UK Politics

3084 readers

77 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

Now claw back Vennells’s bonuses from the Post Office. The rules allow it | Nils Pratley (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 10 months ago by JoBo@feddit.uk to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

And all the others, thanks.

"Vennells’s incentive payments add up to £2.2m over the course of her time in charge. She may note that when James Crosby, former boss of HBOS, gave up his knighthood in 2013 after a parliamentary committee found he “sowed the seeds” of destruction at the bank, he volunteered to surrender 30% of his pension entitlement. Those were the days before clawback clauses but Crosby was nodding to the principle that giving up a gong is not enough. In a post-clawback world, matters should be simpler: the rules are meant to insist on repayment of bonuses. If the relevant clauses aren’t triggered in Vennells’s case, when would they be?

"None of which is to deny that the rotten saga goes further than her. The politicians with oversight roles of the state-owned Post Office clearly have questions to answer, as do the relevant executives at Fujitsu, supplier of the dodgy IT software. But, among the business crew at the top of the Post Office over the years, the two chairs during Vennells’s time must explain why they backed the executives to the hilt."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Both the short-term incentive plan (STIP) and long-term (LTIP) at the Post Office clearly stated that there could be situations in which bonuses could be cancelled and individuals told to return cash.

Despite a report in 2012 from external reviewers that the Horizon IT system was “not fit for purpose”, the Post Office continued prosecutions until 2015 and then spent millions of pounds defending itself until the damning high court judgment in 2019.

She may note that when James Crosby, former boss of HBOS, gave up his knighthood in 2013 after a parliamentary committee found he “sowed the seeds” of destruction at the bank, he volunteered to surrender 30% of his pension entitlement.

The politicians with oversight roles of the state-owned Post Office clearly have questions to answer, as do the relevant executives at Fujitsu, supplier of the dodgy IT software.

But, among the business crew at the top of the Post Office over the years, the two chairs during Vennells’s time must explain why they backed the executives to the hilt.

But, if it’s really the case that the Post Office was left to do its own thing within the wider Royal Mail organisation, then the question is who was supposed to be accountable for the biggest IT project in Europe at the time?

The original article contains 643 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 67%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!