the post office is examining how the 40 it the post office is examining how the a0 it system led to hundreds of people being wrongly convicted of theft and fraud in what has been described as one of the worst miscarriages ofjustice in british legal history. the chief executive of the royal mail group which owns the post office between 2003 and 2010 began giving evidencejust before lunch. earlier we heard from alan cooke, the managing director of the post office, hundreds of people were wrongly accused between 2006 in 2010 while he was in charge. he began by putting on record what he described as a personal apology to the sub—postmaster is and mistresses, as well as their families for all they have been through, let's listen in. i families for all they have been through, let's listen in. i wonder if i could just _ through, let's listen in. i wonder if i could just say _ through, let's listen in. i wonder if i could just say before - through, let's listen in. i wonder if i could just say before we - through, let's listen in. i wonder if i could just say before we get. if i could just say before we get started, i would like to put on

record most strongly my personal apology and sympathies with all sub—postmaster is, their families and those affected by this as we get into the conversation, there will be an opportunity for me to elaborate, but i felt that was important for me to say upfront. it but i felt that was important for me to say upfront-— to say upfront. it was the term ern adam crozier— to say upfront. it was the term ern adam crozier to _ to say upfront. it was the term ern adam crozier to give _ to say upfront. it was the term ern adam crozier to give evidence. - to say upfront. it was the term ern| adam crozier to give evidence. the whole company, because of what we inherited, _ whole company, because of what we inherited, effectively on the royal mail side — inherited, effectively on the royal mail side that had not been invested in for— mail side that had not been invested in for a _ mail side that had not been invested in for a decade, had not hit its quality— in for a decade, had not hit its quality of— in for a decade, had not hit its quality of services and it was the least _ quality of services and it was the least modernised postal company in europa _ least modernised postal company in europe. what that meant was on the royal— europe. what that meant was on the royal mail— europe. what that meant was on the royal mail side, there was no option other_ royal mail side, there was no option other than_ royal mail side, there was no option other than to be fundamentally transparent in the fact that most of what we _ transparent in the fact that most of what we inherited was not working, encouraging a lot of transparency, and we set up the

pmperly— transparency, and we set up the properly functioning audit unit, one of the _ properly functioning audit unit, one of the ways— properly functioning audit unit, one of the ways we could find out what was happening elsewhere in the group — was happening elsewhere in the group. we strengthened that and created _ group. we strengthened that and created a — group. we strengthened that and created a whole risk gender in the business. — created a whole risk gender in the business, from the ground up, we got people _ business, from the ground up, we got people to _ business, from the ground up, we got people to let everyone know what the key risks _ people to let everyone know what the key risks were, they looked at that risk register which was debated... can risk register which was debated... carr you _ risk register which was debated... can you recall whether the conduct of prosecutions _ can you recall whether the conduct of prosecutions and _ can you recall whether the conduct of prosecutions and the _ can you recall whether the conduct of prosecutions and the possibilityl of prosecutions and the possibility of prosecutions and the possibility of bringing — of prosecutions and the possibility of bringing sub—postmasters - of prosecutions and the possibility of bringing sub—postmasters to i of bringing sub—postmasters to justice. — of bringing sub—postmasters to justice, including _ of bringing sub—postmasters to justice, including by— of bringing sub—postmasters tol justice, including by imprisoning them, _ justice, including by imprisoning them, and — justice, including by imprisoning them, and the _ justice, including by imprisoning them, and the issues _ justice, including by imprisoning them, and the issues that- justice, including by imprisoning them, and the issues that arise i justice, including by imprisoning - them, and the issues that arise when conducting _ them, and the issues that arise when conducting prosecutions, _ them, and the issues that arise when conducting prosecutions, was - them, and the issues that arise when conducting prosecutions, was on - them, and the issues that arise when conducting prosecutions, was on the i conducting prosecutions, was on the royal— conducting prosecutions, was on the royal mail_ conducting prosecutions, was on the royal mail holders' _ conducting prosecutions, was on the royal mail holders' risk— conducting prosecutions, was on the royal mail holders' risk register? . conducting prosecutions, was on the royal mail holders' risk register? i. royal mail holders' risk register? i don't believe so, and i don't believe i recall— believe so, and i don't believe i recall seeing it on the post office register — recall seeing it on the post office register. is

recall seeing it on the post office reuister. , ., ., recall seeing it on the post office reuister. , . ., ., recall seeing it on the post office register._ with l register. is that a failing? with the benefit _ register. is that a failing? with the benefit of _ register. is that a failing? with the benefit of hindsight, - register. is that a failing? with the benefit of hindsight, yes. | the benefit of hindsight, yes. conducting an activity which is unusual— conducting an activity which is unusual for— conducting an activity which is unusual for a _ conducting an activity which is unusual for a company? - conducting an activity which is| unusual for a company? would conducting an activity which is - unusual for a company? would you agree? _ unusual for a company? would you auree? , our correspondent azadeh moshiri is at the inquiry in central london. what we have seen in the last few days are officials coming forward and saying, either directly they are sorry or they regret decisions that were made. but what effectively... what has happened or what will happen once this concludes, what is the actual thing that could change as a result of this inquiry? that auestion as a result of this inquiry? that question you — as a result of this inquiry? that question you have _ as a result of this inquiry? trust question you have just asked sums up some of the frustration i have heard from the victims, some of whom are attending today and some of whom are watching today, because for them it is well and good for these

