Post Office scandal

stapler said:
You misunderstand. Spunking a billion up the wall on the original purpose was a terrible idea. It just had nothing whatsoever to do with the scandal. Again as you well know.
Click to expand...

There is a clear causal link. Billion pound systems bought on poorly drawn contracts under public sector systems tend to hang around making a stink and tempt the idiots at the top to reach into their playbook of arse-covering bad decisions to try and make the best of a bad job. This does not absolve anyone of their decisions and conduct after that point, but the original bad idea and decision to give it to Fujitsu are part of the chain of events. And you continue to call this ideology instead of my first hand experience
 


Cockney Mackem said:
There is a clear causal link. Billion pound systems bought on poorly drawn contracts under public sector systems tend to hang around making a stink and tempt the idiots at the top to reach into their playbook of arse-covering bad decisions to try and make the best of a bad job. This does not absolve anyone of their decisions and conduct after that point, but the original bad idea and decision to give it to Fujitsu are part of the chain of events. And you continue to call this ideology instead of my first hand experience
Click to expand...
There is a causal link between the invention of the computer and the scandal. But for the invention of the computer there would have been no scandal.

Are you blaming computers? Of course not, because you aren't obsessed with blaming computers for everything bad.

The 1995 system is not a relevant cause. Had it followed its natural trajectory, the scandal would not have happened. It was the 1999 changes that were the relevant causes.
 
stapler said:
There is a causal link between the invention of the computer and the scandal. But for the invention of the computer there would have been no scandal.

Are you blaming computers? Of course not, because you aren't obsessed with blaming computers for everything bad.

The 1995 system is not a relevant cause. Had it followed its natural trajectory, the scandal would not have happened. It was the 1999 changes that were the relevant causes.
Click to expand...

Show me where I said it caused it.
 
jayjaysafc said:
Brilliant to see these folks getting their names cleared, unfortunately too late for some.
An absolute scandal that will cost the government a small fortune I guess.
I hope whoever was responsible face the justice they deserve

Convicted Post Office workers have names cleared
Click to expand...

Saw this on the local news and couldn’t believe it - poor people’s lives destroyed. I hope they get life changing payouts for what they had to go through.
 
stapler said:
This post is outdoes the European Super League for speedy reverse-ferreting.
Click to expand...

Really - despite me clearly putting the casual link in context with it being part of the chain of events and being very clear that I was only pointing out the origins of the project?

And it's minuscule compared to your deathless remark that socialism and capitalism don't exist, then saying "I'm not saying socialism and capitalism don't exist"
 
Cockney Mackem said:
Really - despite me clearly putting the casual link in context with it being part of the chain of events and being very clear that I was only pointing out the origins of the project?

And it's minuscule compared to your deathless remark that socialism and capitalism don't exist, then saying "I'm not saying socialism and capitalism don't exist"
Click to expand...

You selected the "origins" (which I assume you now agree are irrelevant given your unabashed backsliding) that suit your agenda, rather than the myriad other irrelevant background facts.

My comments on another thread on a different subject, months ago and stripped of all context, are even less relevant.

You make yourself look foolish by your endless attempts to twist anything negative that happens into an attack on the Conservatives. It is not persuasive argument, and your quick recourse to petulant invective whenever you are called out does not improve it.
 
stapler said:
You selected the "origins" (which I assume you now agree are irrelevant given your unabashed backsliding) that suit your agenda, rather than the myriad other irrelevant background facts.

My comments on another thread on a different subject, months ago and stripped of all context, are even less relevant.

You make yourself look foolish by your endless attempts to twist anything negative that happens into an attack on the Conservatives. It is not persuasive argument, and your quick recourse to petulant invective whenever you are called out does not improve it.
Click to expand...

First of all, I pointed out that the origin of the project was a Tory crackdown on benefits recipients led by Peter Lilley. This is a correct statement which you tried to make out was me saying that was the cause of the postmaster scandal to the exclusion of any other factor or decision.

Next you said the original intention and decisions behind the system had *nothing* to do with how it ended up. A bold statement. My counter argument to that was that you can't say it had nothing to do with it when a fatally flawed computer system built by Fujitsu was a key part of the problem. So how is it not a factor in the chain of events that at the outset of the project they gave a corrupt Tory shitcunt a billion pounds and Fujitsu's phone number.

