Topic: The Post Office Scandal

[thaddeus]

It's amazing but also depressing that it takes a TV documentary for a case like this to get a fire lit under it.  Those postmasters have been fighting for justice for a decade or more.  This quote from a former subpostmistress says it all:

It's a shame it took just a million people to cripple her conscience

I expect it will take something similar off the back of the Covid enquiry before anybody is held remotely accountable.  As a country we seem to have lost the ability to accept accountability outside a court of law.  I'm not saying the court of public opinion is necessarily the way to go but whilst people continue to stonewall and double down it's seemingly the only mechanism available.

[Nobby Reserve]

"They essentially supplied an IT system that was intrinsically not fit for purpose."

Not sure that's true. It was fit for purpose, but had significant issues that should have been properly investigated and fixed. The problem is that this wasn't done and that the Post Office Management made the peculiar decision to prosecute rather than find the error(s).

The High Court ruled - after studying a lot of evidence - that the Horizon system was riddled with "a number of bugs, errors and defects”

Given how there were thousands of incidents of the system fucking up, impacting hundreds of sub-Postmasters, I don't know how you can suggest the system as it was supplied was in any way fit for purpose.

[Red-Soldier]

The High Court ruled - after studying a lot of evidence - that the Horizon system was riddled with "a number of bugs, errors and defects”

Given how there were thousands of incidents of the system fucking up, impacting hundreds of sub-Postmasters, I don't know how you can suggest the system as it was supplied was in any way fit for purpose.

Person who works in IT, defends IT company shocker 

[rob1966]

The High Court ruled - after studying a lot of evidence - that the Horizon system was riddled with "a number of bugs, errors and defects”

Given how there were thousands of incidents of the system fucking up, impacting hundreds of sub-Postmasters, I don't know how you can suggest the system as it was supplied was in any way fit for purpose.

Every system has bugs, its the nature of software, Windows is riddled with bugs, errors and security issues, hence the constant patches, yet we all say its fit for purpose, as it does what most of us want most of the time. You can test as you develop, your testers can then try to break it, but its not until you'll roll it out that a lot of bugs get found. If it did the majority of the job is was supposed to do and seeing as how it handled millions of transactions without errors, then it is fit for purpose. From watching the doc, there were bugs when certain transactions were made, plus human intervention from Fujitsu staff, where they changed the amounts, that caused the "losses" incurred by the subpostmasters.

A big question, and it was asked by the woman playing Jo in the drama, is where did the money actually go? And more to the point, why the fuck didn't the post office realise they were a £5million up or whatever huge amounts were involved and wonder why and why didn't some c*nt think "oh fuck, this is the missing money we've been accusing people of losing"

[Fortneef]

But, at its heart, this scandal its not about IT.  The world is full of fucking rubbish IT systems.

The problem is the legal and organisational systems around that IT system.

That turned: "Computer says this is the balance" into "So you are guilty of false accounting at best, or theft"

[Andy @ Allerton!]

The High Court ruled - after studying a lot of evidence - that the Horizon system was riddled with "a number of bugs, errors and defects”

Given how there were thousands of incidents of the system fucking up, impacting hundreds of sub-Postmasters, I don't know how you can suggest the system as it was supplied was in any way fit for purpose.

Because the court did not rule that "They essentially supplied an IT system that was intrinsically not fit for purpose."

They ruled that  "the Horizon system was riddled with "a number of bugs, errors and defects"


Every system in existence is riddled with a number of bugs, errors and defects. In 40 years of working in IT, I've never seen a 'perfect system' because it never has existed - maybe a noddy piece of shit on your personal computer, but not a multi-user, multi-environment system. They are fixed, updated and patched and improved all the time. Every day. Day in. Day out.

Rob's answer also answers your question well.


As Fortneef correctly points out, the system having issues wouldn't have been an issue had it not been from the crazy stance of the management to not investigate and fix the errors in their system, instead, they blamed and prosecuted their users.

Which is fucking disgraceful.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Person who works in IT, defends IT company shocker 

I'm not defending the company in the slightest. How do you come to that conclusion?

The way the company behaved was fucking shocking and also illegal.

A good company would have not only have investigated and fixed the issues, they would have had reconcilliation systems in place that would get the same results in a variety of ways and cross-check those results against the results that they got. That's standard practice. You don't just come out with a single number and go 'Well. That's the number then' - that's fucking insane.

