The Post Office was a “mess” run by executives and government appointees who “dragged their feet” in efforts to compensate and exonerate sub-postmasters, the former chairman has told the public inquiry.
Henry Staunton, who was sacked after 14 months as chair by then business secretary Kemi Badenoch in January, also accused the organisation of having a “huge cultural problem” with a lack of ethnic and gender diversity – and of overseeing “vindictive” investigations into two sub-postmasters who served on the company board.
He also denied allegations that he made racist and misogynistic comments about Post Office colleagues, saying he had been “deeply stung” by an internal investigation he says was used as a pretext by Ms Badenoch to remove him.
A former chairman of WH Smith and director of ITV, Mr Staunton was appointed in December 2022 after being approached by headhunters who told him he would be “giving something back” if he took the job.
He said he found a culture of chaos in senior management that immediately required more than the two days a week he had been told was required.
“The place was a mess that required more of my time,” he said. His view was that executives did not fully accept the findings of the High Court judgment that established the role of the Horizon computer system in hundreds of flawed prosecutions.
More on Post Office Scandal
Related Topics:
“My initial impression was that the Post Office and government were dragging their feet in terms of making payments for remediation – in the first place – and in the second place I thought that there was no appetite at all for exoneration,” he told the inquiry.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:13
New Post Office scandal: ‘It’s been horrific’
Mr Staunton said that initially a “ridiculous” amount of his time was taken up with requests for a pay rise from chief executive Nick Read, who he previously told a Parliamentary inquiry was unhappy and threatening to resign.
Advertisement
In November 2022, before he was formally in post, he was asked to sign a letter to the secretary of state recommending an increase from the maximum of £788,500 to £1.125m, a “massive” increase that Mr Staunton said the minister was right to reject.
He said the environment among senior staff was characterised by “risk aversion and paralysis” and “a culture of fear and worry”, in part because executives feared being called to give evidence to the public inquiry.
Referring to a letter he received from an anonymous whistleblower, that alleged a “disgusting culture” at the Post Office, Mr Staunton agreed the organisation “had a huge problem with culture”.
“Ethnicity was very poorly represented. We did have a problem with ethnicity. We did have a problem with gender.”
He also recognised claims that Mr Read had referred to, of those with a “public school education”, and that there was a perception of “jobs for the boys”.
Mr Staunton was also highly critical of an internal investigation launched into two sub-postmasters who had been appointed to the board as non-executive directors, alleging it was held open for months as a means of intimidating them.
Inquiry hears recording of chair’s sacking
The inquiry also heard details of Mr Staunton’s dismissal and was played a recording of the telephone call in which Ms Badenoch told him he was being removed because of “complaints that are so serious the government needs to intervene”.
Mr Staunton told the inquiry that her call came several hours after a journalist, understood to be Sky News’ Mark Kleinman, rang him to tell him he was likely to be fired.
He was not told on that call what the complaints were, but the previous month had learned his conduct was being examined as part of a Post Office investigation based initially on an 80-page complaint against Mr Read by the then chief people officer. In the complaint, Mr Staunton was mentioned only once and not by name.
Image: Then Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch sacked Mr Staunton last year. Pic: James Manning/PA Wire
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The allegation against him was that he made inappropriate comments about gender and race at a meeting about candidates to chair the Post Office remuneration committee. In his witness statement to the inquiry, he said: “I deny those allegations completely and feel deeply stung by them.”
He told the inquiry that three former Post Office colleagues – one Jewish, one Muslim and one black – had provided letters of support in his defence to questions from the Institute of Chartered Accountants.
“All three directors have said they thought there was not an ounce of racism in me and indeed I was a champion of greater diversity of ethnicity and gender on the board,” he said.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:05
Sir Alan Bates threatens legal action
In his witness statement, he said details of the investigation and its findings against him, which have never been published, were leaked to the media by a government source who claimed they explained why he objected to being sacked by a minister who was “black and female.”
“I was deeply aggrieved at being made a fall guy for failings that I myself had been struggling to get the Post Office to address,” he said.
“This was a report into Nick Read, not about me, but because I had taken the side of the sub-postmasters it was weaponised against me.”
Rachel Reeves will unveil further welfare cuts in her spring statement after being told the reforms announced last week will save less than planned, Sky News understands.
