Fujitsu ‘kicking can down the road' on compensation, says Post Office campaigner
Conservative peer Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom, who played a pivotal role in exposing the outrage, accused the Japanese tech giant of holding out with a view to reducing the amount it would ultimately have to pay.
He argued the only way to change the under-fire company's attitude would be for the Government to stop awarding it contracts.
Despite its involvement in the Post Office debacle, the firm has continued to secure multimillion-pound deals with Whitehall, bankrolled by the taxpayer.
Fujitsu has already acknowledged it has a 'moral obligation' to contribute to compensation, pending the outcome of the public inquiry led by Sir Wyn Williams.
The firm has come under renewed pressure after the publication of the first part of Sir Wyn's final report.
It found around 1,000 people were wrongly prosecuted and convicted after Fujitsu's defective Horizon accounting system made it appear that money was missing at their Post Office branches.
Some victims were sent to prison or financially ruined, others were shunned by their communities, and some took their own lives.
The long-running battle for justice accelerated dramatically after ITV broadcast the drama Mr Bates Vs The Post Office, which highlighted the scandal.
Sir Wyn said around 10,000 people are eligible to submit compensation claims following what has been dubbed as the worst miscarriage of justice in British legal history.
Speaking in Parliament, Lord Arbuthnot said: 'This matter has taken place over many years, under Labour ministers, Lib Dem ministers, Conservative ministers,
'We should all, frankly, hang our heads in shame.'
He added: 'I went along to The Oval last week to listen to Sir Wyn give his excellent report, and he used a telling phrase about Fujitsu, namely that they were kicking the can down the road.
'That's exactly what they are doing.
'The longer they think they can stave off paying a single penny towards the victims of this matter, the less they think they will have to pay.
'Does the Government recognise that the only way we can change that behaviour is to stop giving them contracts?'
Responding, business minister Baroness Jones of Whitchurch said: 'I must pay absolute tribute to him for all of his involvement in this running scandal over many years, and for helping to bring the scandal to light.'
She said the Government was in 'active dialogue' with Fujitsu on the issue of compensation.
The company has said it will not bid for contracts 'with new Government customers' until the Post Office Horizon inquiry concludes.
However, this still leaves it open to tender for work with existing Whitehall clients or 'where there is an agreed need for Fujitsu's skills and capabilities'.
Latest figures show a further 12 new deals had been struck with the company over the last year, in addition to extensions of existing contracts.
The Government has said the majority are for services already provided by Fujitsu and were put in place to ensure continuity of services.
Lady Jones told peers: 'The extent of Fujitsu's role on the scandal is not fully known, and therefore we feel it would be inappropriate for the Government to take further action until we have all parts of the inquiry before us.'
A Fujitsu spokesperson said: 'We have apologised for, and deeply regret, our role in subpostmasters' suffering. We hope for a swift resolution that ensures a just outcome for the victims.