[oldfordie]

Is this all down to a flawed system?
I was thinking about the analogy a Barrister argued when cross examining Holocaust denier David Irvine. Irvine was trying to pass off his lies as a honest mistake.
The Barrister argued, The Bent Waiter analogy, if the waiter made honest mistakes then he would give too much change to one customer as well as short changing another customer, the mistakes should balance out over time if it's a honest mistake. if all the waiters mistakes are made in his favour then it can't be a honest mistake. all Irvines mistakes favoured him which showed he was lying.

Has one Postmaster account left them with a big surplus. did any Postmaster suddenly find they had made a massive profit that week/month. reminds me of the Bent Waiter analogy. all these mistakes favoured the Post Office. every mistake is you owe us thousands but ive not heard any story's of a Postmaster saying my account had a surplus of say £42 grand one week which was absurd.

[rob1966]

Is this all down to a flawed system?

Has one Postmaster account left them with a big surplus. did any Postmaster suddenly find they had made a massive profit that week/month. reminds me of the Bent Waiter analogy. all these mistakes favoured the Post Office. every mistake is you owe us thousands but ive not heard any story's of a Postmaster saying my account had a surplus of say £42 grand one week which was absurd.

This definitely needs answering. Were the adjustments Fujitsu made, being counteracted by other adjustments? Was the software updating the database by removing money from one Branch and adding it to another, was it removing the money and adding it to a central location?

As Andy said, a decent company would notify their IT team/supplier of these issues, then they'd investigate and find the bug. A postmaster, who has worked flawlessly for 10 years, doesn't suddenly start misplacing thousands of pounds, this should have rang alarm bells straight away at the Post Office.

[Nobby Reserve]

Because the court did not rule that "They essentially supplied an IT system that was intrinsically not fit for purpose."

They ruled that  "the Horizon system was riddled with "a number of bugs, errors and defects"


Every system in existence is riddled with a number of bugs, errors and defects. In 40 years of working in IT, I've never seen a 'perfect system' because it never has existed - maybe a noddy piece of shit on your personal computer, but not a multi-user, multi-environment system. They are fixed, updated and patched and improved all the time. Every day. Day in. Day out.

Rob's answer also answers your question well.


As Fortneef correctly points out, the system having issues wouldn't have been an issue had it not been from the crazy stance of the management to not investigate and fix the errors in their system, instead, they blamed and prosecuted their users.

Which is fucking disgraceful.

This isn't about an IT system with a few bugs in that causes some freezes or crashes.

This was an IT system whose ultimate aim was to provide an accurate accounting reconciliation. And it failed to do that on thousands of occasions.

Yes, the Post Office senior management are absolutely culpable for everything that happened - the cover-up and doubling-down - after the system began to so frequently and devastatingly fail, but Fujitsu's system was not fit for purpose in the first place - if it had of been, the problem wouldn't have occurred in the first place.

If you dislike my phrasing, then a senior developer who worked on the Horizon system uses the exact same 'not fit for purpose' wording

The Post Office’s Horizon IT system should “never have seen the light of day” and bosses at supplier Fujitsu allowed it to be rolled out into the Post Office network despite being told it was not fit for purpose, according to a senior developer who worked on the project before it went live.

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252496560/Fujitsu-bosses-knew-about-Post-Office-Horizon-IT-flaws-says-insider

Furthermore, when reports of faults began to accumulate, Post Office commissioned independent investigative firm Second Sight to review the system. Second Sight's report concluded that "the technology was not fit for purpose" in some branches (BBC article from 2014 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29130897)

So, like, 'not fit for purpose' seems entirely accurate.

I called for Fujitsu to have to repay every penny they received from Horizon. Do you think that would be reasonable and justified or not?

[oldfordie]

This definitely needs answering. Were the adjustments Fujitsu made, being counteracted by other adjustments? Was the software updating the database by removing money from one Branch and adding it to another, was it removing the money and adding it to a central location?

As Andy said, a decent company would notify their IT team/supplier of these issues, then they'd investigate and find the bug. A postmaster, who has worked flawlessly for 10 years, doesn't suddenly start misplacing thousands of pounds, this should have rang alarm bells straight away at the Post Office.

That's possible but not how I was looking at it,  the overcharge money paid by the Postmasters to the Post Office went straight into the Post Office account rather than being moved to another Postmasters account but it's still a possibility so needs investigating as well.

[Elmo!]

Person who works in IT, defends IT company shocker 

Hey, I work in IT and will not defend Fujitsu in the slightest, and in fact posted criticism of them earlier today. 

