10 ms·

Post Office plan to sack Horizon IT reviewer kept secret, documents reveal

187 points by physicsguy 3y ago

forinti 3y ago
Having read Nick Wallis' excellent book on this matter, I think that, although the PO and Fujitsu acted in a despicable and criminal manner, the institution that really failed was British Justice. People were sent to jail on the basis of a single number spat out from a black box called Horizon. And to charge someone of false accounting when the system didn't give them much of an option and they communicated it to the helpline baffles me. It seems like their lawyers were pretty useless.
- yrro 3y ago
  > People were sent to jail on the basis of a single number spat out from a black box called Horizon. Something also has to be done about the unjust consequences of plea bargaining. Many were convicted on the basis that they admitted to crimes that they did not commit. I think we also have to get rid of Magistrate's courts and private prosecutions. It's ridiculous that these still exist in a modern state that operates under the presumption of the rule of law.
  - actionfromafar 3y ago
    The UK is modern in a sense of course but it's really archaic when it comes to jurisdiction.
  - bokononon 3y ago
    The postmasters' lawyers have to be put in front of the Inquiry for this utter deriliction of duty.
    - thinkingemote 3y ago
      Many of them have done. Most have either said I don't remember or I was only following orders from above. A few might make the concession that they were misled. One exception would be one barrister who it seemed to be to express genuine regret. Even he said he was in denial for a long time and only came to the realisation recently.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - pfdietz 3y ago
        > I was only following orders from above Nuremberg has entered the chat.
  - Mvandenbergh 3y ago
    Plea bargains are heavily restricted in the UK and many of these cases were heard in Crown courts. I agree about getting rid of private prosecutions though.
- b112 3y ago
  Agree that the courts are somewhat to blame. But really, to me, the full blame should be on the Post Office, and those involved. Trying to conceal problems? Purposefully ignoring bugs? Not listening to, well, everyone. Lying to the courts? People need to be in jail, and starting at the top. I'm not going to absolve Fujitsu, but I have worked government contracts in Canada. They constantly change, morph requirements, not for any real reasons other than "Oh you build this entire thing? We didn't think of X, let's add that". Meanwhile, X basically means an entire rewrite. I've even had situations where "Let's add X" happens, then after done, "Aw, never mind, remove that". It's a different world.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    I'm not sure that both of these can be true at once: > Agree that the courts are somewhat to blame. > But really, to me, the full blame should be on the Post Office, and those involved. Anyway. > They constantly change, morph requirements All software systems are like that. Even if they weren't, the moment a new law comes in you'd need to change them anyway. If the engineering process and build can't withstand change, that's a problem. It seems clear that the Post Office and Fujitsu were complicit in the coverup, and the justice system utterly failed the defendants. All three are so poorly behaved, I hope some change will be triggered. Sadly, I think the way of the world is all organisations regress to the mean, and lots of them are allowed to let their mean get pretty low.
  - Xylakant 3y ago
    I consider “the full blame should be on the Post Office, and those involved.” a dangerous position. A systems must hold even if individuals fail or behave in malicious ways, and focusing strongly on individual culpability tends to overshadow the failures of the system. It’s very easy to go on from there to “If those individuals had just acted properly, none of this would have happened.” I don’t mean to diminish the culpability of all those involved in the coverup, but the system needs fixing more than they need punishment. Fixing the system has a chance of preventing future harm, punishment does not, at least not to the same extend.
    - lupire 3y ago
- moritonal 3y ago
  Creeping around the matter of when can code be trusted. To my knowledge the UK doesn't have the strictest methods to qualify code as "correct in the eyes of the law". Anyone know more on this?
  - edent 3y ago
