MPs heard from key figures in the Post Office scandal, including victim Alan Bates, the company's boss and an executive from Fujitsu, the firm behind the faulty software that led to hundreds of wrongful convictions. Listen to our podcast on what we learnt at the hearing as you scroll.
Tuesday 16 January 2024 17:33, UK
Thank you for following our live page as we heard key figures in the Post Office scandal give evidence to MPs.
Scroll down to read all the main revelations as they happened - and you can read a thorough summary of proceedings in our previous post.
Read more of our coverage of the Post Office scandal here:
It was a busy morning for MPs on the Business and Trade Committee, who questioned several key witnesses regarding the Post Office scandal.
Here are the key things we learnt:
Victims still suffering
We heard first from Dr Neil Hudgell, a lawyer for sub-postmasters, and champion of their cause Lord Arbuthnot.
They painted a grim picture - one in which the vast majority of victims had not received their compensation, not had their convictions overturned or simply not been engaged with by guilty parties.
We learnt that more than 200 new legal inquiries were raised to Dr Hudgell since the ITV drama Mr Bates Vs The Post Office was aired.
Victims' voice
Next up came the famous Alan Bates and fellow former sub-postmistress Jo Hamilton, who provided some insight into how the victims of this scandal have been affected.
Mr Bates said the Post Office had engineered a system in which it could effectively point a "financial gun" at the heads of sub-postmasters and mistresses.
Ms Hamilton said she had been "gaslit" by the Post Office into thinking she had committed offences.
"They convinced me that it was all my fault and I wasn't tech savvy at all," she told the committee.
Fujitsu 'sorry'
The head of Fujitsu's European operation began his time in front of the committee with an apology to those affected.
"Fujitsu would like to apologise for our part in this appalling miscarriage of justice," Paul Patterson, who was not at the company at the time of the scandal, said.
"We did have bugs and errors in the system and we did help the Post Office in their prosecutions of the sub-postmasters and for that we are truly sorry."
Bruising questioning for Post Office boss
Nick Read, head of the Post Office, had a rough afternoon in front of the committee.
Members repeatedly asked him about the timeline of events - but he said he was unable to answer many of the questions because he only joined the business in 2019.
This earned him the wrath of several members, including the chair.
"You must surely have had time in four years to cut to the heart of this issue," Liam Byrne said.
Labour MP Ian Lavery said: "If we're bringing people in front of the committee, we would expect them at least to have knowledge of the history of what's happened - [especially for] something as big as this - and I'm absolutely appalled at the answers which we've received."
Mr Read appeared frustrated throughout proceedings, often telling members of the committee he would have to come back to them with answers to their questions.
The chair then said in his closing statement that Mr Read's evidence, and that of Mr Patterson, had left the committee "fairly shocked".
Post Office minister says Horizon 'least worst option'
Kevin Hollinrake said little we haven't heard, but one takeaway is that the government has not set a deadline for compensating all the victims.
Mr Hollinrake said he wanted to see that process completed by August, but he emphasised: "It's not a deadline", rather "an ambition we want to deliver this scheme by".
He also described the Horizon system, which is still in place, as "the least worst option" for the Post Office's needs, adding that the government was helping to fund the move away from that system despite the mooted 拢270m cost.
Alan Bates - the former sub-postmaster portrayed by Toby Jones in the ITV drama Mr Bates Vs The Post Office - gave evidence to MPs this morning.
He shared his frustration that the compensation scheme appears to be "tied up in bureaucracy" and his claim is "bogged down".
And Jo Hamilton, a former sub-postmistress whose story is also told in the drama, explained the "nonsense" of having to explain every part of her claim as part of the process to gain redress, saying she was "gaslit" by the Post Office.
Watch the key parts of their questioning here...
That's it from the Business and Trade Committee.
We heard from a number of involved parties today - including the Post Office, Fujitsu, affected sub-postmasters and the government on the scandal.
However, the inquiry continues - and many of today's witnesses will be facing further scrutiny.
You can read back through this live blog to read what was said when.
Postal minister Kevin Hollinrake is asked about the compensation being paid to postal workers, and where the money should come from.
The government has contributed just over 拢1bn - money from the taxpayer - to the Post Office so it can make payments.
This is a "very significant bill", according to Mr Hollinrake.
"Our suspicion" is that it will go above the 拢1bn figure, he adds.
He says he welcomes Fujitsu director Paul Patterson saying the company has a "moral obligation" to contribute to the compensation.
Mr Hollinrake says there is no plan to start a new scheme, but rather any money from Fujitsu will be repaid to the taxpayer.
Context: The 拢1bn was paid by the government to the Post Office in 2021, and came about in three tranches.
Read more about that here:
Kevin Hollinrake is asked why the Post Office is still using Horizon.
He says the system remains "the least worst option".
"This is one of the biggest IT systems and networks I think in Europe and if not the world," he says, adding that it would cost some 拢270m to replace right now without a top-level viable alternative.
Mr Hollinrake says the system has been rebuilt, but that the Post Office has indicated that it wants to move away from it anyway.
"That's something that we are funding to help the process," he says.
Postal minister Kevin Hollinrake explains the impact the ITV drama, Mr Bates Vs The Post Office, had on the scandal.
He says he hopes people who had to fight for acquittal in the courts - rather than being cleared en masse - should not feel like their experience is devalued.
He says: "I think people can see there's this massive, widespread miscarriage of justice.
"It's not just the scale of it, it's the depth of it.
"It's the scale of it in terms of the number of people, but the depth of it in terms of the impact on people's lives.
"And I think that's what really came through in that dramatisation."
Kevin Hollinrake is asked about guilty sub-postmasters and their place in the compensation process.
"I think there is a significant chance that some people who are actually guilty of something will get compensation," he says.
"I think we should be honest about that."
He says compensating the guilty may be the "lesser of two evils" in the interest of making sure that the droves of innocent people are processed quicker.
A more thorough process based on faulty evidence from the Horizon system would likely take far longer to investigate - slowing down already lengthy compensation claims by the innocent.
"It's the only way, but I think it's imperfect," he says.
He adds he is willing to hear from the committee and other ministers on how to mitigate the risk.
Kevin Hollinrake, the minister for the Post Office, says previous governments did not sufficiently challenge the company.
He says he does not blame one particular minister, but says that over the past 20 years: "I don't think we've been sufficiently challenging."
Mr Hollinrake says he does not think the scandal would have happened if ministers had been.
"But, you know, we all make mistakes," Mr Hollinrake says.
And challenging the company is now part of the relationship, he adds.
Kevin Hollinrake is now facing the committee.
He says the government's "priority" is to sort compensation out, which the committee chair quickly points out is not going well.
"We'll get to that," Mr Hollinrake says.
He's then asked whether a short and sharp legislative bill could be passed to speed the process up.
"I don't have any objection to that," he says.
The chair then asks for a definitive date for when all of those still awaiting financial redress will receive it.
"I very much hope to hope that will be by August," he replies, but does not make a firm commitment to this.
"It's not a deadline," he says.
"It's an ambition we want to deliver this scheme by."
