I get the point about Unions, but they should always remain curious, and question things.
What I’ve never understood, is what do all these Execs think is going on when their Phone/TV/Computer gets SW updates. Perhaps they think it’s nothing more than wallpaper type cosmetic updates.
I’m not trying to defend his position for a moment, just trying to get inside his mindset and see how he ends up in his entrenched position. The man is clearly totally the wrong person to have at a senior position in an organisation which, at least until they signed the funding agreement with POL in 2015, was there to protect and represent its members.
(The 2015 agreement allowed the NFSP to state positions contrary to POL’s, but heavily caveated, but the caveats weren’t needed with Thomson in post because he clearly believes that the NFSP must support everything POL because that protects the interests of the franchisees.)
… it was the same thing from the Union guy yesterday.
They were both appalling. Yesterday’s guy felt like a ‘70s sitcom parody of a union man, but he wasn’t quite as annoying in that he only gave bureaucratic answers about why they did bugger all to help, rather than loudly ranting about how it was all a non-issue.
Clearly, he appeared to see a symbiotic relationship with POL (almost as an enabler to the changes they needed to effect). It’s another travesty (amongst a long list) in the same way that POL didn’t really operate at arm’s length from HMG judging by everything seen at the SI.
But, and to be fair to what he said, the NSFP didn’t have the tools to address things.
Sir Wyn’s words to Dr. Kay Linnell hang heavy in my mind, when he said the mediation process appeared to be a sham (go Sir Wyn!) in the way POL handled matters, but it did its job in generating findings for the JFSA, which were then adequate to conduct the group litigation.
They have no meaningful understanding of such things.
Details. And Experts. Pah… 
Several of them have said things along the lines of “I’m not a computer expert” and “I’m not computer literate”. Usually while explaining why they had completely ignored being told about issues.
@TheKevster – perhaps to save you some time, I’d suggest listening to the last 10 mins or so of his testimony today defines the man very well (and it’s consistent with his whole testimony). An off the point meaningless rant would be an understatement IMHO.
To my ears it defined to the term ‘you can’t reason with an idiot’, as he simply couldn’t join up the salient points put to him by the lawyers. Bizarre.
“I’m not a legal expert” and “I’m not law literate”, but strangely I know you mustn’t steel or saying blatant lies that hurt other people
I’ve been waiting for the transcript to be able to quote this correctly, she and her business partner Barbara are good human beings.
“You were asked a question by Mr Stevens about your first joining meetings of the JFSA and we all know from the ITV drama that the meetings were sometimes at village halls – Fenny Compton, famously, otherwise at Kineton on occasions.
Now, regarding funding, which is what you were asked by Mr Stevens, how broke were the subpostmasters that you met at these meetings?
Dr Kay Linnell: Very broke and in “minus red land”, as my friend used to call it, with lots of credit card and other debts hanging around them.
Mr Stein: Sometimes, in relation to your support of subpostmasters/mistresses working with Mrs Jeremiah, you were helping them try and make their way through the mess that had been made of their finances. That needed, on occasions, to get things like bank statements, which aren’t necessarily free; how did you manage to do that?
Dr Kay Linnell: Barbara and I paid for them.
“
I was watching her testimony, when she said those word.
“Barbara and I paid for them.”
What do the highly paid seniors of POL have to say about that…?
Nothing. Not A Word.
Time for a change of thread title, methinks.
How about “Post Office Scoundrels”.
Fairly apt, and inclusive enough for everyone?
“Back in 2015-18 I occasionally did some work for the National Federation of Sub Postmasters – whose bombastic CEO of the time, George Thompson, has serious questions to answer when he appears before the Inquiry on 21 June”
@TheKevster: just reviewed your earlier post regarding this blustering corporate bullshiner. He didn’t do too well, I understand.
The SPM’S must have been in despair, and likely never imagined that the bunch of scheming malicious incompetents that have been paraded in front of the KC’s at the Inquiry would ever be held to account. I don’t suppose they ever thought it would happen either.
If you suggest a change might be appropriate, I am more inclined to … Conspiracy!
Likely some charges will, in due corse, include conspiracy to pervert the corse of justice.
Facts known; ignored, overlooked, hidden.
I think on less genteel fora, the last word could legitimately be substited by something a little less, er, polite
Valid question…of course, corporate culture doesn’t have a conscience!
One aspect of this, admitting I only know limited details, is why the whole issue only really saw public traction in the last 5+ years?
Linell and her colleague were versed in forensic accounting. How much difference would a sponsor with or for PR work, at no cost to JFSA, have been able to raise the profile of the conspiracy much earlier? IIRC Computer Weekly held off early days, because of the threat of POL legals.
JA (Lord) et al, had tried, so was there a trigger point, where this gained solid traction?
Clearly the Court of Appeal played a significant role, but was there a single point of change or was it all small steps?
The major set forward came in 2011/12, when MPs started to raise questions on behalf of their constituents and the temperature suddenly went up a notch within POL, with the MPs threatening to table questions in parliament, with the intention of seeking an independent review of matters.
As a result of this, POL engaged 2nd Sight as forensic accountants, this with the blessing of the various stakeholders (inc the JFSA – obviously concerned of a potential whitewash). As was said by the principals of 2nd Sight, while POL paid their bill, their true allegiance & responsibility was to the group of MPs (i.e. rampant conflicts of interest became apparent very quickly).
POL cooked-up (an apposite term) a ‘cheap’ mediation scheme to address any findings of incorrect prosecution and/or bad actions – but, as Sir Wyn put it, this appears to have been a sham in the way POL engaged (slow to produce docs/didn’t produce docs/amended the ToR unilaterally). 2nd Sight were sacked in 2015, when the depth of the issues at POL became very clear – for some reason, POLs Exec management (inc PV and Perkins) appear to think 2nd Sight overstepped their remit, but their remit was to find the truth, and what they found was disturbing (e.g. poor legal processes, incorrect disclosure et al, evidence of bugs) – thankfully, much of what they found was able to be used in the group litigation in which Dr. Kay Linnell and others played significant roles.
Since the Group Litigation Order against POL in 2019, which didn’t really serve up true justice and adequate compensation, there’s been a clamour for proper restitution, and even with this judgement against them, POL have dragged their feet in just about every way it seems. The SI has been running for > a year now.
Sadly as someone who’s followed since Computer Weekly in 2009, Private Eye picking it up in 2011/2012, a funder of the investigation of the wonderful journalist Nick Wallis I can tell you that the (now Lord) Justice Fraser judgement was in 2019, the recusal application was also in 2019 and spectacularly slapped down in the Court of Appeal, and the 39 cleared in the Court of Appeal in 2021, so in the mid-teens you had to delude yourself to believe POL and by 2019 you had to be a highly paid lawyer to not realise it was a horrific miscarriage of justice (yes Grabiner and Neuberger you took the money). but it took until the ITV drama of 2023 before the majority of the public, and thus the politicians, cared.
Look up Paul Marshall barrister, Flora Page barrister, their instructing solicitors Aria Grace all of whom worked pro bono in the appeal cases, with Alan Bates, James Arbuthnot MP (as was), (Lord) Justice Fraser and Nick Wallis they are some of the heroes of this.
Just seen Mr Christou , amazing attitude and awful body language