[rob1966]

This isn't about an IT system with a few bugs in that causes some freezes or crashes.

This was an IT system whose ultimate aim was to provide an accurate accounting reconciliation. And it failed to do that on thousands of occasions.

Yes, the Post Office senior management are absolutely culpable for everything that happened - the cover-up and doubling-down - after the system began to so frequently and devastatingly fail, but Fujitsu's system was not fit for purpose in the first place - if it had of been, the problem wouldn't have occurred in the first place.

If you dislike my phrasing, then a senior developer who worked on the Horizon system uses the exact same 'not fit for purpose' wording

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252496560/Fujitsu-bosses-knew-about-Post-Office-Horizon-IT-flaws-says-insider

Furthermore, when reports of faults began to accumulate, Post Office commissioned independent investigative firm Second Sight to review the system. Second Sight's report concluded that "the technology was not fit for purpose" in some branches (BBC article from 2014 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29130897)

So, like, 'not fit for purpose' seems entirely accurate.

I called for Fujitsu to have to repay every penny they received from Horizon. Do you think that would be reasonable and justified or not?

This will happen in every system, but as Andy says, they have reconcilliations that correct it, so you never hear about it. If we ever knew exactly all the errors in say our banking systems, we'd all keep our money under the bed. Doesn't make the system not fit for purpose, it just means that there is a bug that causes issues. If it wasn't "fit for purpose" it wouldn't be thousands, it'd be millions. Some senior developer getting a chance to talk to a paper will exaggerate, saying "oh, its just one bug" isn't exactly headline grabbing is it?

I'm not defending Fujitsu, they're a fucking disgrace for the part they played in this scandal, but I've worked in IT for 23 years on a system that, amongst other things, handles credit card transactions and I have seen what can go wrong and the chaos it causes for the poor fuckers who have to deal with it.

[kop306]

one of the best documentaries i have watched in a long time

[John C]

But, at its heart, this scandal its not about IT. 

Correct.
It's mostly about malicious prosecution and probably perverting the course of justice.

I was well aware of this scandal years before I started the thread, it use to really annoy me knowing what those poor folks were going through. Now it's boiling my piss, I'm certain a number of senior fuckers in both the PO & Fujistu knew there was a major problem and failed to prevent action being taken, but rather they pursued the sub-poster masters robustly and ruthlessly.
c*nts.

[reddebs]

Was it the system that was faulty though or was it the Fujitsu guys being able to remotely access the subpostmasters systems and altering the figures?

[thejbs]

Hammond contacted the Horizon shortfall scheme, launched to compensate affected postal operators in 2021, in an attempt to vindicate her husband, and was told she was out of time. The scheme had closed to new applicants six months after opening during the first lockdown in 2020. “We were never informed of a compensation scheme for those who paid what was demanded without being convicted,” she said. “As my husband was dying of cancer in 2020, my attention was elsewhere.”

The day after her plight was highlighted in the Guardian, the Post Office announced that it would consider claims lodged after the deadline and Hammond has since received compensation on her husband’s behalf in return for signing a non-disclosure agreement.

So fucking shady. Only reopening the scheme after media pressure and then requiring an NDA.

[Fortneef]

No theres no evidence the fujitsu interventions were causing the discrepancies.
In fact they were attempts to fix problems. Their significance is that they prove the system was shonky and that fujitsu knew it.

The discrepancies were caused by coding errors for calculations ( eg a routine did a subtraction instead of a plus)  and errors in data replication (transactions getting lost or corrupted) and Hq side admin cockups (eg an adjustment being sent to the wrong branch).

(Im at the limits of my IT knowledge here….)

[So… Howard Philips]

Whistle blower sacked. No surprise.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-67921974

[John C]

Whistle blower sacked. No surprise.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-67921974

As Coyne says, the PO buried the report. But not just that, because they'd commissioned it they took control of the report without taking ownership of the issue and they forbid anyone to disclose information in it.
Malicious prosecutions then ensued.

[rob1966]

No theres no evidence the fujitsu interventions were causing the discrepancies.
In fact they were attempts to fix problems. Their significance is that they prove the system was shonky and that fujitsu knew it.

The discrepancies were caused by coding errors for calculations ( eg a routine did a subtraction instead of a plus)  and errors in data replication (transactions getting lost or corrupted) and Hq side admin cockups (eg an adjustment being sent to the wrong branch).

