The government employee involved in the Post Office controversy has responded to accusations that she requested a postponement of compensation payments to post office owners.
According to Henry Staunton, the ex-chair of the Post Office, Sarah Munby, the former chief civil servant at the business department, proposed that they delay compensation payments and hinder progress until the election.
Staunton’s claims sparked a heated argument over the government’s handling of compensation for numerous post office owners who were falsely accused and convicted, which has been labeled as the most significant instance of injustice in British history.
During a parliamentary session, Kemi Badenoch, the secretary of business, accused Staunton of deceit and attempting to get back at her for being fired last month. Rishi Sunak declined to echo her words during prime minister’s questions on Wednesday.
Staunton provided evidence for his assertions by sharing a note he had written during his conversation with Munby in January 2023. In the note, Staunton documented Munby’s statement that there was no desire to make abrupt changes to government finances and that a strategy was needed to make it through the upcoming election.
Munby has provided her own memory of the discussion and maintained that she never made any direct or indirect hints to Staunton about postponing the payments.
In a letter made public by the government on Wednesday, Munby assured Badenoch that he did not suggest or imply to Mr Staunton in any manner that there should be any delay in compensation payments.
The Guardian obtained a recording of statements made by the Post Office’s deputy CEO, Owen Woodley, during a monthly staff meeting on Wednesday.
During the recording, Woodley disagreed with Staunton’s statements made in his interview with the Sunday Times, stating that they were incorrect. Woodley also expressed that if Staunton had been instructed to postpone compensation payments, he should have stepped down from his position as it would have been unacceptable.
Woodley informed the Post Office workers that the statements made and the manner in which they were presented in the interview were incorrect. It is unclear why he made this decision, but he will need to explain his reasoning.
The speaker stated that there was never a time where they were instructed to decrease the pay of post office operators. This has never happened and there is no proof of it.
“In my opinion, if Henry Staunton was indeed informed of that, he should have stepped down immediately as it would have been unacceptable.”
The leaked comments are beneficial to the Post Office because they indicate that no other leaders were informed of a possible directive to postpone compensation payments.
Staunton’s representative affirmed his version of events and stated that he had a vivid memory of the conversation. He felt that the information he received about the government’s stance on the issues was unexpected, prompting him to take notes immediately and share them with his CEO.
The Labour party has demanded that the Cabinet Office conduct a thorough investigation into the allegations made by Staunton. During prime minister’s questions on Wednesday, Keir Starmer added to the pressure on Sunak regarding the controversy.
Starmer called on Sunak to put an end to the issue by making public the communication between the Post Office, the Department for Business, and UK Government Investments, which manages the government’s control of the Post Office.
Ignore the advertisement for the newsletter
after newsletter promotion
Starmer stated that a notable aspect of this error is that whenever concerns have been brought up, they have been disregarded.
Sunak replied to MPs by stating, “As the business secretary stated on Monday, she requested Henry Staunton’s resignation due to serious concerns that were brought to light. She explained the rationale behind this decision and provided a detailed explanation earlier this week in the house.”
The prime minister also stated that they have implemented unprecedented measures to guarantee timely and complete compensation for victims of the Horizon scandal.
There are requests for an inquiry to determine if Badenoch violated the ministerial guidelines by accusing Staunton of lying in parliament.
The Liberal Democrats have requested that Laurie Magnus, the government’s independent advisor on ministerial ethics, investigate whether Badenoch provided false information to Members of Parliament.
Starmer’s representative implied on Wednesday that Badenoch may have utilized her parliamentary privilege to make statements that she would not have been able to do otherwise.
The government maintains that post office operators’ compensation comes from a separate budget that is distinct from the Post Office’s operational budget. In her correspondence, Munby asserted that there is a clear division between the two budgets and that Staunton’s statement is illogical as reducing compensation would not impact Post Office operations.
Staunton stated that funds from both budgets are held by the Treasury until they are needed for specific payments. It is important to note that if these funds are not used, they will still be accessible to the Treasury.
From 1999 to 2015, numerous post office operators were charged by the Post Office due to a malfunctioning computer system called Horizon, which falsely indicated missing funds.
The government has committed to releasing laws in the near future that would automatically reverse any convictions associated with the scandal.
Source: theguardian.com