    As I understand it, the problem is one of hyperbolic doubt. Imagine if you were on trial where the evidence against you came from, say, a computerised breathalyser. You might argue that the code has bugs. Then that the configuration was wrong. Then that the hardware design was faulty. Then that the individual components were broken. Then that the data was altered in transmission. Then that a hacker got in. Then that a cosmic ray corrupted the data. And so on. The defendant has no proof that the evidence is faulty, and the producers of the evidence can demonstrate (to some degree) that their hardware & software are correct. At some point, the court has to accept the evidence presented to it. In the UK, at the moment, the assumption is that a computer is operating correctly unless shown otherwise. The BCS (I'm a member) goes in to a little detail about why they think this presumption should change https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/computer-is-always-right-law-must-be-urgently-reviewed-to-stop-another-post-office-scandal-says-professional-body/ https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/computer-i...
  - RichieAHB 3y ago
    It feels like that might be a fair point in other context but as one of your sibling posts says: this is just double entry book keeping. Print out the transactions with their timestamps and it feels this should have been very clearly a computer error given the duplicates etc.
    - cge 3y ago
      I recall seeing in released emails about the Callendar Square bug that it's debatable as to whether what the system was doing was properly double entry. In that case, my interpretation of the emails was that there were transactions that were nominally recorded as multiple double-entry transactions, but involved, eg, a transfer from account A to a hidden outstanding account X, and a transfer from account from X to account B. Then the account X wasn't actually tracked anywhere or even expected to balance on any individual system: it appears that when multiple counters at the location were involved, the transactions weren't necessarily synchronized between them. In that case, if you have three £1k transfers from A to X (two of which are duplicates), and one £1k transfer from X to B, then it will look like £2k disappeared unless you check the balance of X. To me, that sounds like an accounting system made by people who fundamentally didn't understand the point of double-entry accounting, because a double-entry accounting system that uses hidden or untracked accounts entirely removes that point and is just equivalent to a single-entry accounting system. Presumably, if all those transactions were properly stored and then combined, a full double-entry ledger could be reconstructed, but it appears the system itself couldn't do that in at least some cases. Of course, there also seems to be the suggestion that part of the Post Office's argument to subpostmasters was that even if the problems were obvious, like clear duplicate transactions, they were still liable per the contract.
- ActionHank 3y ago
  I don't understand why someone didn't push for an itemized breakdown as a double-entry ledger. This would have covered the shifts in money and where they came from and is one of the most basic accounting tools.
  - db48x 3y ago
    The Horizon system failed to keep accurate records. It was a kind of distributed database, with individual users entering data on their terminals and occasionally connecting (potentially via dialup, iirc) to a central system to sync their records. But it was implemented badly, and records could and did get lost or modified. Records could be edited at any time by any of several parties, including the postmasters, but then when they were synced those edits could be silently lost. The resulting ledger does not and can not accurately reflect reality, thus the lost money and the convictions.
    - sorokod 3y ago
      Assuming that an itemized breakdown was requested, this is a possible answer as to why it can't be provided. How can a prosecution continue following such answer is a different question.
      - db48x 3y ago
        The prosecution would happily provide the itemized transactions, because the missing transactions are exactly what they are prosecuting. They know there were N pieces of mail that day, but payment was recorded only for N − 2 or whatever. The lies and coverup from the Postal service and Fujitsu were to there to hide the flaws in the system from the courts and the defendants. Even the prosecutors have said that they were completely in the dark. It’s only now that the independent reports are out that everyone knows the details. Unless you know about the bugs in the system, the itemized transaction list makes it look exactly like the cashiers were pocketing cash and not actually ringing up the sales. It’s a classic scam that any competent retail manager or owner knows to guard against. The only difference is that these cashiers nominally own the stores they run. If they pocketed the cash from the sale of a candy bar then there would be no crime; the cash was theirs to begin with. But since they are also working for a third party (the post office), the possibility of theft is a real one.
- mvc 3y ago
  It seems nuts to me that the Post Office was allowed to prosecute their own cases rather than pass what information they had to the police who could conduct an independent investigation.
denton-scratch 3y ago
Pity we can't read the Project Sparrow minutes.
