Post Office Horizon IT scandal: Lib Dem leader Ed Davey apologises to Alan Bates for ‘terse’ refusal to meet

Ex-postal affairs minister admits to inquiry that response was ‘poorly judged’ and says sorry to people who had lives ruined

Liberal Democrats leader Sir Ed Davey has apologised to the leading Post Office scandal campaigner for his “poorly judged” and “terse” refusal of a meeting with him 14 years ago.

Sir Ed told Sir Alan Bates he did not believe a meeting would “serve any useful purpose”, the inquiry into the IT scandal has heard.

And he said he was “deeply sorry for the individuals and families who have had their lives ruined” by the scandal.

Alan Bates was rejected when he wanted a meeting early in 2010 with Sir Ed (Lucy North/PA Wire)

Sir Alan – then just Mr Bates – wrote to Sir Ed in 2010 when he became postal affairs minister, outlining problems with the Horizon software and requesting a meeting.

More than 700 subpostmasters were prosecuted by the Post Office and given criminal convictions between 1999 and 2015 as Fujitsu’s system made it appear as though money was missing.

The inquiry audience groaned when Sir Ed claimed he did not remember Sir Alan’s first letter requesting a meeting.

The Lib Dem leader, who was postal affairs minister from 2010 to 2012 and has come under fire for not acting against the Post Office, signed off on the response written by officials.

Asked by counsel to the inquiry Jason Beer KC whether he considered the response “terse”, Sir Ed agreed, adding: “(But) I do not remember reading his first letter. I remember a second letter ... I have apologised and I repeat that apology for not meeting Mr Bates on the basis of his first letter.”

Ed Davey said he relied on officials’ advice (REUTERS)

In his witness statement, Sir Ed said he would have read it at speed and signed it on officials’ advice.

“On reflection, and with the benefit of hindsight, I am really sorry that I followed the advice and did not question it, and I can also see why Sir Alan took offence at the phrase ‘I do not believe a meeting would serve any useful purpose’.

“It was poorly judged, and I apologise to Sir Alan for signing it off.”

His statement said he had been shocked “at the harm done to so many subpostmasters over so many years, and by the scale of the lies told by the Post Office and Fujitsu - to the subpostmasters, to the courts, to ministers of all parties, including myself, to Parliament, to journalists and to the public”.

Describing the scandal as “the greatest miscarriage of justice of our time”, he added: “As one of the ministers over the 20 years of this scandal who had postal affairs as part of my ministerial responsibilities, I am sorry that it took me five months to meet Sir Alan Bates, the man who has done so much to uncover all this, and that I did not see through the Post Office’s lies when I and my officials raised his concerns with them.”

He said he believed he was seriously misled by the Post Office and hoped the inquiry could shed light on whether civil servants were also misled by the Post Office.

Hundreds of victims are awaiting compensation despite being eligible for £600,000 payouts.

Another former postal affairs minister, Pat McFadden, told the inquiry he wished he had done more to ask Post Office chiefs whether the system was as robust as they suggested.

The Labour MP and new Chancellor for the Duchy of Lancaster, who was postal affairs minister in 2007-2009, said ultimate responsibility for a state-owned company lay with the government, but he did not recall officials telling him they thought a miscarriage of justice was under way.

Instead, he said, it was worth considering an independent body “that can be called in to launch an inquiry or take action when the level of allegations reaches such a point that it looks like that is the right thing to do”.

Mr McFadden said: “Rereading this correspondence now, and knowing the injustice done to so many subpostmasters, of course I wish I had done more to ask the Post Office if they were really sure their IT system was as robust as they suggested.

“Yet if I had done so, I suspect they would have continued to insist that it was not to blame for these accounting errors.”