(Im at the limits of my IT knowledge here….)

I've nicknamed someone at work Dangerous ***** as a couple of us have had to go in and fix his interventions, as they have made things worse, his latest was to delete 150 brand new items, worth about £100k, from the system, so Fujitsu employees cannot be assumed to be blameless

[Lusty]

Fujitsu have continued to win 100s of millions of Government contracts even since the Horizon probe began. Failing all the way to the bank.

[So… Howard Philips]

As Coyne says, the PO buried the report. But not just that, because they'd commissioned it they took control of the report without taking ownership of the issue and they forbid anyone to disclose information in it.
Malicious prosecutions then ensued.

That’s a very good point.

The Criminal Procedures and Investigations Act has, for the last 25 years, required;

“If as a result of the duty to pursue all reasonable lines of inquiry, the investigator or prosecutor obtains or receives material from a third party, then it must be dealt with in accordance with the CPIA 1996, (i.e. the prosecutor must disclose material if it meets the disclosure tests, subject to any public interest ...”

So if the Met get their finger out there may well be some significant prosecutions.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

This isn't about an IT system with a few bugs in that causes some freezes or crashes.

This was an IT system whose ultimate aim was to provide an accurate accounting reconciliation. And it failed to do that on thousands of occasions.

Yes, the Post Office senior management are absolutely culpable for everything that happened - the cover-up and doubling-down - after the system began to so frequently and devastatingly fail, but Fujitsu's system was not fit for purpose in the first place - if it had of been, the problem wouldn't have occurred in the first place.

If you dislike my phrasing, then a senior developer who worked on the Horizon system uses the exact same 'not fit for purpose' wording

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252496560/Fujitsu-bosses-knew-about-Post-Office-Horizon-IT-flaws-says-insider

Furthermore, when reports of faults began to accumulate, Post Office commissioned independent investigative firm Second Sight to review the system. Second Sight's report concluded that "the technology was not fit for purpose" in some branches (BBC article from 2014 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29130897)

So, like, 'not fit for purpose' seems entirely accurate.

I called for Fujitsu to have to repay every penny they received from Horizon. Do you think that would be reasonable and justified or not?

So.. Now a bit less merry than last night.

You have actual IT experts in this thread. You could choose to listen to them or not.

The words 'fit for purpose' are entirely subjective. They literally tell you nothing.


I'm sorry I posted a rant as well - shouldn't have done that at all - this subject has made me really angry. Makes IT people all look like absolute c*nts and this is a massive failing of the British Public and the Postmasters/Sub-Postmasters that have been treated really, really badly.

I agree that Fujitsu should be forced to repay everything and that the people affected should receive full compensation. I'd go further and say that the Post Office needs to be put back into Public Ownership and run properly from now on. I'd also like to see the Government review all contracts awarded to companies that aren't (As you say) 'Fit for purpose'

[Bullet500]

Yes, every software will have bugs but accounting software is probably the easiest kind of software that can be formally verified: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_verification https://github.com/magmide/magmide

Formal verification of software through model checking was not a thing back then beyond aviation and semiconductor industry, but going ahead this should be mandated for critical government software.

[Hedley Lamarr]

Former Post Office boss Paula Vennells to hand back her CBE

https://news.sky.com/story/former-post-office-boss-paula-vennells-to-hand-back-her-cbe-13044576

She's still a CBE mind.  She can hand back the medal, she can stop using the title after her name, but the only person who can withdraw the title is the reigning monarch.

[TSC]

Powerful coverage on the beeb this morning with 9 sub-postmasters in the studio, joined by the PO minister.  PMQs later too.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Yes, every software will have bugs but accounting software is probably the easiest kind of software that can be formally verified: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_verification https://github.com/magmide/magmide

Formal verification of software through model checking was not a thing back then beyond aviation and semiconductor industry, but going ahead this should be mandated for critical government software.

I've worked on several finance systems for several major banks. Every single one of them has reconciliation.

You never have one 'stream' of data.


You have (In this instance):

- The User (Postmaster, Sub-Postmaster, Office Staff, Post Office Staff, Admins)

- The Customer (Person using the Post Office Service)

- The Physical Post Office

- The Post Office (Company)

- Banks and other Financial Institutions


Reconciliation should be performed with daily batch-runs confirming that the totals tally across all the actors. Discrepancies should be produced via reporting which is saved for the mandatory UK term of 7 years. All the figures across all the actors should tally at all times. Those exceptions should be red flagged and raised as incidents.