executives to answer questions, but what they want to see is for those who are responsible, the bankruptcies they have faced, the mental health issues they have had, several suicides have been linked to this entire affair, for the wrongful convictions to be held to account, and they frankly want to see people behind bars, that is not what this inquiry can do. it is trying to understand how the worst miscarriage ofjustice in uk history as it has been called could have possibly happened and who knew what an especially important when, but the met police is monitoring these proceedings to gather evidence so it can establish who was responsible and see if a criminal prosecution can take place, the post office has told the bbc this week that he believes that once that evidence has been established, people should go to jail for been established, people should go to jailfor their been established, people should go to jail for their role been established, people should go to jailfor their role in been established, people should go

to jail for their role in the scandal, but if you speak to victims like the former sub—postmistress from surrey who was pregnant when she was sent to prison, she doesn't understand why that process can't be sped up, she says the evidence in there. it is not her call to make and this inquiry is first trying to establish the facts. that and this inquiry is first trying to establish the facts.— establish the facts. that is fascinating, _ establish the facts. that is fascinating, what - establish the facts. that is fascinating, what you - establish the facts. that is fascinating, what you say l establish the facts. that is - fascinating, what you say about the met monitoring the inquiry as well. you touched on the personal pain that so many people and their families have gone through, i have heard that woman's story many times and heard her husband speak as well and heard her husband speak as well and the pain that really impacted theirfamily, but you have been speaking to others sub—postmasters and mistresses as well and getting their reaction to what they have been watching this week? i their reaction to what they have been watching this week? i spoke to a man who was _ been watching this week? i spoke to a man who was 18 _ been watching this week? i spoke to a man who was 18 when _ been watching this week? i spoke to a man who was 18 when he - been watching this week? i spoke to a man who was 18 when he became l been watching this week? i spoke to | a man who was 18 when he became a

sub—postmaster. but the exact same year that alan cooke became managing director of the post office. and for him to hear his response to those rising concerns around the it system in 2009 was deeply upsetting, in fact he said that was a complete disgrace, rememberwhen fact he said that was a complete disgrace, remember when he responded in an e—mail, a few months later after the first article about this whole affair, his answer was his instinct is during the recession sub—bees who had their hand in the till blamed on the software, so that was difficult for people to hear, i spoke to one sub—postmistress who was in tears, and they believe that their answer is not adequate or appropriate, alan cook himself has said he will regret that expression for the rest of his life. just said he will regret that expression for the rest of his life.— for the rest of his life. just tell us, for the rest of his life. just tell us. while _ for the rest of his life. just tell

us. while we — for the rest of his life. just tell us, while we wait _ for the rest of his life. just tell us, while we wait for - for the rest of his life. just tell us, while we wait for adam - for the rest of his life. just tell - us, while we wait for adam crozier's questioning to resume, why he was such a key figure in all of this. that is partly some of the questioning, trying to establish if he was a key figure, the inquiry believes as he had a serious role at royal mail, as royal mail and the post office were part of the same organisation during his tenure from 2003 until 2010, he should have had some knowledge about what was going on, but his point is that there was a separate government body he did not sit on and no one had flagged up these issues, in fact, even if he has not said all of this just yet we have his witness statement released today and in it he says no one flagged up any serious concerns when it came to the criminal prosecution, in fact as far as he is aware he was

alerted to a concern about the high number of prosecutions, the conduct and civil proceedings relating to sub—postmasters or any concerns of the horizon system, essentially this is what he said before, he has had no involvement with the horizon system, he is still deeply sorry for those affected, extending his heartfelt sympathies. what this inquiry is trying to establish is what exactly he did and whether he should have...— should have... let's go straight to that inquiry _ should have... let's go straight to that inquiry which _ should have... let's go straight to that inquiry which resumes - should have... let's go straight to that inquiry which resumes after l should have... let's go straight to that inquiry which resumes after a i that inquiry which resumes after a lunch break. that that inquiry which resumes after a lunch break-— that inquiry which resumes after a lunch break. . ., ,, lunch break. at about three o'clock, i would lunch break. at about three o'clock, i would like — lunch break. at about three o'clock, i would like you _ lunch break. at about three o'clock, i would like you to _ lunch break. at about three o'clock, i would like you to check _ lunch break. at about three o'clock, i would like you to check with - lunch break. at about three o'clock, i would like you to check with a - i would like you to check with a transcriber whether she needs a break, orwhetherwe transcriber whether she needs a break, or whether we can go on until 3:a5pm without a break. i will break, or whether we can go on until 3:45pm without a break.— 3:45pm without a break. i will do that. 3:45pm without a break. i will do that- before _ 3:45pm without a break. i will do that. before lunch, _ 3:45pm without a break. i will do that. before lunch, you - 3:45pm without a break. i will do that. before lunch, you spoke . 3:45pm without a break. i will do i that. before lunch, you spoke about the autonomy that the post office enjoyed _ the autonomy that the post office enjoyed from royal mail. was it not

patented _ enjoyed from royal mail. was it not patented or obvious from the structure _ patented or obvious from the structure of the organisation and the autonomy that the post office enjoyed _ the autonomy that the post office enjoyed that there was a significant risk for— enjoyed that there was a significant risk for issues that the post office did not— risk for issues that the post office did not wish to raise with royal mail. _ did not wish to raise with royal mail. to— did not wish to raise with royal mail, to go unnoticed by royal mail? that was— mail, to go unnoticed by royal mail? that was the purpose of ensuring that chief executive, chairman and company secretary were on the holdings board, as i understand it that was a decision before i arrived, we built up a strong internal audit function able to go anywhere in the company, and their audit plan was checked by the holding board, the audit committee and the exec team, and also there was an external audit who were similarly involved right across the company and again had the ability to

