Page 14 of 56
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:13pm
by Psamathe
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:58pm
mjr wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 11:55am
ncutler wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 11:40am
This is the text of an email I have just sent to my MP - not that I expect it to achieve anything ....[...]
PS: The pot holes in the village increase in size and number daily.
Almost certainly a matter for your county councillor, not your MP. I would prefer national money spent on strategic transport, not repairing motoring damage, and their attention on reforming the PO.
Some of the money saved by abandoning much of HS2 will be spent on fixing roads, or so Sunak says.
Will he actually be able to do that under the Gov. "Fiscal Rules"? As I understand it HS2 was a capital investment and money would have been borrowed on a different basis from revenue spending for things like potholes.
Ian
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:22pm
by Psamathe
To me the Government has made a complete mess of things. As many far more qualified experts are saying, it does concern me that Parliament is intending to interfere with the Court system. I can appreciate that it is now urgent but seems to me it is now urgent because the Government has largely ignored the issue for far far too long. Had the Gov. acted in a timely manner, put in place sensible procedures to resolve cases, etc. then there would now be no need to Gov. to interfere with the Courts (retrospectively overriding them).
ie The urgency is of the Government's own making through ignoring the issues and failing to act appropriately. That it took a drama creating public opinion to kick politicians to jumping on the bandwagon speaks volumes about the poor quality of many politicians.
Ian
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:35pm
by pete75
toontra wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 1:03pm
To sum up Bradshaw'a evidence:
"I was a small cog"
"I don't remember - it was a long time ago"
"I'm not intelligent enough to understand the technical elements of these cases"
He's squirming and barely controlling his temper.
He stood by and facilitated convictions, including giving witness statements for the prosecution, denying there were strong suspicions there were serious problems with Horizon and didn't disclose any of this to the defence (as was his legal duty).
He is bang square at the centre of this and I truly hope he is eventually prosecuted and imprisoned for his complicity.
At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, we've heard those words many times before.
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:37pm
by thirdcrank
I've no doubt that Stephen Bradshaw is in an uncomfortable situation but inquiry chair Sir Wyn Willliams is well-placed and qualified to assess his testimony. ie not just the words he says now, but things like his deportment as he says them. And all in the context of everything he has heard during the earliier sessions of this inquiry
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:42pm
by mjr
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:58pm
mjr wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 11:55am
ncutler wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 11:40am
This is the text of an email I have just sent to my MP - not that I expect it to achieve anything ....[...]
PS: The pot holes in the village increase in size and number daily.
Almost certainly a matter for your county councillor, not your MP. I would prefer national money spent on strategic transport, not repairing motoring damage, and their attention on reforming the PO.
Some of the money saved by abandoning much of HS2 will be spent on fixing roads, or so Sunak says.
If you believe that, I've a bridge I'd like to sell you!
Remember, Sunak also said cancelling HS2 north would pay to build an existing tram link to Manchester airport and a couple of other completed projects, despite now no longer being able to borrow against the future income of HS2 north and planning to sell land off probably at a loss.
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:44pm
by mjr
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:56pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:45pm
He does appear to be being remarkably defensive. Just observing.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 76978.html
Just imagine the furore if police officers were to be offered a bonus for convictions.
"Gary Thomas – a former member of the Post Office security team between 2000 and 2012 – told the public inquiry there were “bonus objectives” for investigators. Asked if influenced his actions, he said: “I’d probably be lying if I said no.”
Another former Post Office investigator Dave Posnett told the inquiry last month that bonuses were partly based on the sums of money recovered once subpostmasters had been convicted. Mr Posnett said “everyone within the security team was on a bonus, depending on their own objectives”."
Do we know that anyone's bonus objectives included convictions?
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:45pm
by Bonefishblues
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:56pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:45pm
He does appear to be being remarkably defensive. Just observing.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 76978.html
Just imagine the furore if police officers were to be offered a bonus for convictions.
"Gary Thomas – a former member of the Post Office security team between 2000 and 2012 – told the public inquiry there were “bonus objectives” for investigators. Asked if influenced his actions, he said: “I’d probably be lying if I said no.”
Another former Post Office investigator Dave Posnett told the inquiry last month that bonuses were partly based on the sums of money recovered once subpostmasters had been convicted. Mr Posnett said “everyone within the security team was on a bonus, depending on their own objectives”."
Holy Grail of Comp. & Ben. professionals that is - reward driving behaviour. Just make absolutely sure it's going to drive the right behaviour...
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 1:46pm
by Bonefishblues
mjr wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 1:44pm
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:56pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:45pm
He does appear to be being remarkably defensive. Just observing.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 76978.html
Just imagine the furore if police officers were to be offered a bonus for convictions.
"Gary Thomas – a former member of the Post Office security team between 2000 and 2012 – told the public inquiry there were “bonus objectives” for investigators. Asked if influenced his actions, he said: “I’d probably be lying if I said no.”
Another former Post Office investigator Dave Posnett told the inquiry last month that bonuses were partly based on the sums of money recovered once subpostmasters had been convicted. Mr Posnett said “everyone within the security team was on a bonus, depending on their own objectives”."
Do we know that anyone's bonus objectives included convictions?
