POrla Vennells’ attendance at the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry was always going to be a big event, even if it was overshadowed by Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak’s decision to call an election this week. She was chief executive of the government-owned company from 2012 to 2019 and was in charge when forensic accountants were hired to investigate claims that subpostmasters had been wrongly blamed for errors caused by software, and when that investigation was abandoned.
She was boss when Alan Bates and more than 500 deputy postmasters won £58 million in compensation. Since ITV aired high-profile drama “Bates v Post Office” in January, Mr Vennells, who is also a priest, has become the face of a scandal in which hundreds of people have been wrongly prosecuted and 236 sent to prison.
Much of the evidence given to Sir Wyn Williams’ inquiry is legal and technical. But this week much has been revealed about Ms Vennells and the organisation she took pride in before her downfall. That was crucial when she was asked why she had been advised to be “very cautious” when giving evidence to MPs. The answer she gave was not clear, but was that it was because she had something to hide.
Vennells protested about her ignorance of the law, her “credulous” personality, her ability to accept criticism and her reliance on the advice of others. Under questioning from lawyer Jason Beer, it emerged that this self-portrait was contradicted by her actions, including her refusal to have past convictions reviewed, her obsession with the Post Office’s reputation and damning emails attempting to elicit information about the mental state of Martin Griffiths, who committed suicide. Another exchange referred to a message sent by her former boss, Moya Green, which read: “I thought you knew… Given what I have found out I cannot now support you.”
But while guilty, Vennells was not acting alone, and recent hearings have revealed her own inappropriate behaviour. By lawyer At the 2013 conference, Brian Altman KC and others decided not to tell Seema Misra, a sub-postmaster who was jailed while pregnant, that her expert testimony was flawed and that her conviction was in jeopardy. Post Office spokesman Mark Davis gave personal advice that revealed his contempt for reporters. And Vennells was not the only one to oppose the forensic accountants’ second sight. Alice Perkins, who chaired the committee, complained bitterly that they had not been “marked” – she said that if they had been in the civil service where he previously worked, they would have been. Former general counsel Jane McLeod has refused to give evidence in person. The overall impression is one of a complacent bureaucracy that puts the lives of sub-postmasters second.
Beer’s description of the siege mentality has clear parallels with the “institutional defensiveness” that Sir Brian Langstaff identified as the cause of the blood-transmitted infection scandal. Sir Brian criticised the NHS, the government and the civil service. The Post Office investigation is still a long way off, so it is too early to say where responsibility lies. But after years of exhausting fighting, things are starting to move. On Friday, Laws to expunge past convictions “The Horizon bill has been passed, allowing those affected to seek compensation. There is already a lot to understand about the behaviour of very senior professionals, particularly their unwillingness to admit fault. An organisational culture in which personal and corporate self-interest overshadows all else is becoming apparent once again.”