If someone was hacking the database then yeah, you can change the data, but you can't change the audit trails. Each record on each database is timestamped and an audit trail produced. Any competent investigator could review the timestamps on dated records. For instance, if records were written on the 1st Jan 1985 then the Timestamps should match the creation date. It's simple enough to crosscheck against the audit trails with the timestamps on the database. The hacked records would stand out like a sore thumb.

The major problem here seems to be that Fujitsu were given the contract and self-audited themselves. If they haven't got audit logs or reconciliation reporting set up as standard (As any financial system of the time always did) then that is the biggest flag that it wasn't 'fit for purpose' - in that it's self-auditing ability wasn't set. But I don't accept that. This wouldn't have passed standards in even a tin-pot establishment.

The mostly likely thing here, I would guess, would be that all the data was available but ignored by the 'experts' doing the hacking which are likely the same people that investigated the hacking.

It's never a good idea to allow a company to audit themselves - if this is what happened.


From Nobby's post above - "Post Office commissioned independent investigative firm Second Sight to review the system"

I am struggling to see how the fuck they couldn't find actual doctoring of data. What were they doing?


EDIT: Looking into it - they did a good job, but were only hired in 2013. This is a report of what they were doing. Apologies Second Sight - seems you did a good job: https://www.postofficetrial.com/2019/12/second-sights-ron-warmington-breaks-his.html



EDIT EDIT: There is a book on this whole thing, which I'll be giving a read: https://bathpublishing.com/products/the-great-post-office-scandal-paperback  / Kindle: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Post-Office-Scandal-multimillion-ebook/dp/B098GGKMW7/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2J5TPP3XD3AGF&keywords=the+great+post+office+scandal+by+nick+wallis&qid=1704879887&s=digital-text&sprefix=The+great+post%2Cdigital-text%2C85&sr=1-1

[Statto Red]

The issue is not so much the IT system which was full of bugs, faults, & not fit for purpose, but senior Post Office management, even though senior Post Office management knew the IT system was the issue, they decided to cover up the issues & peruse sub post masters, through malicious prosecutions, perverting the course of justice & lied under oath in court too.

If anything too Post Office LTD should be stripped of it's ability to take out private prosecutions, & the whole private prosecutions system [which i believe is outlawed in Scotland] should be looked into as well.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

The issue is not so much the IT system which was full of bugs, faults, & not fit for purpose, but senior Post Office management, even though senior Post Office management knew the IT system was the issue, they decided to cover up the issues & peruse sub post masters, through malicious prosecutions, perverting the course of justice & lied under oath in court too.

If anything too Post Office LTD should be stripped of it's ability to take out private prosecutions, & the whole private prosecutions system [which i believe is outlawed in Scotland] should be looked into as well.

From that link I posted above;

Today Mr Warmington has put forward what he thinks should happen next, arguing that:

    the CCRC must come to a conclusion quickly about referring cases of criminalised Subpostmasters to the Court of Appeal.
    those Subpostmasters who have been wronged in the civil courts (such as Lee Castleton) need to be properly recompensed.
    funds need to be found to supplement the meagre compensation available to claimants after costs and the litigation funder’s success fee has been taken out.
    the Post Office needs to redesign its business plan and prepare new contracts with which to engage its agents (or franchisees) - the Subpostmasters.
    steps should be taken to reduce the abysmally High error rates that are endemic throughout the Post Office (apply Six Sigma or similar process improvements).
    a completely new and trusted investigation department needs to be established - probably funded through a captive insurance company.
    the Post Office’s right to bring prosecutions in the name of the Crown, bypassing the CPS, needs to be revoked, immediately.

[KillieRed]

Good to see The Guardian highlighting the Contaminated Blood Scandal today. Leo (Fat Scouser) from here has been trying to get media attention for it for years. Hopefully this kickstarts something for all the victims. Our establishment really doesn’t like to take responsibility for its crimes & mistakes, and really really doesn’t like a light shone on them.

[MH41]

Was it the system that was faulty though or was it the Fujitsu guys being able to remotely access the subpostmasters systems and altering the figures?

That's what I have been thinking as well.
Here's a quote from a sub postmaster in today's BBCNI news, that has made me wonder even more.
Why was there always a deficit? 
Surely if it was a system error, you would have surplus figures at times as well?

"I kept putting the money in from the shop to the Post Office to keep it right but we never had a plus, it was always minus, the money was just disappearing in front of us."

