UK government officials expressed serious doubts about the suitability of Paula Vennels as Post Office chief executive and considered sacking her in 2014, five years before she resigned, the inquiry into the Horizon IT scandal has heard.
According to internal government documents presented to the inquiry Thursday, officials and other members of the Post’s board had concerns about Vennels’ leadership a decade ago.
“Advice from the last annual review suggested that POL [Post Office Ltd] the team is mindful of the continued suitability of Paula Vennells as CEO,” a document dated February 2014 read.
It appeared to be from the Post Office’s risk and insurance committee, with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the sole shareholder in the state-owned company, and the Shareholder Executive, which manages the government’s relationship with the Post Office and is made up of senior industry people. that appear at the top of the page.
“There is a general consensus that Paula is no longer the right person to lead POL, but the justification is anecdotal.”
In a piece titled “Why is Paula’s position under review?”, one of the reasons given was that “she has not been able to work with personalities who offer her a strong challenge.”
The inquiry is looking into how the state-owned company prosecuted hundreds of postal operators who were wrongly accused of stealing money from the branches they ran because of problems with the Horizon computer system that led to what has been described as the biggest miscarriage of justice in Britain. .
It took years for the Post Office to admit that bugs with Horizon, developed by Japan’s Fujitsu, were behind many of the shortcomings.
Among the options considered by government officials was “maintenance and review” – giving Vennels “time to deliver her plans and time for the government to prepare for her replacement if she fails to deliver on the plan,” the document said. . This was related to the Post Office’s 2010 plan, which “failed to deliver the expected revenue growth,” according to the 2014 document.
The document also said it would be “more difficult” to remove Vennels because of the looming general election, which took place in 2015. “Ministers would be aware of the political implications,” it said.
The paper considered several internal candidates and pointed to then-trading chief Martin George and then-strategy director Sue Barton as possible successors to Vennells.
Lead counsel for the inquiry, Jason Beer KC, asked Alice Perkins, who ran the Post Office at the time, whether Vennells preferred to have “yes-men and yes-women” around her. Perkins denied this but admitted she began to have reservations about Vennells’ leadership in 2014, which were shared by other board members.
after promoting the newsletter
Perkins said the documents were “complete news” to her and she was unaware of the discussions within the government at the time.
Vennells continued to run the Post Office until 2019, and was subsequently awarded a CBE “for services to the Post Office and to charity”. She returned the CBE earlier this year before it was officially stripped.
Last month, Vennells told the inquest she was “very trusting” of subordinates and was advised to deny Fujitsu had remote access to the terminals. At one point, she broke down in tears and said: “I have worked as hard as I can to provide the best post office for the UK.”
During Thursday’s hearing, Perkins was shown an email Vennels sent her twice in 2014 in which the then chief executive said she was “more upset than outraged” about an article on the BBC One Show in the Post Office scandal. Perkins said she couldn’t remember her reaction at the time, but added: “Looking back on it now, it obviously looks absolutely horrible.”
After repeated questioning, Perkins insisted, “The board was not upset about this issue, and I have said on several occasions over the last couple of days that I think there were times when the board should have done otherwise.”