'We are considering the recommendations set out by Sir Wyn in volume one of the inquiry's report, and are engaged with Government regarding Fujitsu's contribution to compensation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Starmer faces difficult task persuading Trump to take different path on Gaza
Moments after Air Force One touched down at Prestwick on Friday for a trip in which politics will take as big a billing as golf, Donald Trump was asked about his relationship with Keir Starmer. 'I like your prime minister. He's slightly more liberal than I am, as you've probably heard. But he's a good man,' the US president told reporters. At a time when the UK wants Trump's ear on numerous weighty issues, his response to questions about the 'special relationship' will have given Downing Street some reassurance. But it has been hard won. Starmer has been clear since before Trump's re-election that he would work with him if it was in Britain's national interest. There have been uncomfortable moments, but so far his decision to align himself with the US president has broadly paid off. Most notable was the economic deal agreed by the two leaders that slashes some of Trump's tariffs on cars, aluminium and steel, and which – even though it is not yet fully implemented – the UK government hopes will be a first step towards a closer trading relationship. Starmer, along with other western allies, has also helped encourage Trump to shift his position on Ukraine. After initially siding with Vladimir Putin and appearing to blame Volodymyr Zelenskyy for the invasion, the US president has since declared himself 'very unhappy' with his Russian counterpart. The prime minister now faces his toughest diplomatic task of all: trying to persuade Trump to take a different path on the humanitarian crisis in the Middle East. Even getting the issue on the agenda will not have been straightforward, with the White House not regarding Gaza as a priority. Trump is the only international leader whom the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, listens to – though even then, not all of the time – so getting the US president's ear at this precise moment is an opportunity not to be squandered. With international fury over the situation on the ground in Gaza growing, Starmer has also been under pressure domestically – from his cabinet, Labour MPs and increasingly the public – to take further action against Israel. Government advisers are defensive – citing what the UK has already done to hold Israel to account since Labour came to power – and promising further action will follow, even if it is not clear what that might constitute. They point to the UK restoring funding to the UN agency Unrwa, sanctioning far-right Israeli ministers and those who committed settler violence, breaking off trade negotiations with Israel, backing the legitimacy of the international criminal court and restricting arms licences to Israel (though not preventing them entirely). Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion The initial urgency is around humanitarian aid, with mass starvation spreading across Gaza, and Starmer will be hoping to persuade Trump that the situation on the ground will only worsen unless the Israelis fully lift their blockade of almost all aid into the territory. The longer-term prize, however, would be a ceasefire. Starmer will press Trump to revive ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas, after the US and Israel withdrew their negotiation teams from Qatar last week. Getting them back round the table to agree a 60-day break from fighting is a prerequisite to a more permanent cessation of violence. The window of opportunity is narrow: the Israeli parliament is not sitting until October, which gives Netanyahu the cover he would need to agree a deal. But Starmer knows Trump is the only international figure who can put pressure on him to do so. Only at that point does Starmer feel the UK could follow France and formally recognise a Palestine state. No 10 insiders say it is a 'matter of when, not if' and David Lammy, the foreign secretary, will be at a UN conference this week to establish a pathway to formal recognition. To the deep frustration of many in his party, the prime minister last week rejected a call to follow France in recognising Palestine amid concerns the move would be largely symbolic without a ceasefire in place, and that issue could overshadow the talks with Trump. But that means even more is riding on Monday's meeting with the US president. It will be a test of whether the energy put into maintaining a good relationship with Trump has been worth it. And it will also show how far Starmer really is prepared to push to help bring an end to the catastrophe in Gaza.
The Guardian
43 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Zero-hours contracts: peers accused of ‘trying to block stronger UK workers' rights'
Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers have been accused of trying to block stronger rights for millions of workers amid a growing campaign by business leaders to water down Labour's zero-hours contract plans. In a blow for the government, the Lords last week voted to curtail the manifesto promise to give workers a right to a guaranteed hours contract and day-one protections against unfair dismissal. Setting up a showdown with the upper chamber, the Lords passed a series of amendments to the employment rights bill that will must be addressed by ministers when MPs return from their summer break. In an angry intervention on Monday, the general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, Paul Nowak, said the Lords was 'doing the bidding of bad bosses' and ought to 'get out of the way' of the plans. 