-
Question
Will the Secretary of State categorically state that at no point was it suggested that a delay would be of benefit to the Treasury?
Minister reply
The minister will not hesitate to defend herself against baseless attacks. She confirmed that there is no evidence of any instruction or inference to delay compensation payments for personal motives, and she emphasised the Government's commitment to delivering swift and fair redress to all affected postmasters.
-
Question
Will there be a Cabinet Office investigation to ensure that no such instruction or inference was given at any point?
Minister reply
The minister emphasised the need for transparency and scrutiny, but she did not commit to a specific Cabinet Office investigation. She urged all parties to work towards clarity and truth regarding the allegations.
-
Question
Will compensation payments be specifically itemised in the upcoming Budget?
Minister reply
The minister did not provide a direct answer but reiterated her commitment to transparency. She highlighted that over £160 million has already been paid out across three compensation schemes, and an additional £150 million was committed to support Post Office activities related to the scandal.
-
Question
Reynolds questioned whether the Post Office was instructed to delay compensation payments or if a delay would be beneficial for the Treasury. He also inquired about the £1 billion allocated for compensation, asking if it is already sitting in the Department's accounts. Reynolds further sought assurances that no obstruction has been placed on any other scandal-related payments and requested full publication of relevant correspondence.
Minister reply
The Secretary of State confirmed there was no instruction to delay payments and stated that such a decision would not make sense given no financial benefit exists. She also indicated that the compensation scheme under Henry Staunton’s watch has been completed with 100% payment made but declined full publication of correspondence due to parliamentary inquiry processes.
-
Question
Scully, a former postal affairs Minister, questioned whether conversations about colluding to slow down the compensation did not happen and reiterated the need for more money to be paid out as soon as possible.
Minister reply
The Secretary of State confirmed that there were no such discussions. She stated that officials would have raised any issues with ministers had they occurred.
-
Question
Fellows questioned whether Nick Read wrote a letter defending convictions and asked about the derisory offers made to sub-postmasters. She also inquired about Post Office’s investigators still being employed.
Minister reply
The Secretary of State denied that any pressure was put on Nick Read to write such a letter. She clarified that the main compensation scheme saw 84% acceptance rate among those offered and mentioned that the inquiry is looking into ongoing investigations.
-
Question
Redwood asked for a review of UKGI’s governance, questioning how they managed Post Office's treatment of sub-postmasters and allowed significant financial losses.
Minister reply
The Secretary of State noted recent personnel changes and stated that until the day she dismissed Staunton, no difficulties with UKGI were communicated.
-
Question
The Secretary of State should produce all correspondence between UKGI and Post Office regarding the overturning of convictions. The statement is a cover-up and not open to scrutiny.
Minister reply
Rejects the assertion that there was any instruction from UKGI or others to write the letter about potential guilt, asserting that it was Nick Read's decision.
-
Question
Reflecting on the comments of board members regarding former chairman Henry Staunton's performance and the subsequent dismissal.
Minister reply
Agrees with the sentiment that Staunton was not performing his duties well, justifying his removal.
-
Question
What further actions are being taken to ensure all sub-postmasters receive compensation for their losses due to the Horizon scandal?
Minister reply
Emphasises efforts made to expedite compensation payments through a formal process.
-
Question
Assures constituents that the compensation process is straightforward and encourages affected individuals to come forward.
Minister reply
Reassures people about the fairness of the compensation process and the commitment to ensure equitable treatment.
-
Question
Alleges a pattern of delayed action by the Government, similar to the handling of the infected blood scandal.
Minister reply
Rejects the allegation, highlighting pre-ITV drama actions taken for compensation.
-
Question
Asks what measures are being taken to improve practices at the Post Office board and address negative language towards postmasters.
Minister reply
Affirms efforts to find new leadership for the Post Office and notes concern over potential misinformation deterring candidates.
-
Question
Cites evidence of delays in compensation payments from his own constituents' experience.
Minister reply
Acknowledges the delay but assures that a fixed sum award is available and emphasises efforts to expedite payments.
-
Question
Requests assurance for compensation for an affected postmaster who was not prosecuted.
Minister reply
Commits to ensuring fair compensation and assures that cases can be reviewed through the postal affairs Minister.
-
Question
Ministers have promised to swiftly exonerate and compensate victims, but why has Chris Head received only a 13% compensation offer? Can the Secretary of State confirm that sub-postmasters can trust the Government or the Post Office with their claims?
Minister reply
The legislation was passed in December without opposition support. While I do not have specific details on Kate Osborne's constituent, there is an appeals process and independent panel for those unsatisfied with offers.
-
Question
Will the Secretary of State block any payouts to Henry Staunton given his failure in handling compensation?
Minister reply
There will be no payments to Henry Staunton.
-
Question
Does the Secretary of State agree that addressing compensation issues quickly would answer for Henry Staunton's management failure?
Minister reply
The right hon. Gentleman is correct; we aim to ensure all receive fair compensation and are working towards this goal.
-
Question
Does the Secretary of State agree that Labour's current stance supports disgraced Post Office management despite wrongful imprisonments?
Minister reply
The hon. Friend is correct; multiple changes have been made to ensure proper leadership.
-
Question
How did the Secretary of State find out about Mr Staunton’s dismissal, given it was leaked to Sky News before she informed him?
Minister reply
The information was leaked from an unknown source within the Department or Post Office; I called Sky News and another outlet to prevent premature publication.
-
Question
Is the Secretary of State willing to refer herself to the ethics adviser due to her statement on Mr Staunton’s dismissal?
Minister reply
The hon. Lady's assertion is ridiculous; I have officials, Post Office board members, and media outlets backing up my claims.
-
Question
Is it acceptable for the Post Office to still be involved in investigations given its discredited process?
Minister reply
The inquiry’s work, individual case reviews, and proper process setup aim to give postmasters confidence.
-
Question
Will the Government compensate former sub-postmasters not only for financial loss but also for personal harm caused by the scandal?
Minister reply
The goal is to ensure no one ends up worse off; additional compensation will be provided where possible.
-
Question
Given past Government scandals, should independent bodies manage Government compensation schemes for public confidence?
Minister reply
The hon. Lady mentions decade-long scandals but overlooks that the Horizon scandal began under a Labour government; this Government is addressing it.
-
Question
Raises the case of Mr Pennington, a sub-postmaster for 20 years who suffered financial distress due to errors in the Horizon system and has received only partial compensation. Asks when shortcomings will be reviewed so full compensation can be provided.
Minister reply
Acknowledges the issue and states that they are working with an advisory board to address it, ensuring proper compensation for affected sub-postmasters.
-
Question
Questions if millions of pounds spent on compensating innocent sub-postmasters could have been better used to keep post offices open. Mentions the closure of Clapham Common post office.
Minister reply
States that efforts can be made both to compensate and keep post offices open.
-
Question
Asks for confirmation that Northern Ireland will be included in legislation addressing the compensation of sub-postmasters with criminal convictions, despite current Government reluctance.
Minister reply
Confirms ongoing conversations with devolved Governments to address the issue, without a definitive answer yet.
-
Question
Requests assurance that compensation will be paid before the general election, highlighting the distress of sub-postmasters awaiting payments.
Minister reply
Reiterates that delaying compensation until after the election is 'complete nonsense' and states a commitment to ensure quick payment.
-
Question
Requests an update on the expected timescale for compensating sub-postmasters across the UK, noting that some have waited up to three years.
Minister reply
States a commitment to see everyone receive compensation by the end of this year.