Connect with us

Published

on

Civil servants have hit back at “cowardly” former ministers who have criticised them for their alleged failure to act on the Post Office Horizon scandal.

A blame-game is under way following the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office, which depicted how hundreds of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses were wrongly held responsible for accounting errors created by the faulty Horizon IT software.

Sir Ed Davey and Lord Peter Mandelson, who are both facing questions for their roles as postal affairs minister and business secretary during the scandal, have laid some of the blame at the door of civil servants – with the latter arguing that officials should have been “more focused and cognisant of what was going on” and that they “failed” to protect ministers.

And in an interview with Sky News, Sir Ed, the Liberal Democrat leader, accused officials in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills of “lying to me” over the scandal.

Politics latest: Post Office investigators accused of behaving like ‘mafia gangsters’

Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union, told Sky News that Lord Mandelson’s comments were “just another cowardly example of politicians scrambling to blame others for their own mistakes”.

“Politicians are quick to take credit when things go well. They should be humble and honest enough to take responsibility for their mistakes, and swiftly deliver justice for the wronged sub-postmasters and sub-mistresses.”

More on Post Office Scandal

Dave Penman, the general secretary of the FDA union for civil servants, branded Sir Ed’s comments “outrageous” and said they were an “act of desperation from a former minister trying to save his own skin”.

“Ed Davey goes beyond what is reasonable to expect from a former minister,” he told Sky News. “If he’s going to repeat this he needs to back up his accusations.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘The Post Office was lying to me’

He added: “Civil servants should rightly be held to account for what they did and didn’t do, but they need an opportunity to defend themselves.”

Between 1999 and 2015, more than 700 people were prosecuted for a variety of offences including theft, fraud and false accounting – causing many to lose their jobs, livelihoods and reputations.

On Wednesday, Rishi Sunak announced that a new law would be introduced to exonerate and compensate those caught up in the Horizon scandal and that those who were part of the group litigation order against the Post Office would also be eligible for an upfront payment of £75,000.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sub-postmasters were ‘guinea pigs’

Sir Ed – who was postal affairs minister between 2010 and 2012 during the coalition government – has attracted particular criticism after it emerged he refused to meet sub-postmaster Alan Bates, whom the ITV drama is named after, on a number of occasions – saying in a short three-paragraph letter that a meeting “wouldn’t serve any purpose”.

However, Sir Ed did later meet with Mr Bates and was the first minister on public record to do so. It is understood he then asked his officials to follow up on the concerns raised by the sub-postmaster at their meeting.

Speaking to Sky News this week, Sir Ed said: “I wish I’d known then what we all know now. The Post Office was lying on an industrial scale to me and other ministers.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Wrongly convicted postmaster describes ordeal

“When I met Alan Bates and listened to his concerns, I put those concerns to officials in my department, to the Post Office and to the National Federation of Postmasters and it’s clear they all were lying to me.”

Sir Ed was joined in his criticism of the civil service by Lord Mandelson, who was in charge of the oversight the Post Office from 2008 until his departure in 2010.

In his Times Radio podcast aired earlier this week, Lord Mandelson said: “I’m not trying to point the finger at particular civil servants obviously,” he added, “but they should have been much more focused and cognisant of what was going on.

“And their job is to, in a sense, both to protect ministers and serve the wider public interest, and in this instance that failed.”

Read more:
Post Office scandal: Investigators ‘offered bonuses’ to prosecute sub-postmasters
Sub-postmasters used as ‘guinea pigs’ to grind out issues in Horizon, says expert

Separately, it has emerged that Lord Mandelson was made personally aware of the Horizon issue, after an email released under the Freedom of Information (FOI) showed they were highlighted to him in 2009 by Tory peer Lord Arbuthnot.

However, rather than respond himself, the FOI instead showed a response from his junior business minister, and now close ally of Sir Keir Starmer, Pat McFadden, who said there was “nothing to indicate that there are any problems with the Horizon system”.

A spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats said: “Ed has been clear that Post Office managers lied to the victims, to judges and to ministers, those lies circulated across the entire system.

“It is also the case that like all former ministers and post office managers, civil servants – particularly those sitting on the post office board, must face the inquiry and answer questions.