- planede 3y ago
  I wonder if the redacted versions are available in higher resolution. I think the downscaled version could potentially be deciphered if the exact font is identified.
  - tyingq 3y ago
    Not sure if there's a better source, but there is this: https://www.postofficetrial.com/2021/03/project-sparrow-first-board-minutes.html https://www.postofficetrial.com/2021/03/project-sparrow-firs... Looks like Arial to me. Edit: Yes, it's Arial. Played with typing up a passage in Arial and adjusting using MS Word's justified text setting. I was able to get the right spacing etc. Here's an overlay with a image snip of the original document and my attempt (in red) overlayed. It looks almost identical. https://imgur.com/a/EUy3jpl https://imgur.com/a/EUy3jpl
    - planede 3y ago
      Sure enough, it is Arial. https://imgur.com/a/WAdo55M https://imgur.com/a/WAdo55M I might play with imageworsener to see if I can figure out the exact downscaling method. edit: ah, you beat me to it. I just played with Inkscape and word spacing to match that line. The scanned document looks very lightly slanted, but I don't think it matters too much.
icu 3y ago
I think this is a similar situation where business leaders and managers get away from any meaningful repercussions just like in the '08 negligence of regulators and bankers, or with Grenfell tower where the cladding vendor managers faked the tests, or knew of the faked tests. I think the issue comes down to the link between business and Government and how to save itself from embarrassment and extra work rectifying the situation, civil servants and ministers will try to speed up the cover up.
- MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
  Burnham [0] kind of predicted the rise of unaccountable managerial class way back in 1941, at the end of his Marxist phase. Not the fully correct picture to understand the world we are currently living in, but certainly an interesting read and important milestone to thinkers that came after him. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burnham#The_Managerial_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burnham#The_Managerial_R...
  - smackay 3y ago
    Thanks for the reference. There are quite a few writers railing against the current Professional Managerial Class (PMC). It's very interesting to see that their rise has quite a long history. Where things appear to have gone off the rails is that the PMC are now more interested in the management of perception than actually managing. The proposed solution is to get more competent managers but Burnham points out that the issue is likely more fundamental than that and a new social organisation may be required to deal with their shortcomings.
    - jack_riminton 3y ago
      Yes the 'management of perception' is a key point here because that is essentially what politics is, and this case was so close to politics i.e. the government was the sole shareholder, the Post Office needed to show a profit so it could be sold The CEO was effectively rewarded for managing the crisis (when the crisis was in full swing in 2019) by the government through the award of the CBE and a seat on the board of an NHS trust etc.
_a_a_a_ 3y ago
"Paula Anne Vennells (born 21 February 1959) is a British former businesswoman who was the chief executive officer of Post Office Limited from 2012 to 2019. She is also an Anglican priest" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Vennells https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Vennells I don't understand how somebody who can be a priest, appointed by God to do the right thing, was unable to behave morally. I just don't understand how she could live with herself, a priest that deliberately and knowingly hurt people to support a system which she knew was wrong. If she'd had any sense she would have realised this was going to come out anyway. I don't understand her selfishness and stupidity and cruelty. (I'm not having a go at christianity but a particular christian, before the arguments start; please don't)
- s_dev 3y ago
  The problem here is you assume people who subscribe to a faith or pursue it more piously are or should at least be more moral in some way.
  - _a_a_a_ 3y ago
    Well yes, she had a book, with written instructions from her own deity telling her not to be a tosser, and she still didn't follow it even as a priest. I truly don't understand.
    - dessimus 3y ago
      So did Catholic priests, and that didn't stop them from diddling kids nor the Church from helping cover it up.
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      I do not understand what you do not understand. People are capable of lying, to others and themselves. As of yet, there is no external influence with a proven mechanism of action that can fully prevent that.
    - Libcat99 3y ago
      If you need a book to tell you this is wrong, that may be part of the problem.
nobodyandproud 3y ago