[Fortneef]

Two reasons:

1)
When postmaster Joe Bloggs reported a £5000 surplus the PO fixed the bug.  So it didn't happen to anyone else.

But when Bob Smith reported a £ 5000 deficit they took the money off him. Then the same bug happened to Deidre Example, and they took her money. And then Gary Placeholder too. etc.


2)
I surmise there are logical IT/Accounting/operational reasons why money-out transactions were more fragile than ins.

Eg - if an error takes money off customers they will complain like hell. But not so much if it gives them money.

[Red-Soldier]

Good to see The Guardian highlighting the Contaminated Blood Scandal today. Leo (Fat Scouser) from here has been trying to get media attention for it for years. Hopefully this kickstarts something for all the victims. Our establishment really doesn’t like to take responsibility for its crimes & mistakes, and really really doesn’t like a light shone on them.

Indeed.

There are a few other miscarridges of justice, that I can think of too.

[Wabaloolah]

It's awful what's happened, unbelievable too but I'm not sure the government introducing a law that simply wipes out all of the convictions is necessarily the right way to go.

I don't trust this government as far as I could throw them and now there will be a precedent in place where the government has overruled an independent court.

I suspect they have a hidden agenda here.

This should be resolved immediately by the Court of Appeal not by a hastily introduced Act of Parliament

[oldfordie]

Two reasons:

1)
When postmaster Joe Bloggs reported a £5000 surplus the PO fixed the bug.  So it didn't happen to anyone else.

But when Bob Smith reported a £ 5000 deficit they took the money off him. Then the same bug happened to Deidre Example, and they took her money. And then Gary Placeholder too. etc.


2)
I surmise there are logical IT/Accounting/operational reasons why money-out transactions were more fragile than ins.

Eg - if an error takes money off customers they will complain like hell. But not so much if it gives them money.

When you say Joe Bloggs is that a assumption or there are cases when Postmasters accounts were over paid.
I also wouldn't assume a Postmaster would say nothing when they know theres been a mistake overpaying them thousands, the big jump in profits that week/month would stand out like a sore thumb.

I knew my monthly Company pension was due to drop a few yrs back as I chose this option when retiring, I checked to see if it did drop when the time came which it did so it wasn't a problem but I knew a couple of people who chose the same option whose pensions continued when they should have been lowered, they were overpaid for a few yrs and then suddenly got a letter from Pension scheme telling them about the over payment, they had to pay back thousands, nobody suggested fraud on their part as the mistake lay with the Pension fund but they did demand the over payments to be paid back in full over time, I wouldn't put myself in that position and I would take the same attituded if I was a postmaster, it all builds up and your waiting for that letter telling you it all has to be paid back.

[Red-Soldier]

It's awful what's happened, unbelievable too but I'm not sure the government introducing a law that simply wipes out all of the convictions is necessarily the right way to go.

I don't trust this government as far as I could throw them and now there will be a precedent in place where the government has overruled an independent court.

I suspect they have a hidden agenda here.

This should be resolved immediately by the Court of Appeal not by a hastily introduced Act of Parliament

I agree.

There's no need to do this.

[rob1966]

That's what I have been thinking as well.
Here's a quote from a sub postmaster in today's BBCNI news, that has made me wonder even more.
Why was there always a deficit? 
Surely if it was a system error, you would have surplus figures at times as well?

"I kept putting the money in from the shop to the Post Office to keep it right but we never had a plus, it was always minus, the money was just disappearing in front of us."

Depends on what the bug was, it seems to be it was subtracting instead of adding in some situations - in the drama, they showed Jo Hamilton trying to correct a deficit, with help from the helpdesk and it doubled the deficit.

As she said, where did the money go? Because it showed up somewhere at some point.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

It's awful what's happened, unbelievable too but I'm not sure the government introducing a law that simply wipes out all of the convictions is necessarily the right way to go.

I don't trust this government as far as I could throw them and now there will be a precedent in place where the government has overruled an independent court.

I suspect they have a hidden agenda here.

This should be resolved immediately by the Court of Appeal not by a hastily introduced Act of Parliament

Exactly.

A very dangerous precedent is about to be set, which will be ignored/misunderstood by the general population.

A further step towards an authoritarian government.

[John C]

Powerful coverage on the beeb this morning with 9 sub-postmasters in the studio, joined by the PO minister.  PMQs later too.

Yeah it was good, they could probably have spent a full two hours with that group.