Ron and Ian prepare to unload

I remain staggered that the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry has chosen to give Second Sight’s Ron Warmington and Ian Henderson a mere half day each to be questioned about their knowledge of the Post Office Horizon IT scandal. They uncovered it. You’d think the Inquiry would want to hear about it. I certainly do.

(Sir) Alan Bates and his Justice for Subpostmasters Alliance colleagues lived this disaster. James Arbuthnot and his fellow MPs supported the Subpostmasters as a matter of public interest. Ron and Ian went into the Post Office, asked for the relevant documentation, put the pieces together and between them pulled the lid off a can of worms.

Corporate lunacy

It’s not Second Sight’s fault that the truth they stumbled on was the biggest miscarriage of justice this country has ever seen. They went in with open minds. They listened to the evidence and followed the paper trail. They did their jobs.

When Ron and Ian tried (and I’ve heard the tapes, boy did they try) to explain to that they were looking at the possibility or even likelihood of unsafe prosecutions, the Post Office refused to listen.

It raised issues about their “work product”. It tried to sack them. It belittled and discredited them. It did everything possible to distance itself from Ron and Ian’s conclusions because the truth was simply too unpalatable for them to accept.

And in doing so it extended this scandal for at least another six years.

Blowing the whistle

Ron and Ian should be national heroes. When it became apparent the Post Office were trying to force them out of the door, they stuck at it. They dealt with the accusations of poor work, the game-playing and the adversarial attitude in order to keep patiently asking for documents and evidence. They got as close as they could to the truth.

Half way through Second Sight’s investigation Ron and Ian were forced to sign NDAs as part of a renegotiated contract. They knew what they might be liable for if they went public – they could be sued and bankrupted. They were aware that as professional investigators contracted to the Post Office that if they spoke out against their client they ran the risk of never getting another investigation contract from any other client ever again. But they went public. In 2015, less than six months after being sacked, Ian Henderson appeared in our BBC Panorama Trouble at the Post Office to tell John Sweeney the Post Office suffered from an “institutional blindness” as to the truth.

Capes, etc

Ron and Ian are, of course, not the only heroes of this tale. At the top of the mountain are the campaigning Subpostmasters. There is Kay Linnell, there are the parliamentarians and there are many, many other professionals – those who worked alongside Second Sight and those lawyers and IT folk who then used Second Sight’s “work product” to take the fight back to the Post Office in the High Court and the Court of Appeal, but I do honestly think Ron and Ian’s contribution should be more widely recognised beyond the few anoraks who follow this story as closely as I do.

I’m quite sure they’re not living in penury, but they don’t get reward or compensation for spending the last ten years doing what they can to avoid being sued, developing their investigation business (in a market which tends to value discretion and/or whitewashes) whilst also doing everything possible to ensure this story stays in the public domain. That’s a tough gig.

What guided them? I have spent enough time personally dealing with Ron and Ian to assess their “work product” and their character. It is abundantly clear the thing that motivates them is the pursuit of the truth, and righting an obvious, awful wrong.

Ron Warmington and Ian Henderson got to the truth in the Post Office scandal, and they refused to let it go. They could have thrown the towel in earlier. They could have quietly moved on to their next gig after being sacked and called it quits, but they didn’t. They refused to let it go, at an absolutely crucial stage in this scandal.

Half a day each

I am aware Lord Arbuthnot only got half a day at the Inquiry. I understand there might be more value in grilling Gareth Jenkins over four days and recalling Andy Dunks. I have been speaking to sources close to the inquiry asking why Ron and Ian only got half a day each and the line I’ve been given is that Ron and Ian wrote such thorough witness statements, the Inquiry doesn’t need to question them on matters arising. Hmm. Womble Bond Dickinson’s Andy Parsons submitted a 500 page witness statement and he still got two days in the chair.

Justice doesn’t just need to be done, it needs to be seen to be done, and giving Ron and Ian a day each would give the public a far better understanding of what they went through, the work they did and the pressures they were under.

Other news

You are very welcome to read my last two posts:

– on Saturday – a write-up of Alan Bates’ knighthood

– from Friday – Day 2 of Andy Parsons’ evidence to the inquiry.

Also:

Sir Ed Davey criticised for election ‘buffoonery’ by former sub-postmaster – Telegraph

‘Glitch’ – The True Story of the Post Office Scandal announces cast – Reading Chronicle. (I’m going to this on 1 July. I will report back)

Last chance to get tickets before the hoi polloi

I will soon start telling non-secret emailers about my upcoming talk at the Otley Courthouse near Leeds on 22 November with Janet Skinner, so this is your last chance to get in there before everyone else knows about it.

I am delighted Janet has kindly agreed to join me on stage and tell her story. She is in demand as a speaker herself and her story is quite something. Do come along if you can.

I’m not planning to do any more public talks for the rest of the year, so if you want to say hello and live in Yorkshire, it would be great to meet you.

Thanks

Thanks as ever to everyone who has signed up in the last few days. Just to warn you that I am only going to cover the next three days of the public inquiry. On Friday I have a diary clash which means I cannot witness (nor immediately write up) former NFSP General Secretary George Thomson’s evidence. This is a shame. I am glad I got to meet him and highlight his contribution to this scandal earlier this year…

Keep well

Nick

* Day 1 of Andy Parsons’ evidence to the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry:

Q: Is your evidence that you personally had concerns about Second Sight’s paperwork as at October 2014?
A: I had concerns at that point about the quality of the work product they were producing.