Every time I read about this scandal, it reminds me how important independent journalism really is. I actually donated money to The Guardian, and (reluctantly) restarted my NY Times subscription a few months ago. While the UK has an extra level of horrible, the US has its own corporate and government Post Master scandals.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 3y ago
  Similar example I gave recently that reminded me of how important independent journalism is: https://www.kxan.com/investigations/no-more-paper-license-plates-new-law-tears-up-old-system/amp/ https://www.kxan.com/investigations/no-more-paper-license-pl... Widespread criminal ring that created issue spanning all 50 states uncovered and eventually fixed primarily from one institution’s Austin, TX based reporting.
  - nobodyandproud 3y ago
    Paper tags always seemed a bit dodgy, but now I see why it’s been flying under the radar: Too good for the criminals to lose. Local journalists need even more support, and they have even less support. If there’s one legacy I and others can leave for the younger generations, it’s rebuilding a robust habit, culture, and network of paid-for journalism.
- monsecchris 3y ago
  I'm not sure I would consider The Guardian and the NYT to be independent.
  - daverol 3y ago
    You might not like their stance on issues, but in today's media landscape The Guardian is as good as it gets: https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-trust https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-trust
    - Karunamon 3y ago
pjmq 3y ago
Pretty much everyone who was not a sub-postmaster involved in the Horizon mess needs to be sentenced. The sheer malice on display here is inescapable. These people killed people and hid their mess. Plain and simple.
- wozniacki 3y ago
  Yes, indeed. In as many words. Two things here that come to mind: 1) The lack of muckraking agents in this whole affair - individuals, investigative bodies, the media, non-governmental agencies, British billionaires who have the wherewithal to finance private investigative operations etc. The sheer magnitude of that shortfall is just worrying. For those that are not fully familiar with the scope of the issues here : Between 1999 and 2015, an estimated 3500 staff employed by the state-owned Post Office service were accused of fraud, theft or malicious accounting. Almost 700 of them were convicted in courts and some 230 were jailed. Most were legally compelled to repay the amounts they were accused of fleecing, resulting in bankruptcies, marriage failures, substance abuse and even suicides. There was just one not-so-little problem – virtually all of those people were innocent.[1] I mean how does something like that go on for so long! Especially when lives have been torn apart! Its one thing for public money to be pilfered & squandered. That happens everywhere. But those people have been wrecked, if that article is to be believed. 2) Whats more concerning is the larger question : a) if people have been made to put up with these kinds of horrendous miscarriages of justice for so long, in a postal services affair, what other miscarriages of justice are there that go unnoticed, uninvestigated and unpunished. b) is this "part and parcel" of middle income British life? do the Brits put a large amount of trust in their unimpeachable public institutions? do they pull themselves back, short of calling into question the integrity of those that are tasked with such jobs? (atleast more so than is the case in the United States and elsewhere). I ask because I've come across things that seem to buttress exactly that : It is also forcing everyone to pay higher taxes for worse public services: The great British Middle Class live in a world of petty crime that goes un-investigated let alone punished, over-crowded emergency health services, and ever-lengthening NHS waiting lists (Britain has one of the lowest ratios of doctors and hospital beds per patient in the whole of the OECD). I have come across this kind of uniquely British reluctance to call a spade a spade, in quite a few other instances as well. Dr. John Campbell of Youtube fame comes to mind but I digress.[3] [1] Inside the incredible and devastating postal service scandal that could bring down the UK government https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/inside-the-incredible-and-devastating-postal-service-scandal-that-could-bring-down-the-uk-government/news-story/44aeb4c184336cfe4b11b506abf01f0b https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/inside-the-incr... [2] Britain Should Stop Pretending It’s a Rich Country https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/18/stagnant-britain-needs-growth-if-it-wants-to-be-a-rich-country/a9f39bd6-2526-11ee-9201-826e5bb78fa1_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/18/stagnant-... [3] Dr. John Campbell https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching/videos https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching/videos
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

