Lord Duckhunter

I see Davey has emerged from his bunker & given itv an interview

So the victims are part of a “right wing conspiracy “ They clearly don’t share your opinion that other ministers are similarly culpable. There doesn’t appear to be plans for a post office candidate to run against others in the general election, why is that? They’re not calling for other ministers to stand down, why is that? Oh of course, it’s all a “right wing conspiracy “ . They know more than you or I, and they’re reserving particular ire for Sir Ed, Probably because he “fobbed off” Bates more than other ministers, refused to help a convicted post master constituent, ended up working for the lawyers who defended the PO (a firm which his brother was also a senior partner), and has now disappeared of the radar and didn’t appear for the debate in the week. Maybe it is a vast right wing conspiracy as you claim, or maybe the victims feel that he was the worst of a bad bunch. My monies on the latter, yours appears to be on the former. Jo Hamilton, new new Kate Hopkins 😂

What a noddy idea. They should present supporters with a “Thanks for watching our 200 appearances, of which the majority were shite” flag.

Why does Soggy keep lumping Davey in with Starmer on this? It’s not just GB news or the “far right” that are calling for his head, it’s the victims, including a constituent jailed who claims Davey refused to meet him. Not as a minister, but as his MP. There’s now talk of a victim standing against him at the GE, and not for the NF either. The Davey situation isn’t manufactured political outrage, and he knows it. If it was he’d have been at PMQ’s Weds and attended the debate on the scandal. Personally, I’d be surprised if he rode this out, but it’s certainly not a right wing conspiracy.

I heard a very interesting interview with Ron Warmington, forensic accountant, fraud investigator and Chairman of Second Sight, where he addressed this very point. He said the judicial process is weighted incredibly towards believing computers over people and that defendants just don’t have the means or expertise to prove otherwise. This is in all walks of life, not just the PO. He claims the PO contracts are the ultimate source of the problem. As you say, other industries have bugs, problematic software etc, but losses mean they are dealt with quickly and sorted out. Because the Post Masters are ultimately responsible for any loss, PO had no real incentive to spend a shit load of money & effort to put issues right. Ultimately, they tended to get their money. Whereas a bank with the same issues would lose all the money. A couple of examples he gave were; Staff theft, if a PM thought staff were on the fiddle the PO did nothing, because ultimately it was down to him. They wouldn’t help him prove it and the police wouldn’t get involved with a PO matter. If a bank employee fiddled money, the bank would forensically investigate and prosecute that person. The PO didn’t, because the Post master was liable regardless. He said some post masters covered it up and that then opened themselves up to the false accounting charges. Had the PO been more supportive, the PM may still have lost the money (as he employed the staff), but the false accounting wouldn’t have happened. Another one was what he called TC’s (transaction corrections). He said these were sent using a branch number & if somebody in the PO back office inadvertently inputted a wrong digit, the money involved would go to the wrong PO. He said the PO as a whole would balance, but some PM’s would be down & some up. Because the PM contract states they don’t need to pay surpluses back (and they didn’t know where the money was intended for anyway), the bloke with the overage kept it, whereas the bloke with the deficit had to put that in. Again, he contrasted it with banks, where any overage is investigated as throughly as a deficit because they know it’s missing from somewhere and want it tracked down. The PO didn’t care, because the poor old PM with the deficit had to put it in, or again falsify his accounts. He also said the post office never would have rolled out such a flawed IT system had post masters not been liable for the money. He went into countless examples of loopholes that they just wouldn’t have accepted had they,and not somebody else, been liable for losses.

Strange that yesterday you were complaining that ITV didn’t focus on Crozier. So following your logic, he’s must be in the clear.

S🤡ggy Some victims are calling for Ed Daveys head, that’s why it’s news, not some vast right wing pile on. Equally, the bird who first reported this in computer weekly (or what ever it was called), has claimed Blair ignored concerns (expressed by cabinet members) because he was worried about upsetting the Chinese government. That’s why he’s involved. If the victims were calling for Sunaks head, if it was alleged that Boris ignored faults because of Chinese involvement, you’d be unable to control yourself with excitement. As for you assertion that the police alone should investigate post office fraud, I suggest you listen to the Second sight bloke involved. He said the police haven’t got the time or expertise to do so, and it’s a simplistic answer that won’t led to better results. There’s a surprise you’re calling for something simplistic. 😂

Who are Horizon?

That’s a ridiculous pov. Parroting the post offices’ line when you’re a minister or MP, leaves a lot of questions for you to answer. What did you know, when did you know it, and who lied to you, are legitimate questions for every single minister. What if a shadow minister claimed the issue wasn’t raised with him when he was a minister, but it actually was? McFadden has claimed it wasn’t raised and he was unaware of it.

