Photo credit: www.bbc.com
The head of Fujitsu Europe, Paul Patterson, recently expressed uncertainty regarding the reliability of the Horizon IT system, which has been central to the wrongful convictions of numerous sub-postmasters in the UK. During his testimony at an inquiry into this issue, Patterson acknowledged the presence of “bugs, errors, and defects” within the system, indicating a notable level of unreliability that could affect current users of Horizon.
This was Patterson’s second appearance in front of the inquiry. He also admitted his lack of knowledge about whether Fujitsu had conducted an independent review of the software, though he mentioned a willingness to support external investigations.
From 1999 to 2015, the Horizon system falsely indicated financial shortfalls in the accounts of hundreds of sub-postmasters and postmistresses, leading to wrongful prosecutions. With Fujitsu’s contract for Horizon up for renewal early next year, Patterson expressed considerable concern about the implications of extending the agreement, given the system’s chronic unreliability. “If you don’t keep IT systems upgraded, I cannot determine what will or will not happen,” he stated, highlighting his anxieties about the potential consequences of continued use of Horizon.
The inquiry is now entering its final week, having gathered evidence for over two and a half years. Patterson reiterated Fujitsu’s commitment to compensating victims, describing it as a “moral obligation,” but indicated that the company preferred to wait for the inquiry’s conclusion before progressing with payouts.
In a tense exchange with Sam Stein KC, representing some victims, Patterson was urged to clarify why compensation had not yet been distributed. “You already accept that there is a need for Fujitsu to put its money where its mouth is,” Stein remarked. Patterson reiterated that understanding all the evidence was critical before proceeding financially.
Earlier this week, Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservative Party and former business secretary, also provided testimony. She remarked that the airing of a recent drama highlighting the scandal helped accelerate the urgency for compensation. The government needed to “be seen to be doing the right thing,” Badenoch insisted, admitting that the public response had proved to be a catalyst.
During the proceedings, Badenoch emphasized that her dispute with the Treasury last summer regarding compensation timelines was more than mere posturing. She acknowledged that the ITV drama “Mr Bates vs The Post Office” raised awareness, shifting the compensation matter from a financial angle to a more public perception issue. Yet she also criticized government processes as inadequate, conceding that the response had been “too slow.”
Badenoch proposed a flat compensation offer of £100,000 to all affected sub-postmasters, a suggestion which had stirred some controversy during the inquiry. In her testimony, she characterized her directive to the Treasury as an essential signal for change in direction.
The inquiry also raised questions about Badenoch’s dismissal of former Post Office chairman Henry Staunton. She claimed that she had received only “vanilla updates” from civil servants, preventing her understanding of the gravity of the issues surrounding him. Her statement cited Staunton’s aggressive conduct, attempts to obstruct whistleblowing investigations, and a general lack of understanding of the Post Office’s operations as justifications for his termination. Despite Staunton’s defense against allegations of inappropriate behavior, Badenoch maintained her stance on the matter.
In a significant development, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds suggested that ownership of the Post Office could potentially be transferred to sub-postmasters. “Nothing should be off the table for the future of the Post Office,” he remarked, acknowledging that the corporate culture within the organization had been a fundamental factor in the scandal, contributing to a significant loss of faith in the justice system among sub-postmasters.
Source
www.bbc.com