187 points by physicsguy 3y ago

Having read Nick Wallis' excellent book on this matter, I think that, although the PO and Fujitsu acted in a despicable and criminal manner, the institution that really failed was British Justice. People were sent to jail on the basis of a single number spat out from a black box called Horizon. And to charge someone of false accounting when the system didn't give them much of an option and they communicated it to the helpline baffles me. It seems like their lawyers were pretty useless.

yrro 3y ago
> People were sent to jail on the basis of a single number spat out from a black box called Horizon. Something also has to be done about the unjust consequences of plea bargaining. Many were convicted on the basis that they admitted to crimes that they did not commit. I think we also have to get rid of Magistrate's courts and private prosecutions. It's ridiculous that these still exist in a modern state that operates under the presumption of the rule of law.
- actionfromafar 3y ago
  The UK is modern in a sense of course but it's really archaic when it comes to jurisdiction.
- bokononon 3y ago
  The postmasters' lawyers have to be put in front of the Inquiry for this utter deriliction of duty.
  - thinkingemote 3y ago
    Many of them have done. Most have either said I don't remember or I was only following orders from above. A few might make the concession that they were misled. One exception would be one barrister who it seemed to be to express genuine regret. Even he said he was in denial for a long time and only came to the realisation recently.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - pfdietz 3y ago
      > I was only following orders from above Nuremberg has entered the chat.
- Mvandenbergh 3y ago
  Plea bargains are heavily restricted in the UK and many of these cases were heard in Crown courts. I agree about getting rid of private prosecutions though.
b112 3y ago
Agree that the courts are somewhat to blame. But really, to me, the full blame should be on the Post Office, and those involved. Trying to conceal problems? Purposefully ignoring bugs? Not listening to, well, everyone. Lying to the courts? People need to be in jail, and starting at the top. I'm not going to absolve Fujitsu, but I have worked government contracts in Canada. They constantly change, morph requirements, not for any real reasons other than "Oh you build this entire thing? We didn't think of X, let's add that". Meanwhile, X basically means an entire rewrite. I've even had situations where "Let's add X" happens, then after done, "Aw, never mind, remove that". It's a different world.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  I'm not sure that both of these can be true at once: > Agree that the courts are somewhat to blame. > But really, to me, the full blame should be on the Post Office, and those involved. Anyway. > They constantly change, morph requirements All software systems are like that. Even if they weren't, the moment a new law comes in you'd need to change them anyway. If the engineering process and build can't withstand change, that's a problem. It seems clear that the Post Office and Fujitsu were complicit in the coverup, and the justice system utterly failed the defendants. All three are so poorly behaved, I hope some change will be triggered. Sadly, I think the way of the world is all organisations regress to the mean, and lots of them are allowed to let their mean get pretty low.
- Xylakant 3y ago
  I consider “the full blame should be on the Post Office, and those involved.” a dangerous position. A systems must hold even if individuals fail or behave in malicious ways, and focusing strongly on individual culpability tends to overshadow the failures of the system. It’s very easy to go on from there to “If those individuals had just acted properly, none of this would have happened.” I don’t mean to diminish the culpability of all those involved in the coverup, but the system needs fixing more than they need punishment. Fixing the system has a chance of preventing future harm, punishment does not, at least not to the same extend.
  - lupire 3y ago
moritonal 3y ago
Creeping around the matter of when can code be trusted. To my knowledge the UK doesn't have the strictest methods to qualify code as "correct in the eyes of the law". Anyone know more on this?
- edent 3y ago
