Key Questions Still Unanswered as Investigation Nears Conclusion

After months of testimony, the Post Office Inquiry has heard from its final witnesses this week. Before Chair Sir Wyn Williams publishes his final report next month, closing statements will be made. The bulk of the evidence has focused on what was known, when, and by whom. But what have we learned from the key players, and which questions remain unresolved?

What Did Paula Vennells Know About IT Problems?

Paula Vennells, who served as CEO of the Post Office from 2012 to 2019, was expected to be a key figure in the inquiry. Her testimony in May, spread over three days, revolved around one main question: what did she know about the Horizon IT system’s problems, and when did she learn about them?

Despite a highly emotional appearance, where Vennells was frequently seen tearful, her answers remained vague. She claimed to have little memory of many events and insisted she was never told about the issues with the Horizon system.

“You are not responsible for everything under your leadership. You have to rely on internal and external experts,” she argued.

Her responses drew criticism, with a lawyer representing the sub-postmasters accusing her of living in a “cloud of denial.” At one point, the inquiry’s lead lawyer sarcastically questioned whether she was “the unluckiest CEO in history.”

There were many questions regarding whether Vennells was more focused on protecting the Post Office brand than addressing the concerns of its employees. Her tough stance on media coverage was also brought to light, alongside sharp text messages from former Royal Mail boss Dame Moya Green, who had doubts about Vennells’ integrity. However, amidst the tears and apologies, some things were clear.

While Vennells’ testimony raised many questions, the 775 pages of her witness statement will provide Sir Wyn Williams with much to consider as he prepares his report.

When Did Fujitsu Know About the Issues with Expert Witnesses?

Few played a more significant role in the Post Office scandal than Gareth Jenkins, a senior engineer at Fujitsu who helped create the faulty Horizon system. Jenkins provided expert testimony in several legal cases, assuring the Post Office that the system was robust.

In July 2013, the Post Office received explosive legal advice that Jenkins was “in clear breach of his duty as an expert witness,” prompting them to stop their prosecution and replace him. The question remains: when did Fujitsu officials become aware of this?

When asked during the inquiry, Duncan Tate, the former CEO of Fujitsu, claimed he had no recollection of being informed about any issues with Jenkins. However, a briefing from November 2013, seen by the BBC, shows that Post Office officials planned to raise concerns about Jenkins with Fujitsu, including discussions about finding “an independent expert” to give evidence on the Horizon system.

If Fujitsu knew about the concerns regarding Jenkins’ past testimony, it raises serious questions about why the company still allowed him to be used as an expert witness in the 2019 Bates v Post Office trial. Though he never appeared as a formal expert witness, Jenkins continued to provide technical support and information behind the scenes.

How Much Did Politicians Know?

What did politicians in power know about what was happening at the Post Office? According to many, not enough. Several witnesses stated that the officials they met or the civil servants they spoke to failed to give them an accurate picture. Former minister Jo Swinson revealed that after the inquiry, she learned the full extent of the issues at the Post Office, realizing that “what I was being told was completely opposite to what was actually happening.”

New Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch also expressed frustration, claiming that when she was Business Secretary, civil servants had failed to provide a “clear view of what was happening.”

Another issue that emerged during the inquiry was the high turnover of ministers, leading to gaps in understanding. Ministers would often join without being briefed on the Horizon problems, and just as they began to understand the issues, a reshuffle or election would force them to leave. A barrister representing the sub-postmasters pointed out that this “revolving door” of ministers led to a lack of continuity, with eight business secretaries in just five years.

Every politician who appeared before the inquiry had reasons for not doing more while in power, but they could not claim complete ignorance. MPs and campaigners had been pushing them to pressure the Post Office for answers regarding Horizon.

As Jo Swinson said in her testimony, “I asked myself why I didn’t push harder?”

What Does the Future Hold for Horizon and the Post Office?

While the inquiry is still investigating the current situation, it is also considering what changes are needed to prevent a similar scandal in the future. Horizon is still in use at branches. This week, it was revealed that there are currently 16 bugs in the system.

Fujitsu’s European boss expressed concern about any projects that should have been completed long ago, refusing to confirm whether the system is capable of providing reliable accounts.

In an extraordinary confession, Paul Patterson revealed that the Post Office had contacted him when he was about to enter the inquiry room, asking whether they could continue using the Horizon system for the next four years.

Sir Wyn Williams is also asking witnesses about how the Post Office should be run in the future and whether it is worth saving. The new CEO, Nigel Railton, made headlines this week with his announcement of plans to place sub-postmasters “at the heart” of the business, which may involve job cuts and branch closures.

The problem? One: sub-postmasters have heard these promises before. Two: money. These plans rely on government funding, and replacing Horizon could be prohibitively expensive.

Post Office owners claim to have had “positive” discussions with the government, but as the saying goes, talk is cheap.

Kemi Badenoch warned during the inquiry that if the organization had to compete for funding against sectors like the NHS or schools, it would “always lose.”

The future of the Post Office may ultimately depend as much on the inquiry’s findings about the past as on its recommendations for moving forward.

Reporters: Theo Leggett, Nalini Shivathasan, Tom Beal, and Peter Ruddick