go anywhere and look at anything, and i met regularly and privately with internal and external audit and was able to check privately whether there were any concerns they had. in there were any concerns they had. in your seven years, are you aware of any external — your seven years, are you aware of any external audit of the horizon system? — any external audit of the horizon s stem? ., ., , any external audit of the horizon s stem? . . , ., system? external audit? in terms of financial auditors? _ system? external audit? in terms of financial auditors? any _ system? external audit? in terms of financial auditors? any form - system? external audit? in terms of financial auditors? any form of- financial auditors? any form of audit of the — financial auditors? any form of audit of the horizon _ financial auditors? any form of audit of the horizon system. . financial auditors? any form of audit of the horizon system. i | financial auditors? any form of- audit of the horizon system. i don't think i audit of the horizon system. i don't think i am- — audit of the horizon system. i don't think i am. are _ audit of the horizon system. i don't think i am. are you _ audit of the horizon system. i don't think i am. are you aware - audit of the horizon system. i don't think i am. are you aware of- audit of the horizon system. i don't think i am. are you aware of any i think i am. are you aware of any form of external— think i am. are you aware of any form of external audit _ think i am. are you aware of any form of external audit or- think i am. are you aware of any form of external audit or review| think i am. are you aware of any l form of external audit or review of the post office's prosecutorial function? i the post office's prosecutorial function? ., �* , the post office's prosecutorial l function?_ are function? i don't believe so. are ou function? i don't believe so. are you aware _ function? i don't believe so. are you aware of— function? i don't believe so. are you aware of any _ function? i don't believe so. are you aware of any internal- function? i don't believe so. are you aware of any internal audit i function? i don't believe so. are| you aware of any internal audit of the post — you aware of any internal audit of the post office's prosecutorial function — the post office's prosecutorial function in your seven year period? i function in your seven year period? i don't _ function in your seven year period? idon't recall — function in your seven year period? i don't recall. can function in your seven year period? i don't recall-— i don't recall. can i start by lookin: i don't recall. can i start by looking at _ i don't recall. can i start by looking at the _ i don't recall. can i start by i

looking at the responsibilities i don't recall. can i start by - looking at the responsibilities of a director— looking at the responsibilities of a director of— looking at the responsibilities of a director of a business or ceo? with those _ director of a business or ceo? with those duties include a direct's duty is to the _ those duties include a direct's duty is to the accuracy of accounting information and records?- is to the accuracy of accounting information and records? yes, it would. information and records? yes, it would- and _ information and records? yes, it would. and is _ information and records? yes, it would. and is it _ information and records? yes, it would. and is it right _ information and records? yes, it would. and is it right the - information and records? yes, it i would. and is it right the company law requires _ would. and is it right the company law requires directors _ would. and is it right the company law requires directors to _ would. and is it right the company law requires directors to prepare l law requires directors to prepare accounts — law requires directors to prepare accounts for each financial year which _ accounts for each financial year which give _ accounts for each financial year which give a true and fair view of the state — which give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the company andindeed the state of affairs of the company and indeed of a group and of the profit _ and indeed of a group and of the profit and — and indeed of a group and of the profit and loss of the group for that relevant period? that profit and loss of the group for that relevant period?— that relevant period? that is correct. there _ that relevant period? that is correct. there is _ that relevant period? that is correct. there is a _ that relevant period? that is correct. there is a director l that relevant period? that is i correct. there is a director have that relevant period? that is - correct. there is a director have to have confidence _ correct. there is a director have to have confidence in _ correct. there is a director have to have confidence in the _ correct. there is a director have to have confidence in the figures - have confidence in the figures produced in respect of a business's profit _ produced in respect of a business's profit and — produced in respect of a business's profit and loss before they can take a definitive view on the financial statements of the business? yes, the do. statements of the business? yes, they do- if — statements of the business? yes, they do. if there _ statements of the business? yes, they do. if there are _ statements of the business? yes, they do. if there are any - statements of the business? yes, they do. if there are any doubts i they do. if there are any doubts about the _ they do. if there are any doubts about the integrity _ they do. if there are any doubts about the integrity of _ they do. if there are any doubts about the integrity of the - they do. if there are any doubts| about the integrity of the figures produced in the accounts of a business. _ produced in the accounts of a business, that would be a matter of significant _ business, that would be a matter of significant concern for any director of the _ significant concern for any director of the business?— significant concern for any director| of the business?_ an of the business? yes, it would. an accounting — of the business? yes, it would. an accounting integrity _ of the business? yes, it would. an accounting integrity or _ of the business? yes, it would. an accounting integrity or concerns i accounting integrity or concerns over _ accounting integrity or concerns over accounting integrity would be a