The point I was making was that when a project is started up with a flawed premise and given to a supplier who is incompetent to the point of criminal negligence, the fact that it collapses and the original benefits case for the project has evaporated, it is frequently the case that people press on regardless and try to save face and salvage the system. That does not, as I have already been very clear, absolve anyone of what happened next, but it is a factor in the chain of events leading up to that. Anyone with experience of large IT projects, especially those in the public sector involving Fujitsu, would tell you the same.


You have said that's irrelevant with absolutely nothing to back it up. You've said it is not at all a factor, with nothing to back it up. Please extend on how the decision to appoint Fujitsu on a flawed requirement and waste a billion pounds on a bad computer system had nothing to do with Fujitsu's flawed computer system and the postmasters scandal.
 
Cockney Mackem said:
First of all, I pointed out that the origin of the project was a Tory crackdown on benefits recipients led by Peter Lilley. This is a correct statement which you tried to make out was me saying that was the cause of the postmaster scandal to the exclusion of any other factor or decision.

Next you said the original intention and decisions behind the system had *nothing* to do with how it ended up. A bold statement. My counter argument to that was that you can't say it had nothing to do with it when a fatally flawed computer system built by Fujitsu was a key part of the problem. So how is it not a factor in the chain of events that at the outset of the project they gave a corrupt Tory shitcunt a billion pounds and Fujitsu's phone number.

The point I was making was that when a project is started up with a flawed premise and given to a supplier who is incompetent to the point of criminal negligence, the fact that it collapses and the original benefits case for the project has evaporated, it is frequently the case that people press on regardless and try to save face and salvage the system. That does not, as I have already been very clear, absolve anyone of what happened next, but it is a factor in the chain of events leading up to that. Anyone with experience of large IT projects, especially those in the public sector involving Fujitsu, would tell you the same.


You have said that's irrelevant with absolutely nothing to back it up. You've said it is not at all a factor, with nothing to back it up. Please extend on how the decision to appoint Fujitsu on a flawed requirement and waste a billion pounds on a bad computer system had nothing to do with Fujitsu's flawed computer system and the postmasters scandal.
Click to expand...

I'll simply point out that nearly everything in this post is not contained in the post that I took issue with. I've set out why it is irrelevant. You keep changing your position with flimsy justification, and frankly I can't be arsed.

It is a shame, because there probably isn't that much between us on the things that actually do matter. (Although I think you take the benefit of hindsight too much, particularly in respect of Fujitsu's reputation. They earned that a couple of years later.) I'm not sure you appreciate how off-putting your Cato-esque "and this means the Tories are bad" mantra is to people who don't already sing from that hymnsheet. If you want to persuade people who don't already agree with you, I'd suggest a change of approach.
 
stapler said:
I'll simply point out that nearly everything in this post is not contained in the post that I took issue with. I've set out why it is irrelevant. You keep changing your position with flimsy justification, and frankly I can't be arsed.

It is a shame, because there probably isn't that much between us on the things that actually do matter. (Although I think you take the benefit of hindsight too much, particularly in respect of Fujitsu's reputation. They earned that a couple of years later.) I'm not sure you appreciate how off-putting your Cato-esque "and this means the Tories are bad" mantra is to people who don't already sing from that hymnsheet. If you want to persuade people who don't already agree with you, I'd suggest a change of approach.
Click to expand...

Please point to where you proved it was irrelevant
 
stapler said:
There is a causal link between the invention of the computer and the scandal. But for the invention of the computer there would have been no scandal.

Are you blaming computers? Of course not, because you aren't obsessed with blaming computers for everything bad.

The 1995 system is not a relevant cause. Had it followed its natural trajectory, the scandal would not have happened. It was the 1999 changes that were the relevant causes.
Click to expand...

Labour stopped the Horizon project in it's tracks in 1999 and subsequently the Department of Social Security wanted nothing to do with it. The decision to carry on using it in Post Office counters was wholly down to POCL, who had been given further autonomy in the Postal Services Act (2000). Dunno where all this Labour/Lib Dem stuff comes from tbh.
 
Paddy O'Dors said:
Labour stopped the Horizon project in it's tracks in 1999 and subsequently the Department of Social Security wanted nothing to do with it. The decision to carry on using it in Post Office counters was wholly down to POCL, who had been given further autonomy in the Postal Services Act (2000). Dunno where all this Labour/Lib Dem stuff comes from tbh.
Click to expand...

There is more to it than merely a shit IT system. Governments sat by as POCL sent innocent people to jail. The Labour and coalition governments ignored the growing clamour while innocent folk had their lives destroyed.

The Private Eye report sets out the key players in the hall of shame - free to download here and well worth a read.
 

Back
Top