  As I understand it, the problem is one of hyperbolic doubt. Imagine if you were on trial where the evidence against you came from, say, a computerised breathalyser. You might argue that the code has bugs. Then that the configuration was wrong. Then that the hardware design was faulty. Then that the individual components were broken. Then that the data was altered in transmission. Then that a hacker got in. Then that a cosmic ray corrupted the data. And so on. The defendant has no proof that the evidence is faulty, and the producers of the evidence can demonstrate (to some degree) that their hardware & software are correct. At some point, the court has to accept the evidence presented to it. In the UK, at the moment, the assumption is that a computer is operating correctly unless shown otherwise. The BCS (I'm a member) goes in to a little detail about why they think this presumption should change https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/computer-is-always-right-law-must-be-urgently-reviewed-to-stop-another-post-office-scandal-says-professional-body/ https://www.bcs.org/articles-opinion-and-research/computer-i...
- RichieAHB 3y ago
  It feels like that might be a fair point in other context but as one of your sibling posts says: this is just double entry book keeping. Print out the transactions with their timestamps and it feels this should have been very clearly a computer error given the duplicates etc.
  - cge 3y ago
    I recall seeing in released emails about the Callendar Square bug that it's debatable as to whether what the system was doing was properly double entry. In that case, my interpretation of the emails was that there were transactions that were nominally recorded as multiple double-entry transactions, but involved, eg, a transfer from account A to a hidden outstanding account X, and a transfer from account from X to account B. Then the account X wasn't actually tracked anywhere or even expected to balance on any individual system: it appears that when multiple counters at the location were involved, the transactions weren't necessarily synchronized between them. In that case, if you have three £1k transfers from A to X (two of which are duplicates), and one £1k transfer from X to B, then it will look like £2k disappeared unless you check the balance of X. To me, that sounds like an accounting system made by people who fundamentally didn't understand the point of double-entry accounting, because a double-entry accounting system that uses hidden or untracked accounts entirely removes that point and is just equivalent to a single-entry accounting system. Presumably, if all those transactions were properly stored and then combined, a full double-entry ledger could be reconstructed, but it appears the system itself couldn't do that in at least some cases. Of course, there also seems to be the suggestion that part of the Post Office's argument to subpostmasters was that even if the problems were obvious, like clear duplicate transactions, they were still liable per the contract.
ActionHank 3y ago
I don't understand why someone didn't push for an itemized breakdown as a double-entry ledger. This would have covered the shifts in money and where they came from and is one of the most basic accounting tools.
- db48x 3y ago
  The Horizon system failed to keep accurate records. It was a kind of distributed database, with individual users entering data on their terminals and occasionally connecting (potentially via dialup, iirc) to a central system to sync their records. But it was implemented badly, and records could and did get lost or modified. Records could be edited at any time by any of several parties, including the postmasters, but then when they were synced those edits could be silently lost. The resulting ledger does not and can not accurately reflect reality, thus the lost money and the convictions.
  - sorokod 3y ago
    Assuming that an itemized breakdown was requested, this is a possible answer as to why it can't be provided. How can a prosecution continue following such answer is a different question.
    - db48x 3y ago
      The prosecution would happily provide the itemized transactions, because the missing transactions are exactly what they are prosecuting. They know there were N pieces of mail that day, but payment was recorded only for N − 2 or whatever. The lies and coverup from the Postal service and Fujitsu were to there to hide the flaws in the system from the courts and the defendants. Even the prosecutors have said that they were completely in the dark. It’s only now that the independent reports are out that everyone knows the details. Unless you know about the bugs in the system, the itemized transaction list makes it look exactly like the cashiers were pocketing cash and not actually ringing up the sales. It’s a classic scam that any competent retail manager or owner knows to guard against. The only difference is that these cashiers nominally own the stores they run. If they pocketed the cash from the sale of a candy bar then there would be no crime; the cash was theirs to begin with. But since they are also working for a third party (the post office), the possibility of theft is a real one.
mvc 3y ago
It seems nuts to me that the Post Office was allowed to prosecute their own cases rather than pass what information they had to the police who could conduct an independent investigation.