The fiscal watchdog put the value of the cuts at £3.4bn, leaving ministers scrambling to find further savings.
Ms Reeves is now expected to announce that universal credit (UC) incapacity benefits for new claimants, which were halved under the original plan, will also be frozen until 2030 rather than rising in line with inflation
As originally reported by The Times, there will also be a small reduction in the basic rate of UC in 2029, with the new measures expected to raise £500m.
A Whitehall source told Sky’s political editor Beth Rigby that it is “hard to tell how MPs will react”, as while the OBR’s assessment means fewer people will be affected by the PIP changes than thought, they “might be unhappy about the chaotic nature of it all”.
Several Labour MPs criticised the measures as pushing more sick and disabled people into poverty, while former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn called the package a “disgrace” on Tuesday and accused the government of imposing austerity on the country.
Watch and follow the spring statement live across Sky News from 11am
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
13:10
‘Labour MPs are upset’
Spending cuts expected
Ms Reeves is expected to announce a large package of departmental spending cuts when she gives an update on the economy on Wednesday, potentially putting her on a further collision course with her own MPs.
Having only committed to doing one proper budget each year in the autumn, the spring statement was meant to be a low-key affair.
However, a turbulent economic climate since October means the OBR is widely expected to downgrade its growth forecasts for the UK while the government has borrowed more than previously expected.
This has wiped out the £9.9bn gap in her fiscal headroom Ms Reeves left herself at her budget last year – money she needs to make up if she wants to stick to her self-imposed fiscal rule that day-to-day spending must be funded through tax receipts, not debt, by 2029-30.
In a bid to fend off criticism, she will also announce an extra £2.2bn will be spent on defence over the next year to “deliver security for working people”.
The money is part of the government’s aim to hike defence spending to 2.5% of the UK’s economic output by 2027 – up from the 2.3% where it stands now.
Ms Reeves will insist this plan, set out by the prime minister in February, was the “right decision” against the backdrop of global instability, saying it will put “an extra 6.4bn into the defence budget by 2027”.
“This increase in investment is not just about increasing our national security but increasing our economic security, too,” she will say.
The money is coming from reductions to the international aid budget and Treasury reserves, and will be used to invest in new technology, refurbish homes for military families and upgrade HM Naval Base Portsmouth.
Remember “securonomics”? It was the buzzword Rachel Reeves gave to her economic philosophy back before the election.
The idea was that in the late 2020s, the old ideas about the way we run the economy would or should give way to a new model.
For a long time, we ignored where something was made and by whom and just ordered it in from the cheapest source. For a long time, we ignored the security consequences of where we got our energy from. The upshot of these assumptions was that over time, we allowed our manufacturing base to become hollowed out, unable to compete with cheap imports from China. We allowed our energy system to become ever more dependent on cheap Russian gas.
The whole point of securonomics was that it matters where something is made and who owns it. And not just that – that revitalising manufacturing and energy could help revitalise “left-behind” corners of the economy, places like the Midlands and the North East.
Back when she came up with the coinage, Joe Biden was in power and was pumping billions of dollars into the US economy via the Inflation Reduction Act – a scheme designed to encourage green tech investment. So securonomics looked a little like the British version of Bidenomics.
That’s the key point: the “security” part of “securonomics” was mostly about energy security and supply chain security rather than about defence.
More on Defence
Related Topics:
But when Rachel Reeves became chancellor, it looked for a period as if securonomics was dead on arrival. Most glaringly, Labour dramatically trimmed back the ambition and scale of its green investment plans.
But roll on a year or so, and we all know what happened next.
A new era
The Democrats lost, Donald Trump won, came into office and swiftly triggered a chain reaction that panicked everyone in Europe into investing more in defence. Today, much of the focus among investors is not on net zero but on defence.
All of which is to say, securonomics might be about to resurface, but in a markedly different guise. In the spring statement, I expect the chancellor to bring back this buzzword, but this time, the emphasis will not be on green tech but on something else: the defence sector.
Expect to hear about weapons
This time around, the chancellor will say securonomics 2.0, which is to say government investment in the defence sector will also bring an economic windfall, as old naval ports like Plymouth and Portsmouth see regeneration. This time, the focus will not be on solar and wind but on submarines and weapons.
Whether this rendition of securonomics is any more successful than the last remains to be seen. For the chancellor hardly has an enormous amount of money left to invest. While this week’s event is billed as a mere forecast update, the reality, when you take a step back, is more serious.
