Thoughts on being a sub Post Master

 

Credit: Myatt Antonia, ukposter.co.uk

The aphorisms I draw on to make my case:-

Where there is power, there is also abuse of power.

Most groups and organisations primarily exist to serve their own interest.

Most theft in the West is completely legal.

I have been listening to Nick Wallis radio 4 podcast called 'The Great Post Office Trial'.

In episode 12 (bonus section) Nick Wallis interviews Nick Read, the current CEO of the Post Office, having bumped into each other at the parliamentary enquiry at the Palace of Westminster.  Of course Nick Wallis had requested an interview with Post Office officials over many years, so he was very surprise when Nick Read agreed to speak.  The interview is fascinating because it exposes the fact that the abuse of power being investigated was demonstrably still present in the system.  Post office executives had been given substantial bonuses to reward them for their contributions in the public enquiry.  What is more, this had been stated in the Post Office Annual Report.  Some of the bonuses appear to be greater than the awards for damages offered to sub-post masters.

To me this sounded like a burglar being rewarded financially for confessing to guilt, though in this case it was for minimising guilt, to protect the organisation.

Nick Wallis has been able to show how powerful people were able to run roughshod over working-class men and women, often Asian, and assume that they would get away with it.  In the interview Nick Read seemed compelled to time and again say how awful and terrible the errors made against the sub-masters/mistresses were.  Nick Read, as with politicians, kept saying that his job was to clean up the culture of the Post Office, and that he needed to take the people who had made the mistakes with him.  This reminded me of the sentiments in Germany after the first world war.  Ok they lost, but they still regretted what had happened to them.

Nick Wallis was able to illuminate the shallowness of accountability, where the powerful do not lose their jobs, or suffer gross indignities, such as prosecution. 

All the compensation paid to victims will come from the public purse.  Nick Read referred in the interview to the compensation scheme needing to fair on the taxpayer, who would be footing the bill, as if we the listening public would then sympathise with the need to work to reduce individual claims.  It was acknowledged that if the Post Office was a private business (it is semi-private), it would have failed, and been replaced with something else long ago.  

It also struck me, that as someone who is paid from the public purse, the Post office scandal also provided lucrative work to many lawyer, all who ultimately are paid for from the public purse.   All this work would be unnecessary if systems were not allowed to misuse power.

How can power be kept in check?  I observed how the service I worked in was able to flourish when we worked in a multi-agency partnership.  We worked together in a mutually beneficial partnership covering common, shared aims. From a systems perspective, all we shared where the children.  The three agencies involved were able to maintain a focus on these aims, and were able to limit the propensity for our own self serving hidden and selfish agenda to dominate.   

Examples were- we functioned without waiting lists, we valued children even if they moved out of our area, we were interested in feedback and measured effectiveness.  we also published data about our service.  These are all things that as soon as the partnership was dissolved (due to 'austerity') we lost.

It is my view that more private companies should be run as worker's cooperatives.  Services require moderation at all levels.  If the people who were made to suffer had more power within the organisation, they would have been able to have greater influence over the way problems were solved.

The longer deceit is allowed to persist, the more it becomes essential to defend.  Catch it early and costly errors of justice can be limited.

Another question.  Did the computer errors give the post masters any cash, as well as take it away?? 

The invitation to follow.

Some thoughts on the calling of Nathaniel

The Gospel of John, Chapter One 43-50

The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, he said to him, “Follow me.” Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 

 “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” Nathanael asked.  “Come and see,” said Philip.  When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.” “How do you know me?” Nathanael asked.  Jesus answered, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.” Then Nathanael declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” Jesus said, “You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that.”  He then added, “Very truly I tell you, you will see ‘heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”

Today, Angela Sheard, curate at St Martin in the Fields, spoke from these verses.  Her points were well made and well taken.  She spoke about the mechanics of shifting from stuck and ridge beliefs to ones which are more clearly focused on Jesus.  

It appears that Philip, Andrew and Peter quickly understood the Jesus was 'special'.  They knew he was a great leader, the one foretold of old.  Nathanial was more sceptical, and I'm sympathetic here.  I wondered how I would react if someone said to me, "Andrew, Jesus has returned to the earth and he is now  living in Andover."  

Angela had an interesting thought about the apposite nature of the fig tree.  She noted that fig trees in the rabbinic tradition signify 'a search worth taking on'.  Just as we search the scriptures for nuggets and gems, so the fig tree rewards those who climb and seek, by providing good fruit.  The fig tree became a good place to seek shade from which to study the scriptures.

Angela noted that Nathanial, as a seeker after the truth, was 'chosen' by Jesus, but he was also 'ripe for the choosing'. 

"Seek and you will find." This is a message that crosses all generations and cultures, and reassures us that the 'choosing' is not coincidental or prejudiced.

Angela's emphasised the point that it is through relationships that we are able to free ourselves up to be receptive to truth.  Nathanial was getting to know Jesus.  She recalled her time at Theological college (The Queens Foundation in Birmingham), where students from the full spectrum of Christian orientation mixed and rubbed up against each other.  She felt that through simple things like playing games together, they learnt to respect each other's views and beliefs, and even allow them to gently challenge their own.

I once read (and cannot now substantiate), that Cardinal Newman said "It is as sensible to try to persuade someone into the kingdom of heaven, as it is to hold a gun to their head."  I do not know if he actually said that, but I remembered it because I really like it.  I believe this.  Conviction comes like 'falling in love', from a common desire for 'relationship'.