'Recoveries' were certainly explicit:
Gary Thomas, from the Post Office security team, told the inquiry there were “bonus objectives”, according to the Telegraph.
When asked if it influenced decisions, he said: “I’d probably be lying if I said no because… it was part of the business, the culture of the business of recoveries or even under the terms of a postmaster’s contract with the contracts manager.”
In a 2021 email sent from Mr Thomas to Post Office boss Nick Read, he wrote: “My yearly objectives that were bonus worthy at the time were based on numbers of successful prosecutions and recovery amounts of money to the business.”
Former postmaster Alan Bates, who was the focus of ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office, said the offering of financial incentives for prosecutions was “appalling”.
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 2:41pm
by peetee
I’m rather late to this story and haven’t read the whole of this thread but did see the last two episodes of the telly drama.
Every organisation suffers criminal activity but somewhere like the Post Office must have a relatively quantifiable and constant element year-on-year.
Did no one think to compare these statistics in order to establish whether the Horizon system might have been responsible?
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 3:05pm
by Mike Sales
Handing back a CBE costs nothing, financially speaking. So it is little wonder that Paula Vennells, former chief executive of the Post Office, has discovered that returning her absurd award has prompted another question. Yes, but what about your bonuses?
The demand is obviously fair. And, critically, it is fair even according to the rules of the bonus scheme that operated during her seven years at the top from 2012 and 2019. Both the short-term incentive plan (STIP) and long-term (LTIP) at the Post Office clearly stated that there could be situations in which bonuses could be cancelled and individuals told to return cash.
This wording is from the Post Office’s 2012-13 accounts (page 52) and near-identical versions can be found in every subsequent year of Vennells’s tenure: “Executive directors have clawback clauses in their contracts, as well as the STIP and LTIP rules, which provide for the return of any overpayments in the event of misstatement of the accounts, error or gross misconduct on the part of an executive. These provisions are in line with market best practice.”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/ni ... s-allow-it
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 3:41pm
by pete75
mjr wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 1:44pm
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:56pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:45pm
He does appear to be being remarkably defensive. Just observing.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 76978.html
Just imagine the furore if police officers were to be offered a bonus for convictions.
"Gary Thomas – a former member of the Post Office security team between 2000 and 2012 – told the public inquiry there were “bonus objectives” for investigators. Asked if influenced his actions, he said: “I’d probably be lying if I said no.”
Another former Post Office investigator Dave Posnett told the inquiry last month that bonuses were partly based on the sums of money recovered once subpostmasters had been convicted. Mr Posnett said “everyone within the security team was on a bonus, depending on their own objectives”."
Do we know that anyone's bonus objectives included convictions?
Read the quote from Dave Posnett above. The aim of teh investigators was to gather evidence for charge, trial and conviction.
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 3:45pm
by pete75
Bonefishblues wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 1:45pm
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:56pm
Bonefishblues wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:45pm
He does appear to be being remarkably defensive. Just observing.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 76978.html
Just imagine the furore if police officers were to be offered a bonus for convictions.
"Gary Thomas – a former member of the Post Office security team between 2000 and 2012 – told the public inquiry there were “bonus objectives” for investigators. Asked if influenced his actions, he said: “I’d probably be lying if I said no.”
Another former Post Office investigator Dave Posnett told the inquiry last month that bonuses were partly based on the sums of money recovered once subpostmasters had been convicted. Mr Posnett said “everyone within the security team was on a bonus, depending on their own objectives”."
Holy Grail of Comp. & Ben. professionals that is - reward driving behaviour. Just make absolutely sure it's going to drive the right behaviour...
And who decides what is the right behaviour? The rewards are to drive what is seen as good for the business.
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 3:47pm
by mjr
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 3:41pm
mjr wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 1:44pm
pete75 wrote: 11 Jan 2024, 12:56pm
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 76978.html
Just imagine the furore if police officers were to be offered a bonus for convictions.
"Gary Thomas – a former member of the Post Office security team between 2000 and 2012 – told the public inquiry there were “bonus objectives” for investigators. Asked if influenced his actions, he said: “I’d probably be lying if I said no.”
Another former Post Office investigator Dave Posnett told the inquiry last month that bonuses were partly based on the sums of money recovered once subpostmasters had been convicted. Mr Posnett said “everyone within the security team was on a bonus, depending on their own objectives”."
Do we know that anyone's bonus objectives included convictions?
Read the quote from Dave Posnett above. The aim of teh investigators was to gather evidence for charge, trial and conviction.
That aim is not necessarily the objective set for a bonus.
Given the rubbish the current CEO had as a bonus objective, it seems likely someone was being paid per conviction, but I'd like to see it explicitly stated before assuming it.
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 4:50pm
by freiston
Whether they were paid bonuses based on the number of convictions or not, being as Posnett said that they were paid (partly) based on the sums recovered after conviction, then it follows that more convictions equals more sums recovered - equals higher bonuses.
Re: Ex-Post Office CEO Paula Vennells
Posted: 11 Jan 2024, 4:56pm
by toontra
Bradshaw deflected, obfuscated and squirmed (as he did throughout to be fair) when directly asked about "performance" bonuses. That suggests to me they were indeed paid for successful prosecutions.