significant _ over accounting integrity would be a significant issue, would you agree, for the _ significant issue, would you agree, for the director irrespective of whether— for the director irrespective of whether the business was a unitary enterprise — whether the business was a unitary enterprise or franchise across ten or 1000 _ enterprise or franchise across ten or 1000 outlets?— enterprise or franchise across ten or 1000 outlets? under the combined code ou or 1000 outlets? under the combined code you have — or 1000 outlets? under the combined code you have the _ or 1000 outlets? under the combined code you have the same _ or 1000 outlets? under the combined code you have the same duties - or 1000 outlets? under the combined code you have the same duties as - or 1000 outlets? under the combined code you have the same duties as a l code you have the same duties as a director, yes. code you have the same duties as a director. yes-— director, yes. would you as ceo exoect any _ director, yes. would you as ceo expect any concerns _ director, yes. would you as ceo expect any concerns or- director, yes. would you as ceo expect any concerns or even - expect any concerns or even allegations about concerns that the in counting integrity of a business was lacking or problematic to be escalated — was lacking or problematic to be escalated to you and then to the main _ escalated to you and then to the main board?— escalated to you and then to the main board? yes, either from the external auditors, _ main board? yes, either from the external auditors, the _ main board? yes, either from the external auditors, the financial. external auditors, the financial community, orthe external auditors, the financial community, or the internal audit team, if they had any concerns i would have expected them, if it occurred, to report that to the board but also to the holdings board and audit committee, yes. is the board but also to the holdings board and audit committee, yes. is the ceo

resonsible and audit committee, yes. is the ceo responsible for _ and audit committee, yes. is the ceo responsible for ensuring _ and audit committee, yes. is the ceo responsible for ensuring that - and audit committee, yes. is the ceo responsible for ensuring that the - responsible for ensuring that the board _ responsible for ensuring that the board to — responsible for ensuring that the board to whom they report is fully briefed _ board to whom they report is fully briefed on — board to whom they report is fully briefed on the reliability of accounting systems that are used to support— accounting systems that are used to support the figures for the business?_ support the figures for the business? , . , , , ., ~ support the figures for the business? , . , , , . ~ . business? generally speaking, that would be led _ business? generally speaking, that would be led by _ business? generally speaking, that would be led by the _ business? generally speaking, that would be led by the cfo _ business? generally speaking, that would be led by the cfo but - would be led by the cfo but supported by the chief executive, yes. in supported by the chief executive, es. supported by the chief executive, es, . ., , ., supported by the chief executive, es. .. , ., ., supported by the chief executive, es. ., ., ., ,,. yes. in the case of a group such as ro al yes. in the case of a group such as royal mail. _ yes. in the case of a group such as royal mail, would _ yes. in the case of a group such as royal mail, would that _ yes. in the case of a group such as royal mail, would that include - royal mail, would that include responsibility for the oversight of business — responsibility for the oversight of business units such as the post office? — business units such as the post office? ., , . ., , office? under our structure, as i exolained _ office? under our structure, as i explained before, _ office? under our structure, as i explained before, that _ office? under our structure, as i explained before, that was - office? under our structure, as i explained before, that was a - explained before, that was a separate reporting function to the holding board. obviously, the financial numbers were collated by the groove chief financial officer, yes. the groove chief financial officer, es. ~ ., y ., the groove chief financial officer, es. . . , ., ., ., yes. what were your line management responsibilities? _ yes. what were your line management responsibilities? generally _ responsibilities? generally speaking. _ responsibilities? generally speaking, well, _ responsibilities? generally speaking, well, they - responsibilities? generally i speaking, well, they changed responsibilities? generally - speaking, well, they changed over a period of time, as i think i say in my statement. initially, i was

responsible for parcelforce and royal mail logistics, which were two businesses at that time also involved in gls on the parcel side, and i was responsible for helping modernise the letters, business, marketing, finance and group technology which as i said before was very focused on the huge job we had to do to modernise the royal mail letters business in terms of sorting machines and automation machines, tracking and trace capabilities so we could build a parcel business that would allow it to compete in the future. it is parcel business that would allow it to compete in the future.- to compete in the future. it is my fault for a — to compete in the future. it is my fault for a poor _ to compete in the future. it is my fault for a poor question, - to compete in the future. it is my fault for a poor question, did - to compete in the future. it is my fault for a poor question, did any| fault for a poor question, did any of your— fault for a poor question, did any of your line — fault for a poor question, did any of your line management responsibilities include responsibility for any senior executives within the post office? between — executives within the post office? between 2000 and the end of 2005,

no. from 2006 when alan cook took overfrom david, as i said earlier, he had dual reporting to me on group issues regarding things like funding and budgets in the commercial relationship between the post office and royal mail, which of course was huge, but also he had a direct reporting line into the chairman of the post office and the board, as you would imagine.— the post office and the board, as you would imagine. after 2006 and other than in _ you would imagine. after 2006 and other than in relation _ you would imagine. after 2006 and other than in relation to _ you would imagine. after 2006 and other than in relation to mr- you would imagine. after 2006 and other than in relation to mr cook, l other than in relation to mr cook, did any— other than in relation to mr cook, did any of— other than in relation to mr cook, did any of the people within the post _ did any of the people within the post office senior executive team report _ post office senior executive team report to — post office senior executive team report to you? | post office senior executive team report to you?— post office senior executive team i report to you?_ can report to you? i don't think so. can ou hel report to you? i don't think so. can you help us — report to you? i don't think so. can you help us with — report to you? i don't think so. can you help us with line _ report to you? i don't think so. can you help us with line management| you help us with line management responsibility for the following people. — responsibility for the following people, the head of security within the post _ people, the head of security within the post office? | people, the head of security within the post office?— the post office? i believe they re orted the post office? i believe they reported to — the post office? i believe they reported to jonathan - the post office? i believe they reported to jonathan evans. i the post office? i believe they i reported to jonathan evans. the reported tojonathan evans. the company secretary. riff reported to jonathan evans. the company secretary.— reported to jonathan evans. the company secretary. of royal mail

