frame are not necessarily right or wrong in another frame. But still, some universal truths are right in all frames.

Now coming to question, there are two scenarios;

1- a person always claims to be right

2- the person wants to be right.

“It is for better to prove yourself right than to prove others wrong”

[dappercyborg]

[keir-hardies-beard]

[salmankhanholics]

★ Salman Khan with David Dhawan Ji, Sajid Nadiawala and his wife Warda (Panvel, December 31, 2018)! 

[rather-annoying-blog]

The Tories and the Egg Challenge

[manansood121204]

Throwback: Salman Khan, Akshay Kumar, Priyanka Chopra, Sajid Nadiadwala, Sanjay Dutt and David Dhawan from the muhurat of Mujhse Shaadi Karogi.

[ministerforpeas]

Hunger Games: Chancellor Battle Royale

Get ready for another edition of the Hunger Games! This time with various Chancellors of the Exchequer (and some Shadow Chancellors cuz why not).

Who will win the honour of being the best Chancellor?