denton-scratch 3y ago

Pity we can't read the Project Sparrow minutes.

planede 3y ago
I wonder if the redacted versions are available in higher resolution. I think the downscaled version could potentially be deciphered if the exact font is identified.
- tyingq 3y ago
  Not sure if there's a better source, but there is this: https://www.postofficetrial.com/2021/03/project-sparrow-first-board-minutes.html https://www.postofficetrial.com/2021/03/project-sparrow-firs... Looks like Arial to me. Edit: Yes, it's Arial. Played with typing up a passage in Arial and adjusting using MS Word's justified text setting. I was able to get the right spacing etc. Here's an overlay with a image snip of the original document and my attempt (in red) overlayed. It looks almost identical. https://imgur.com/a/EUy3jpl https://imgur.com/a/EUy3jpl
  - planede 3y ago
    Sure enough, it is Arial. https://imgur.com/a/WAdo55M https://imgur.com/a/WAdo55M I might play with imageworsener to see if I can figure out the exact downscaling method. edit: ah, you beat me to it. I just played with Inkscape and word spacing to match that line. The scanned document looks very lightly slanted, but I don't think it matters too much.

icu 3y ago

I think this is a similar situation where business leaders and managers get away from any meaningful repercussions just like in the '08 negligence of regulators and bankers, or with Grenfell tower where the cladding vendor managers faked the tests, or knew of the faked tests. I think the issue comes down to the link between business and Government and how to save itself from embarrassment and extra work rectifying the situation, civil servants and ministers will try to speed up the cover up.

MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
Burnham [0] kind of predicted the rise of unaccountable managerial class way back in 1941, at the end of his Marxist phase. Not the fully correct picture to understand the world we are currently living in, but certainly an interesting read and important milestone to thinkers that came after him. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burnham#The_Managerial_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burnham#The_Managerial_R...
- smackay 3y ago
  Thanks for the reference. There are quite a few writers railing against the current Professional Managerial Class (PMC). It's very interesting to see that their rise has quite a long history. Where things appear to have gone off the rails is that the PMC are now more interested in the management of perception than actually managing. The proposed solution is to get more competent managers but Burnham points out that the issue is likely more fundamental than that and a new social organisation may be required to deal with their shortcomings.
  - jack_riminton 3y ago
    Yes the 'management of perception' is a key point here because that is essentially what politics is, and this case was so close to politics i.e. the government was the sole shareholder, the Post Office needed to show a profit so it could be sold The CEO was effectively rewarded for managing the crisis (when the crisis was in full swing in 2019) by the government through the award of the CBE and a seat on the board of an NHS trust etc.

_a_a_a_ 3y ago

"Paula Anne Vennells (born 21 February 1959) is a British former businesswoman who was the chief executive officer of Post Office Limited from 2012 to 2019. She is also an Anglican priest" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Vennells https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Vennells I don't understand how somebody who can be a priest, appointed by God to do the right thing, was unable to behave morally. I just don't understand how she could live with herself, a priest that deliberately and knowingly hurt people to support a system which she knew was wrong. If she'd had any sense she would have realised this was going to come out anyway. I don't understand her selfishness and stupidity and cruelty. (I'm not having a go at christianity but a particular christian, before the arguments start; please don't)

s_dev 3y ago
The problem here is you assume people who subscribe to a faith or pursue it more piously are or should at least be more moral in some way.
- _a_a_a_ 3y ago
  Well yes, she had a book, with written instructions from her own deity telling her not to be a tosser, and she still didn't follow it even as a priest. I truly don't understand.
  - dessimus 3y ago
    So did Catholic priests, and that didn't stop them from diddling kids nor the Church from helping cover it up.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    I do not understand what you do not understand. People are capable of lying, to others and themselves. As of yet, there is no external influence with a proven mechanism of action that can fully prevent that.
  - Libcat99 3y ago
    If you need a book to tell you this is wrong, that may be part of the problem.

nobodyandproud 3y ago

Every time I read about this scandal, it reminds me how important independent journalism really is. I actually donated money to The Guardian, and (reluctantly) restarted my NY Times subscription a few months ago. While the UK has an extra level of horrible, the US has its own corporate and government Post Master scandals.