“The priority now needs to be getting justice and compensation for the victims.”

The Labour Party has been approached for comment.

Continue Reading

Politics

South Korean court clears Wemade ex-CEO in Wemix manipulation case

Published

on

By

South Korean court clears Wemade ex-CEO in Wemix manipulation case

South Korean court clears Wemade ex-CEO in Wemix manipulation case

After nearly a year of legal proceedings, a South Korean court acquitted former Wemade CEO Jang Hyun-guk of market manipulation charges.

Continue Reading

Politics

Is there £15bn of wiggle room in Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules?

Published

on

By

Is there £15bn of wiggle room in Rachel Reeves's fiscal rules?

Are Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules quite as iron clad as she insists?

How tough is her armour really? And is there actually scope for some change, some loosening to avoid big tax hikes in the autumn?

We’ve had a bit of clarity early this morning – and that’s a question we discuss on the Politics at Sam and Anne’s podcast today.

Politics Live: Reeves to reform financial regulations

And tens of billions of pounds of borrowing depends on the answer – which still feels intriguingly opaque.

You might think you know what the fiscal rules are. And you might think you know they’re not negotiable.

For instance, the main fiscal rule says that from 2029-30, the government’s day-to-day spending needs to be in surplus – i.e. rely on taxation alone, not borrowing.

And Rachel Reeves has been clear – that’s not going to change, and there’s no disputing this.

But when the government announced its fiscal rules in October, it actually published a 19-page document – a “charter” – alongside this.

And this contains all sorts of notes and caveats. And it’s slightly unclear which are subject to the “iron clad” promise – and which aren’t.

There’s one part of that document coming into focus – with sources telling me that it could get changed.

And it’s this – a little-known buffer built into the rules.

It’s outlined in paragraph 3.6 on page four of the Charter for Budget Responsibility.

This says that from spring 2027, if the OBR forecasts that she still actually has a deficit of up to 0.5% of GDP in three years, she will still be judged to be within the rules.

In other words, if in spring 2027 she’s judged to have missed her fiscal rules by perhaps as much as £15bn, that’s fine.

Rachel Reeves during a visit to Cosy Ltd.
Pic: PA
Image:
A change could save the chancellor some headaches. Pic: PA

Now there’s a caveat – this exemption only applies, providing at the following budget the chancellor reduces that deficit back to zero.

But still, it’s potentially helpful wiggle room.

This help – this buffer – for Reeves doesn’t apply today, or for the next couple of years – it only kicks in from the spring of 2027.

But I’m being told by a source that some of this might change and the ability to use this wiggle room could be brought forward to this year. Could she give herself a get out of jail card?

The chancellor could gamble that few people would notice this technical change, and it might avoid politically catastrophic tax hikes – but only if the markets accept it will mean higher borrowing than planned.

But the question is – has Rachel Reeves ruled this out by saying her fiscal rules are iron clad or not?

Or to put it another way… is the whole of the 19-page Charter for Budget Responsibility “iron clad” and untouchable, or just the rules themselves?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?

And what counts as “rules” and are therefore untouchable, and what could fall outside and could still be changed?

I’ve been pressing the Treasury for a statement.

And this morning, they issued one.

A spokesman said: “The fiscal rules as set out in the Charter for Budget Responsibility are iron clad, and non-negotiable, as are the definition of the rules set out in the document itself.”

So that sounds clear – but what is a definition of the rule? Does it include this 0.5% of GDP buffer zone?

Read more:
Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn
Tough decisions ahead for chancellor

The Treasury does concede that not everything in the charter is untouchable – including the role and remit of the OBR, and the requirements for it to publish a specific list of fiscal metrics.

But does that include that key bit? Which bits can Reeves still tinker with?

I’m still unsure that change has been ruled out.

Continue Reading

Politics

LA sheriff deputies admit to helping crypto ‘Godfather’ extort victims

Published

on

By

LA sheriff deputies admit to helping crypto ‘Godfather’ extort victims

LA sheriff deputies admit to helping crypto ‘Godfather’ extort victims

The Justice Department says two LA Sheriff deputies admitted to helping extort victims, including for a local crypto mogul, while working their private security side hustles.

Continue Reading

Trending