You’re all Tory Tory Tory, don’t seem to understand or accept other parties we’re just as responsible, if not more so. Blair was in charge at the start and even stood up in the HoC praising this new system. The victims, including Bates have heavily criticised Davey some calling for him to resign. Fuck me, if the victims called on Sunak to resign, you’d be cumming in your pants. What a joker. I don’t know who the Tory responsible was, perhaps if he’d behaved like Davey I would do.

🤡 Its the victims calling for his head, those fucking right wing nut jobs 😂 Whats the truth then old wise one, what do you know that the victims don’t?

If you mean “all” as in Government’s containing all 3 major parties, you are 100% right. Although that doesn’t seem to stop people putting it at The Fucking Tories door. The bird who first investigated it for the computer publication reckons it started with Blair being put under pressure by the Chinese Government. Reports state that Harperson told him it was flawed before it was rolled out, but he didn’t want to upset the Chinese. He’s subsequently blamed Mandleson. The Lib Dem’s we’re in charge of the post office during the coalition years, and Sir Ed Davey has some serious questions to answer, particularly after his spokesman claimed yesterday that he had been lied to “on an industrial scale” by the Post Office and other ministers. What did he know, and when? And who were the people who “lied on an industrial scale”. Alan Bates has claimed Davey “fobbed him off” despite 5 requests for meetings & it’s noticeable that the victims have started to call for him to step down from his leadership position. I don’t know who was responsible after the coalition, but surely they should have looked at this, basic competence would have meant alarm bells ringing as there was numerous prosecutions by then. I doubt the full truth will ever come out, or if it does the guilty politicians will be long out of office. No doubt they’ll offer up a few token sacrifices & a few might lose honours, but every party will have an incentive to kick it into the long grass until the public move on.

Ed Davey was the postal affairs minister in the Coalition government, he was told of concerns about the Post Office’s faulty software. Alan Bates claims he sent the Lib Dem leader at least five letters when he was in office. Davey then earned £275,000 as a consultant with law firm Herbert Smith Freehills, who acted for the Post Office. The issue was first raised in 1999, some 11 years before the Tories were in power. We’ll never know if Sunak would bother if it wasn’t an election year, but opposition politicians were in a position to take action, and did fuck all about it as well.

I wondered when you usual suspects would get round to solely blaming the Tories. The problems started under Labour, Ed Davey & Vince Cable were heavily involved & the Tories have been in Government the past 13 years. Every single MP (bar the odd exception) said fuck all about it, and ignored it until the past couple of weeks. It’s a plague on all their houses, it’s the British Establishment that’s let these people down, the 3 major parties & the civil service. Not just the fucking Tories.

What a load of old pony. I presume you mean me. Lol “famously “, give your head a wobble man, nobody cares, “famously”, FFS it’s a football forum. For the avoidance of any doubt, I don’t call anyone who shows sympathy to innocents an anti semite, and I haven’t done so, that’s just a lie. I have called one poster an anti semite, that poster being err, you. Thats because you’ve posted anti semitic comments on this thread and other threads previously.

Educate yourself man…..

BBC following itv’s lead. Their biggest game, Arsenal V Liverpool. Male only pundits, co commentary & presenter. Saving the birds for Burnley v Fulham I guess.

Soggy?

There you go. Big game on itv today and no bird to be seen. Strange isn’t it, almost as if deep down they know blokes that have played the mens game are better analysts.

I managed to obtain secret footage of the CoT Xmas bash.

I don’t know how the have the “balls” to give their opinions when sat next to some brilliant players, id be intimidated knowing I was a shite player. I also love the way some of those players go ott with their responses to what the birds say. Jamie Redknapp is by far the worst “good point”, & nodding like a fucking dog when they say anything. They maybe getting better for all I know, because the last couple of weeks the off button is deployed when they’re on. Luckily, I don’t miss the analysis of the big games, because if you notice on sky, the big games tend to be blokes only.

Mens football is for everyone, I don’t get this argument that because you don’t want to see a dopey bird analyst, you’re somehow trying to keep the game male dominated & them out of it. I can’t believe anyone can have a problem when a bird presents football shows. In principle commentators can be either sex, but there just aren’t any birds that are tolerable to listen to. It’s not sexist, but just like I wouldn’t want to listen to Brian Blessed or Alan Carr commentary, I’m yet to hear a bird doing so that doesn’t have me reaching for the mute button. Where Barton is spot on is in the analysis. Personally, if I want him a championship game, I want somebody who has played or managed at that level as co commentator or analyst, same with premier league, champions league etc. Its not sexist, I wouldn’t want Reg, the dog and duck centre half pointing out where Harry McGuire is going wrong. There’s absolutely no need to bring Fred & Rose into it, that devalues his argument. But his basic point is 100% right. There is an agenda, and it’s not going away. I take the option that will be becoming more and more popular. I turn it on for the start of the game & turn it off at half time and the end.