arou - ? company secretary. of royal mail group? and _ company secretary. of royal mail group? and the — company secretary. of royal mail group? and the post _ company secretary. of royal mail group? and the post office. - company secretary. of royal mail group? and the post office. in i company secretary. of royal mail i group? and the post office. in what ca aci group? and the post office. in what capacity was — group? and the post office. in what capacity was jonathan _ group? and the post office. in what capacity was jonathan evans - group? and the post office. in what capacity was jonathan evans directly line managing that person, as the company— line managing that person, as the company secretary of the post office or the _ company secretary of the post office or the royal mail group? company secretary of the post office orthe royal mail group? i�*m company secretary of the post office or the royal mail group?— or the royal mail group? i'm not sure i or the royal mail group? i'm not sure i recall. _ or the royal mail group? i'm not sure i recall, to _ or the royal mail group? i'm not sure i recall, to be _ or the royal mail group? i'm not sure i recall, to be honest. - or the royal mail group? i'm not sure i recall, to be honest. who| or the royal mail group? i'm not. sure i recall, to be honest. who had line management _ sure i recall, to be honest. who had line management responsibility - sure i recall, to be honest. who had line management responsibility for. line management responsibility for the head _ line management responsibility for the head of product and branch accounting within the post office? that would have been the post office cfo. �* , that would have been the post office cro. ~ , ., , ., that would have been the post office cfo. �* , ., , ., ., . ., cfo. any oversight of that function from within — cfo. any oversight of that function from within royal _ cfo. any oversight of that function from within royal mail _ cfo. any oversight of that function from within royal mail group? - cfo. any oversight of that function | from within royal mail group? that would have from within royal mail group? trust would have come from the group cfo, which was mariska sony, and in the latter years iain duncan. iloathe which was mariska sony, and in the latter years iain duncan.— latter years iain duncan. who had line management _ latter years iain duncan. who had line management responsibility i latter years iain duncan. who hadi line management responsibility in respect _ line management responsibility in respect of the head of legal services _ respect of the head of legal services within royal mail group?

that was— services within royal mail group? that wasjonathan evans, company secretary. that was jonathan evans, company secreta . ~ ., ., ., ., secretary. who had line management responsibility — secretary. who had line management responsibility for _ secretary. who had line management responsibility for the _ secretary. who had line management responsibility for the general - responsibility for the general counsel— responsibility for the general counsel within royal mail? jonathan evans, counsel within royal mail? jonathan evans. company _ counsel within royal mail? jonathan evans, company secretary. - counsel within royal mail? jonathan evans, company secretary. the - counsel within royal mail? jonathan| evans, company secretary. the head of it in evans, company secretary. the head of w in the — evans, company secretary. the head of it in the post _ evans, company secretary. the head of it in the post office? _ evans, company secretary. the head of it in the post office? would - evans, company secretary. the head of it in the post office? would have| of it in the post office? would have re orted of it in the post office? would have reported to — of it in the post office? would have reported to the _ of it in the post office? would have reported to the chief _ of it in the post office? would have reported to the chief executive - of it in the post office? would have reported to the chief executive of i reported to the chief executive of the post office. bud reported to the chief executive of the post office.— reported to the chief executive of the post office. and any line back to r0 al the post office. and any line back to royal mail— the post office. and any line back to royal mail holdings? - the post office. and any line back to royal mail holdings? dotted i the post office. and any line back| to royal mail holdings? dotted for skilled advice, _ to royal mail holdings? dotted for skilled advice, for _ to royal mail holdings? dotted for skilled advice, for want _ to royal mail holdings? dotted for skilled advice, for want of - to royal mail holdings? dotted for skilled advice, for want of a - to royal mail holdings? dotted for skilled advice, for want of a better| skilled advice, for want of a better phrase, to the group technology director. they reported to the chief executive. 50 director. they reported to the chief executive. ,, ., director. they reported to the chief executive. . ., , executive. so the function stayed within the post _ executive. so the function stayed within the post office? _ executive. so the function stayed within the post office? which - executive. so the function stayed l within the post office? which parts of the _ within the post office? which parts of the business had responsibility and oversight for certain activities, conduct or functions? rather— activities, conduct or functions? rather than looking at the people

involved — rather than looking at the people involved. can we turn up page ia of your witness — involved. can we turn up page ia of your witness statement, please, paragraph ai.i? you say oversight brought by the post office would have sat with the post office would have sat with the post office would have sat with the post office legal team and oversight for prosecutions brought in behalf of the _ for prosecutions brought in behalf of the rest of the group would have sat within _ of the rest of the group would have sat within the group legal team, then you — sat within the group legal team, then you say, i believe both teams would _ then you say, i believe both teams would have — then you say, i believe both teams would have been under the supervision of the company secretary, jonathan evans. were you not aware — secretary, jonathan evans. were you not aware that there was no post office _ not aware that there was no post office legal team, it had no