SOLAR_FIELDS 3y ago
Similar example I gave recently that reminded me of how important independent journalism is: https://www.kxan.com/investigations/no-more-paper-license-plates-new-law-tears-up-old-system/amp/ https://www.kxan.com/investigations/no-more-paper-license-pl... Widespread criminal ring that created issue spanning all 50 states uncovered and eventually fixed primarily from one institution’s Austin, TX based reporting.
- nobodyandproud 3y ago
  Paper tags always seemed a bit dodgy, but now I see why it’s been flying under the radar: Too good for the criminals to lose. Local journalists need even more support, and they have even less support. If there’s one legacy I and others can leave for the younger generations, it’s rebuilding a robust habit, culture, and network of paid-for journalism.
monsecchris 3y ago
I'm not sure I would consider The Guardian and the NYT to be independent.
- daverol 3y ago
  You might not like their stance on issues, but in today's media landscape The Guardian is as good as it gets: https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-trust https://www.theguardian.com/the-scott-trust
  - Karunamon 3y ago

pjmq 3y ago

Pretty much everyone who was not a sub-postmaster involved in the Horizon mess needs to be sentenced. The sheer malice on display here is inescapable. These people killed people and hid their mess. Plain and simple.

wozniacki 3y ago
Yes, indeed. In as many words. Two things here that come to mind: 1) The lack of muckraking agents in this whole affair - individuals, investigative bodies, the media, non-governmental agencies, British billionaires who have the wherewithal to finance private investigative operations etc. The sheer magnitude of that shortfall is just worrying. For those that are not fully familiar with the scope of the issues here : Between 1999 and 2015, an estimated 3500 staff employed by the state-owned Post Office service were accused of fraud, theft or malicious accounting. Almost 700 of them were convicted in courts and some 230 were jailed. Most were legally compelled to repay the amounts they were accused of fleecing, resulting in bankruptcies, marriage failures, substance abuse and even suicides. There was just one not-so-little problem – virtually all of those people were innocent.[1] I mean how does something like that go on for so long! Especially when lives have been torn apart! Its one thing for public money to be pilfered & squandered. That happens everywhere. But those people have been wrecked, if that article is to be believed. 2) Whats more concerning is the larger question : a) if people have been made to put up with these kinds of horrendous miscarriages of justice for so long, in a postal services affair, what other miscarriages of justice are there that go unnoticed, uninvestigated and unpunished. b) is this "part and parcel" of middle income British life? do the Brits put a large amount of trust in their unimpeachable public institutions? do they pull themselves back, short of calling into question the integrity of those that are tasked with such jobs? (atleast more so than is the case in the United States and elsewhere). I ask because I've come across things that seem to buttress exactly that : It is also forcing everyone to pay higher taxes for worse public services: The great British Middle Class live in a world of petty crime that goes un-investigated let alone punished, over-crowded emergency health services, and ever-lengthening NHS waiting lists (Britain has one of the lowest ratios of doctors and hospital beds per patient in the whole of the OECD). I have come across this kind of uniquely British reluctance to call a spade a spade, in quite a few other instances as well. Dr. John Campbell of Youtube fame comes to mind but I digress.[3] [1] Inside the incredible and devastating postal service scandal that could bring down the UK government https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/inside-the-incredible-and-devastating-postal-service-scandal-that-could-bring-down-the-uk-government/news-story/44aeb4c184336cfe4b11b506abf01f0b https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/inside-the-incr... [2] Britain Should Stop Pretending It’s a Rich Country https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/18/stagnant-britain-needs-growth-if-it-wants-to-be-a-rich-country/a9f39bd6-2526-11ee-9201-826e5bb78fa1_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/18/stagnant-... [3] Dr. John Campbell https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching/videos https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching/videos

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]