'The sight of hereditary peers voting to block stronger workers' rights belongs in another century. It's plain wrong,' he said. Under the Lords' amendments, a requirement for employers to offer zero-hours workers a contract covering a guaranteed number of hours would be shifted to place the onus on staff to ask for such an arrangement. Protections against unfair dismissal from the first day of employment – which the government plans to reduce from the current level of two years – would be extended to six months, and changes to free up trade unions would be curtailed. The bill will return to the Commons in September for MPs to consider the amendments. The two houses then continue to vote on the changes in a process known as 'ping-pong' until a way forward is agreed. The amendments were put forward by the Lib Dem Lord Goddard, a former leader of Stockport council, and two Tory peers: Lord Hunt, who is a shadow business minister, and Lord Sharpe, a former investment banker. Hunt did not respond to a request for comment. Sharpe said: 'Keir Starmer's unemployment bill is a disaster for employees as much as it is a threat to business. Labour politicians who have never worked in business are destroying the economy. Only the Conservatives are listening to business and making the case for growth.' Goddard said he feared Labour's 'rushed bill' would be bad for workers in small businesses and on family-owned farms. 'They were badly let down by the Conservatives, and Labour seems to have a blind spot when it comes to farms and small businesses, too. 'We support the bill as a whole and have worked constructively to try to improve it. It's a shame to see the government getting upset that we didn't simply give them a blank cheque.' Employers groups welcomed the changes, saying the Lords was responding to business concerns. Helen Dickinson, the chief executive of the British Retail Consortium, said: 'Putting forward positive, practical and pragmatic amendments to the employment rights bill [will] help to protect the availability of valuable, local, part-time and entry level jobs up and down the country.' Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Industry chiefs have stepped up lobbying against the workers' rights changes, warning that companies were already slashing jobs and putting up prices in response to tax rises in chancellor Rachel Reeves's autumn budget. Dickinson said there was 'further to go' to curb the employment rights bill. 'Even with these amendments accepted, retailers remain worried about the consequences for jobs from other areas of the bill.' Union leaders have, though, urged ministers to stand firm. A recent mega poll of 21,000 people commissioned by the TUC found a majority of UK voters – including Conservative, Lib Dem and Reform UK supporters – backed a ban on zero-hours contracts. Nowak said the government plan included 'commonsense protections' that a majority of people wanted to see become law. 'These peers are not just out of touch, they are actively defying their own voters – and the public at large. The government must stand firm in the face of cynical attacks and deliver the employment rights bill in full.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns
An animal charity has called for stricter regulations on animal rescues importing dogs into the UK, citing concerns about disease risks and behavioural issues Government statistics reveal that in 2023, 320,000 pets were brought into the UK under travel pet schemes and 44,000 entered as commercial imports. RSPCA spokesman David Bowles likened the process to ' Deliveroo for dogs' and called on the Government to tighten regulations on animal rescues. He told the BBC: 'The RSPCA's major concern is these dogs are essentially ticking time bombs – coming over, not being health tested. 'Diseases are now coming in through these dogs. They're affecting not just the dogs that are being imported, they could also affect the dogs already in this country and their owners. 'They've almost set up a Deliveroo for dogs and that is a real problem.' There is no requirement for rescue organisations to be licensed in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. It comes weeks after a bill that aims to stop animal smuggling and cruelty cleared the Commons with cross-party support. Legislation put forward by Liberal Democrat MP Dr Danny Chambers will reduce the number of animals for non-commercial entry into the UK, ban the import of puppies and kittens under six months old or heavily pregnant dogs and cats, and introduce a halt on the import of dogs and cats who have been 'mutilated', including having their ears docked. The MP for Winchester's Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill was supported by the Government, and will now proceed to the House of Lords on its passage to becoming law. Dr Chambers said: 'As a vet, I've seen the devastating consequences of puppy smuggling. It's unimaginably cruel to separate puppies and kittens from their mothers at a very young age, and then bring them across borders in substandard conditions where they're then sold for maximum profit by unscrupulous traders who prioritise profit over welfare.' He added: 'Careful consideration has been given to setting these limits, balancing the need to disrupt illegal trade with minimising impact on genuine pet owners. To underpin this, only an owner, not an authorised person, will be permitted to sign and declare that the movement of a dog or cat is non-commercial. He criticised the influence of social media on the increased demand for dogs with docked ears, and a party colleague hit out at the platforms' role in publishing animal abuse. He said: 'One reason that there is such an interest in dogs with cropped ears is that a lot of influencers on Instagram and other social media platforms pose with these dogs or show they have these new dogs with cropped ears. Many people aren't aware that this is a mutilation. 'They think it's how the dogs' ears normally look, and it drives a demand for dogs that look like this.'