separate legal in—house function, and that— separate legal in—house function, and that civil and criminal proceedings were brought by lawyers within— proceedings were brought by lawyers within the _ proceedings were brought by lawyers within the royal mail group legal team? _ within the royal mail group legal team? |— within the royal mail group legal team? ., , within the royal mail group legal team? ., ., so within the royal mail group legal - tsunfl— 50 lawyers team? i was not, though. so lawyers within the group _ team? i was not, though. so lawyers within the group gave _ team? i was not, though. so lawyers within the group gave advice - team? i was not, though. so lawyers within the group gave advice on - within the group gave advice on prosecutions, they made decisions about— prosecutions, they made decisions about prosecutions and within prosecutions, and they conducted proceedings, not any post office lawyers, — proceedings, not any post office lawyers, you didn't know that? was that lawyers, you didn't know that? —" that throughout the whole period? yes. throughout the whole of your period _ yes. throughout the whole of your period i _ yes. throughout the whole of your eriod. ., , yes. throughout the whole of your eriod. .,, ., yes. throughout the whole of your eriod. ., ., ., ., ., ., period. i was not aware of that, no. given the fact _ period. i was not aware of that, no. given the fact that _ period. i was not aware of that, no. given the fact that i _ period. i was not aware of that, no. given the fact that i have _ period. i was not aware of that, no. given the fact that i have just - given the fact that i have just described, would that mean that your board _ described, would that mean that your board had _ described, would that mean that your board had a _ described, would that mean that your board had a responsibility for the conduct — board had a responsibility for the conduct of— board had a responsibility for the conduct of a team of lawyers within royal mail group who were acting on behalf of the post

office, _ were acting on behalf of the post office, ratherthan were acting on behalf of the post office, rather than the post office board _ office, rather than the post office board having such a responsibility for them? — board having such a responsibility forthem? in board having such a responsibility for them? , , board having such a responsibility forthem? , , , ., for them? in part, yes, but also they would _ for them? in part, yes, but also they would be — for them? in part, yes, but also they would be doing _ for them? in part, yes, but also they would be doing that at - for them? in part, yes, but also they would be doing that at the | they would be doing that at the behest of the post office team who owned horizon and any issues deriving out of that.- owned horizon and any issues deriving out of that. might that be their clients? _ deriving out of that. might that be their clients? yes. _ deriving out of that. might that be their clients? yes. i'm _ deriving out of that. might that be their clients? yes. i'm talking - their clients? yes. i'm talking about responsibility _ theirclients? 1's; i'm talking about responsibility for theirclients? 1ezs i'm talking about responsibility for the theirclients? 123 i'm talking about responsibility for the conduct and work— about responsibility for the conduct and work of the lawyers. that fell, if i'm _ and work of the lawyers. that fell, if i'm right, — and work of the lawyers. that fell, if i'm right, to royal mail group to manage _ if i'm right, to royal mail group to manage and oversee. my understanding at the time was — manage and oversee. my understanding at the time was that _ manage and oversee. my understanding at the time was that that _ manage and oversee. my understanding at the time was that that was _ manage and oversee. my understanding at the time was that that was also - at the time was that that was also under the supervision of the company secretary at the post office, in conjunction with the royal mail, they used i thought a mix of post office legal team augmented by royal mail legal team and outside legal people as well, that was my

understanding.— people as well, that was my understanding. people as well, that was my understandin.. . , understanding. can we turn up page 28 of our understanding. can we turn up page 28 of your witness _ understanding. can we turn up page 28 of your witness statement, - 28 of your witness statement, please? — 28 of your witness statement, please? and look to start at paragraph 83? use a generally speaking responsibility for criminal prosecutions which the post office brought _ prosecutions which the post office brought would have sat under the relevant — brought would have sat under the relevant post office executive team members. — relevant post office executive team members, underthe relevant post office executive team members, under the oversight of the post office _ members, under the oversight of the post office executive team as a whole — post office executive team as a whole. the risk and compliance committee and the post office board. and then _ committee and the post office board. and then if— committee and the post office board. and then if we go on to sa. you say in response — and then if we go on to sa. you say in response to the questions i have been _ in response to the questions i have been asked — in response to the questions i have been asked by the inquiry, i do not recall— been asked by the inquiry, i do not recall having any involvement, having — recall having any involvement, having involvement in or knowledge of the _ having involvement in or knowledge of the oversight of investigations and prosecutions brought by the post office _ and prosecutions brought by the post office against sub—postmasters for

alleged _ office against sub—postmasters for alleged shortfalls in branch accounts of the recovery of such alleged — accounts of the recovery of such alleged shortfalls. and then over the page — alleged shortfalls. and then over the page to 87. to the best of my knowledge, i do not recall reports of the _ knowledge, i do not recall reports of the number of prosecutions being brought— of the number of prosecutions being brought by— of the number of prosecutions being brought by the post office against sub—postmasters being escalated to me nor— sub—postmasters being escalated to me nor the — sub—postmasters being escalated to me nor the fact there were systemic issues _ me nor the fact there were systemic issues impacting the horizon system. i 'ust issues impacting the horizon system. ijust want to issues impacting the horizon system. i just want to test what you said issues impacting the horizon system. ijust want to test what you said in those _ ijust want to test what you said in those three — ijust want to test what you said in those three paragraphs there about a lack of— those three paragraphs there about a lack of knowledge about these activities of the post office. can we start, — activities of the post office. can we start, please, by looking at rmg 706? _

in my version, they should be upright~ — in my version, they should be upright~ if— in my version, they should be upright. if we can go back to page one. _ upright. if we can go back to page one, please. you will have to tilt your— one, please. you will have to tilt your head — one, please. you will have to tilt your head to the side. can you see that these — your head to the side. can you see that these are minutes of an audit and risk— that these are minutes of an audit and risk committee of the 11th of november, 2003? | and risk committee of the 11th of november, 2003?— and risk committee of the 11th of. november, 2003?_ can and risk committee of the 11th of - november, 2003?_ can you november, 2003? i can, yes. can you see that you _ november, 2003? i can, yes. can you see that you were _ november, 2003? i can, yes. can you see that you were in _ november, 2003? i can, yes. can you see that you were in attendance? - see that you were in attendance? yes. _ see that you were in attendance? yes. i_ see that you were in attendance? yes. i do — see that you were in attendance? yes, i do. ., see that you were in attendance? yes, i do.— see that you were in attendance? yes, i do. ., ., , yes, i do. you are the third person down in attendance. _ yes, i do. you are the third person down in attendance. and _ yes, i do. you are the third person down in attendance. and then - yes, i do. you are the third person down in attendance. and then if i yes, i do. you are the third person | down in attendance. and then if we no, down in attendance. and then if we go. please. — down in attendance. and then if we go, please, to page five, please. and scroll— go, please, to page five, please. and scroll down, please. and scroll down. _ and scroll down, please. and scroll down, please, thank you, security