The chancellor will have to acknowledge that, without remedial action, she would have broken her fiscal rules. She will have to confirm significant changes to policy to rebuild the “headroom” against these rules. These will stop short of tax rises. Instead, the spending envelope in future years will be trimmed (think 1.1% or so spending increases rather than 1.3% or 1.4%). Those welfare reforms announced last week will bring in a bit of extra cash. And thanks to an accounting quirk, the decision (announced a few weeks ago) to shift development spending into defence will also give her a bit more space against her rules.
The austerity question
But even these changes will raise further awkward questions: is this or is this not austerity? Certainly, for some departments, that spending cut will involve further significant sacrifices. Are those benefits gains really achievable, and at what cost? And, most ominously, what if the chancellor has to come back to parliament in another six months and admit she’s broken her rules all over again?
The return of securonomics might be the theme she wants to focus on in the coming months – but that, too, depends on having money to invest – and the UK’s fiscal position looks as tight as ever.
A new boxing format which promises to eliminate often-controversial human judging decisions is in talks to raise $50m from heavyweight investors amid a broader shake-up in the funding and marketing of combat sports.
Sky News has learnt that STRIKR, which will use data-driven scoring by embedding sensors in combatants’ mouthguards and deploying technology from partners including Hawk-Eye, is in detailed talks with a large number of prospective backers about its first major funding round.
Sources said that scores of prospective investors were due to attend the first alpha test of STRIKR’s technology in action at an event to be held at The Outernet, an entertainment venue in Central London, this week.
People close to STRIKR’s development said its proprietary technology could track the exact trajectory, speed and force of punches.
This, they said, would open up huge betting market opportunities by enabling live in-play gambling, which they added would boost consumers’ engagement with the sport.
Among the architects of STRIKR are Greg Nugent, who oversaw the marketing of the London 2012 Olympic Games, and Michael Sutherland, former chief transformation officer at Real Madrid.
Stephen Duval, founder of sports and entertainment corporate finance group 23Capital and creator of Superset Tennis and Superfighter, is also among STRIKR’s co-founders.
More from Money
Sources said the initial fundraising of about $50m would be followed by a larger capital-raising as the concept gained momentum.
Oakwell Advisory, a sports-focused corporate finance firm, is advising STRIKR on its talks with investors.
They added that STRIKR had the potential to “revolutionise” boxing in the same way that T20 had changed international cricket and that data-driven technology and smarter marketing had introduced Formula One motor racing to new audiences.
STRIKR is understood to work by using artificial intelligence combined with technology from Hawk-Eye Innovations and Protecht to generate more than 3,000 points of data about each punch thrown by a boxer.
By promising to eliminate the controversy which frequently accompanies the ringside verdicts of boxing judges, the new format is likely to claim that its advent will deliver a greater level of objectivity, integrity and transparency to one of the world’s most popular sports.
Responding to an enquiry from Sky News, Mr Duval said: “STRIKR is a new format of boxing that uses world-class technology to generate real-time objective scoring.
“It will create a different approach to fighting, using a new format, enabled by new technology, to engage the existing audience and attract a new one, to the benefit of the market overall.”
Mr Duval declined to comment on the identity of the investors in discussions with STRIKR, although people close to the fundraising said it had already secured indicative commitments encompassing a sizeable chunk of the $50m target.
The company also refused to be drawn on further details of commercial partnership discussions ahead of Monday’s test event.
STRIKR fights are expected to be free to watch, including on digital platforms such as YouTube, and will incorporate features such as personalised shopping and loyalty-based premium content.
The arrival of STRIKR – which is expected to include its maiden competitive events in the UK and US next year – will come at a time when investor interest in combat sports has surged amid an influx of funding from sovereign funds and other prominent pools of capital.
An official launch of the new format is said to be planned for May, with a series of exhibition events to showcase the technology later this year.
TKO Group, which owns UFC and WWE, this month struck a deal with the Saudi General Entertainment Authority to create a new international boxing league.
The Saudi government has already sanctioned an enormous investment in the sport through the creation of the Riyadh Season to secure the hosting of some of boxing’s most lucrative fights, including December’s world heavyweight title rematch between Oleksandr Usyk and Tyson Fury, which was won by the Ukrainian.