report~ _ down, please, thank you, security report the — down, please, thank you, security report. the security report was received. — report. the security report was received. a _ report. the security report was received, a document tabled for the meeting. _ received, a document tabled for the meeting, and in particular the following _ meeting, and in particular the following was noted, royal mail personnel —related crime because the business _ personnel —related crime because the business approximately £26 million per year. _ business approximately £26 million per year, the company had prosecuted 32a per year, the company had prosecuted 324 people _ per year, the company had prosecuted 32a people in 2002—3, cautioned 108 others. _ 32a people in 2002—3, cautioned 108 others, recommended a7 cases and taken _ others, recommended a7 cases and taken iegal— others, recommended a7 cases and taken legal action in a further a3 cases~ _ taken legal action in a further a3 cases. these were noted as minimum figures _ cases. these were noted as minimum figures since — cases. these were noted as minimum figures since there were also cases where _ figures since there were also cases where iocai— figures since there were also cases where local action is taken to deal with offenders. this is relatively early— with offenders. this is relatively early in — with offenders. this is relatively early in yourtenure, with offenders. this is relatively early in your tenure, is that right, you took— early in your tenure, is that right, you took up— early in your tenure, is that right, you took up your post in april, 2003. — you took up your post in april, 2003. and _ you took up your post in april, 2003, and this is november 2003?| 2003, and this is november 2003? i think 2003, and this is november 2003? think it was 2003, and this is november 2003? i think it was february 2003 i started. 50 think it was february 2003 i started. ,, ., think it was february 2003 i started. ., ,., think it was february 2003 i started. ., ., , ., started. so eight or so months after ou took started. so eight or so months after you took up — started. so eight or so months after you took up post? _

started. so eight or so months after you took up post? so _ started. so eight or so months after you took up post? so from - started. so eight or so months after you took up post? so from this i started. so eight or so months after| you took up post? so from this point onwards— you took up post? so from this point onwards you — you took up post? so from this point onwards you would have known that the company was prosecuting a vast number— the company was prosecuting a vast number of— the company was prosecuting a vast number of people each year? yes, but it refers to royal— number of people each year? yes, but it refers to royal mail— number of people each year? yes, but it refers to royal mail personnel, i it refers to royal mail personnel, we would not have described sub—postmasters is royal mail personnel so obviously i don't recall this particular meeting, it's a very long time ago, but by the description here it was very much focused on royal mail personnel, both full—time and casual workers. so you think this figure here does not include — so you think this figure here does not include any prosecutions of post office _ not include any prosecutions of post office employees? all sub— postmasters? office employees? all sub—postmasters? | office employees? all sub-postmasters? office employees? all sub-ostmasters? ., �* , sub-postmasters? i don't believe so, no. wh sub-postmasters? i don't believe so, no- why was — sub-postmasters? i don't believe so, no- why was that _ sub-postmasters? i don't believe so, no. why was that not _ sub-postmasters? i don't believe so, no. why was that not reported i sub-postmasters? i don't believe so, no. why was that not reported to i sub-postmasters? i don't believe so, no. why was that not reported to the | no. why was that not reported to the arou - ? no. why was that not reported to the a-rou? i no. why was that not reported to the group? i don't _ no. why was that not reported to the group? i don't know. _ no. why was that not reported to the group? i don't know. can _ no. why was that not reported to the group? i don't know. can you - no. why was that not reported to the i group? i don't know. can you assist? sor ,i group? i don't know. can you assist? sorry. i don't— group? i don't know. can you assist? sorry, i don't know. _ group? i don't know. can you assist? sorry, i don't know. why _ group? i don't know. can you assist? sorry, i don't know. why would i group? i don't know. can you assist? sorry, i don't know. why would you i sorry, i don't know. why would you

have wanted _ sorry, i don't know. why would you have wanted or _ sorry, i don't know. why would you have wanted or necessary - sorry, i don't know. why would you have wanted or necessary to i sorry, i don't know. why would you have wanted or necessary to be i sorry, i don't know. why would you| have wanted or necessary to be told about _ have wanted or necessary to be told about the _ have wanted or necessary to be told about the number of people that royai— about the number of people that royal mail were prosecuted, but not the post _ royal mail were prosecuted, but not the post office?— the post office? because, at this time, we the post office? because, at this time. we were — the post office? because, at this time, we were having _ the post office? because, at this time, we were having a - the post office? because, at this time, we were having a lot i the post office? because, at this time, we were having a lot of- time, we were having a lot of problems in royal mail, both in terms of theft of things like credit cards out of the post, which was obviously severely dent in confidence in the post and indeed of the companies that used it, there was a lot of mail, one of the reasons we were failing quality of service targets was a lot of mail was not being delivered, it was either being dumped or hoarded, so a whole host of reasons as to why there was a real issue in terms of what we used to call, there was a programme run by ourselves, very much monitored chord mails integrity, all about the integrity

of the mail itself. in integrity, all about the integrity of the mail itself.— of the mail itself. in any event, throu~h of the mail itself. in any event, through this — of the mail itself. in any event, through this route, _ of the mail itself. in any event, through this route, you - of the mail itself. in any event, through this route, you would i of the mail itself. in any event, i through this route, you would have known _ through this route, you would have known about the royal mail's prosecutorial activities?- prosecutorial activities? yes, indeed. would _ prosecutorial activities? yes, indeed. would you _ prosecutorial activities? yes, indeed. would you get i prosecutorial activities? yes, | indeed. would you get regular u dates indeed. would you get regular updates about _ indeed. would you get regular updates about the _ indeed. would you get regular updates about the number i indeed. would you get regular updates about the number ofl indeed. would you get regular- updates about the number of people prosecuted in a year, the amount of loss estimated by the criminal activities _ loss estimated by the criminal activities of royal mail group employees, or other individuals, and the amount— employees, or other individuals, and the amount recovered? | employees, or other individuals, and the amount recovered? i am employees, or other individuals, and the amount recovered?— employees, or other individuals, and the amount recovered? i am not sure i would the amount recovered? i am not sure i would use — the amount recovered? i am not sure i would use the _ the amount recovered? i am not sure i would use the word _ the amount recovered? i am not sure i would use the word regular- the amount recovered? i am not sure i would use the word regular but i i would use the word regular but there were updates in terms of prosecutions that reached obviously... came to... taste prosecutions that reached obviously... came to... we will leave the _ obviously... came to... we will leave the post _ obviously... came to... we will leave the post office _ obviously... came to... we will leave the post office inquiry i obviously... came to... we will leave the post office inquiry to | leave the post office inquiry to bring you some breaking news on a story we have been watching for the past week, and that is that a man

has been charged with murdering his wife while she walked with her baby in the pram in bradford, he has now appeared before the city's crown court, he was asked to appear again today at the crown court in bradford. the woman was stabbed on saturday afternoon, she later died in hospitalfrom her injuries, and habibur masum faced bradford crown court via video link this afternoon, charged with her murder. we are hearing that her baby was not physically harmed during that attack. now, habibur masum is due to face a plea hearing on the 10th of may and a provisional trial date has been set for november, the 25—year—old was arrested in

aylesbury earlier this week following a three day nationwide manhunt and west yorkshire police has referred itself to the police watchdog because of previous contact the force had had with kulsuma akter before her death. let us now go back to the post office inquiry in central london and listen in. care where the — central london and listen in. care where the company _ central london and listen in. care where the company is _ central london and listen in. care where the company is the alleged victim _ where the company is the alleged victim of— where the company is the alleged victim of the crime, where the company— victim of the crime, where the company is alleged... investigates whether— company is alleged... investigates whether it — company is alleged... investigates whether it is the victim of the crime — whether it is the victim of the crime and _ whether it is the victim of the crime and then decides whether to prosecute? crime and then decides whether to rosecute? . crime and then decides whether to prosecute? yes. a phrase that has been prosecute? 123 a phrase that has been described asjudge, jury prosecute? 123 a phrase that has been described as judge, jury and executioner in the past. what special— executioner in the past. what special supervision and oversight of such an _ special supervision and oversight of such an activity would you say was required? — such an activity would you say was required? |— such an activity would you say was reuuired? ., ., ., required? i would have thought the su ervision required? i would have thought the supervision of _ required? i would have thought the supervision of the _ required? i would have thought the supervision of the experts, - required? i would have thought the supervision of the experts, both i supervision of the experts, both internal and external, qualified

lawyers, legal advice, the general counsel, the company secretary, and of course any people looking at the issues that arose.— of course any people looking at the issues that arose. what about things like ensuring — issues that arose. what about things like ensuring there _ issues that arose. what about things like ensuring there is _ issues that arose. what about things like ensuring there is a _ issues that arose. what about things like ensuring there is a separation i like ensuring there is a separation of functions? asi as i said, the legal process is not my area of expertise.— as i said, the legal process is not my area of expertise. what about thin . s like my area of expertise. what about things like the _ my area of expertise. what about things like the independence i my area of expertise. what about things like the independence of i things like the independence of decision—makers? things like the independence of decision-makers?— things like the independence of decision-makers? yes, i would have thou~ht decision-makers? yes, i would have thought so. — decision-makers? yes, i would have thought so. yes- _ decision-makers? yes, i would have thought so, yes. what _ decision-makers? yes, i would have thought so, yes. what about - decision-makers? yes, i would have thought so, yes. what about thingsl thought so, yes. what about things such as intrusive _ thought so, yes. what about things such as intrusive supervision i thought so, yes. what about things such as intrusive supervision and i such as intrusive supervision and regular— such as intrusive supervision and regular audits and reviews of the way in _ regular audits and reviews of the way in which the company's conducting its prosecutorial functions?— conducting its prosecutorial functions?- what i conducting its prosecutorial functions? yes. what about special attention being _ functions? 123 what about special attention being paid to who you are recruiting _ attention being paid to who you are recruiting to investigate alleged crimes— recruiting to investigate alleged crimes against the male? yes, i

would have _ crimes against the male? yes, i would have thought _ crimes against the male? yes, i would have thought so. - crimes against the male? yes, i would have thought so. i i crimes against the male? yes, i would have thought so. i would| crimes against the male? yes, i i would have thought so. i would have thought all the people