The size of the post office network is relatively stable but types of post offices are changing.

The size of the post office network is relatively stable but types of post offices are changing.

My hon Friend the Minister of Small Business and Economic Transformation (Blair McDougall MP) has today made the following statement.

The Government is determined that postmasters affected by the Horizon Scandal receive the compensation they deserve.

The Government is today announcing further details about how postmasters who previously accepted the Horizon Shortfall...

My hon Friend the Minister of Small Business and Economic Transformation (Blair McDougall MP) has today made the following statement.

The Government is determined that postmasters affected by the Horizon Scandal receive the compensation they deserve.

The Government is today announcing further details about how postmasters who previously accepted the Horizon Shortfall...

The Government is determined that postmasters affected by the Horizon Scandal receive the compensation they deserve.

The Government is today announcing further details about how postmasters who previously accepted the Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS) Fixed Sum Offer (FSO) will be able to request permission from an independent person to appeal their...

The Government is determined that postmasters affected by the Horizon Scandal receive the compensation they deserve.

The Government is today announcing further details about how postmasters who previously accepted the Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS) Fixed Sum Offer (FSO) will be able to request permission from an independent person to appeal their...

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to the answer of 4 September 2025, to Question 70519, on Public Inquiries, what has been the public cost to date of the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to the answer of 4 September 2025, to Question 70519, on Public Inquiries, what has been the public cost to date of the Post Office Horizon IT inquiry.

My Lords, I pay tribute to the noble Lord and to my noble friend Lord Beamish, whose unwavering determination, moral courage and steadfast advocacy over these years have ensured that the voices of Horizon victims were heard, believed and ultimately vindicated.

Fujitsu has acknowledged its moral responsibility and has indicated its intention to make a financial contribution. The figure will be set once the Williams inquiry publishes the final volume of its report. We have made it clear to Fujitsu that an interim payment would be a valuable demonstration of intent. However, whether to make such payment and the level of any contribution remains a decision for the company.

My Lords, I pay tribute to the noble Lord and to my noble friend Lord Beamish, whose unwavering determination, moral courage and steadfast advocacy over these years have ensured that the voices of Horizon victims were heard, believed and ultimately vindicated.

Fujitsu has acknowledged its moral responsibility and has indicated its intention to make a financial contribution. The figure will be set once the Williams inquiry publishes the final volume of its report. We have made it clear to Fujitsu that an interim payment would be a valuable demonstration of intent. However, whether to make such payment and the level of any contribution remains a decision for the company.

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Given that Fujitsu knew from the beginning that its system was faulty; that it knew that it was altering remotely sub-postmasters’ accounts without the knowledge of the sub-postmasters; that it knew that the Government and the Post Office were denying that these things could happen while prosecuting the sub-postmasters, how can Fujitsu possibly be a fit and proper organisation to do business with anyone in this country, let alone the Government? Or are we over a barrel?

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Given that Fujitsu knew from the beginning that its system was faulty; that it knew that it was altering remotely sub-postmasters’ accounts without the knowledge of the sub-postmasters; that it knew that the Government and the Post Office were denying that these things could happen while prosecuting the sub-postmasters, how can Fujitsu possibly be a fit and proper organisation to do business with anyone in this country, let alone the Government? Or are we over a barrel?

My Lords, the anger shown by the noble Lord, which I share, is completely understandable, considering the serious injustice experienced by so many sub-postmasters. These are exactly the issues that the independent inquiry is examining in detail. Fujitsu has acknowledged a moral obligation to contribute

to the costs of redress, and the Government have made it absolutely clear that it should do so. Decisions regarding its future role as a government supplier will be made carefully, based on the full findings of the inquiry.

My Lords, the anger shown by the noble Lord, which I share, is completely understandable, considering the serious injustice experienced by so many sub-postmasters. These are exactly the issues that the independent inquiry is examining in detail. Fujitsu has acknowledged a moral obligation to contribute

to the costs of redress, and the Government have made it absolutely clear that it should do so. Decisions regarding its future role as a government supplier will be made carefully, based on the full findings of the inquiry.

My Lords, the situation outlined by my good friend, the noble Lord, Lord Arbuthnot, is right. Fujitsu provided the equipment for the Post Office and knew what was wrong with it, and, even worse, it had a contract to provide information in court to prosecute individual postmasters. Fujitsu was at the centre of this scandal.

My noble friend said that Fujitsu has announced that it has a moral obligation. Well, moral obligations do not pay bills. The taxpayer is on the hook already for over £1.4 billion paid out. Those postmasters—some, unfortunately, are no longer with us—need answers to this injustice. Fujitsu is hiding behind the inquiry. It could make the interim payment now. The Government must stop giving this company contracts: that is the only thing which will stop it and wake it up. Can my noble friend indicate when that decision will be made to stop giving Fujitsu work?

My Lords, the situation outlined by my good friend, the noble Lord, Lord Arbuthnot, is right. Fujitsu provided the equipment for the Post Office and knew what was wrong with it, and, even worse, it had a contract to provide information in court to prosecute individual postmasters. Fujitsu was at the centre of this scandal.

My noble friend said that Fujitsu has announced that it has a moral obligation. Well, moral obligations do not pay bills. The taxpayer is on the hook already for over £1.4 billion paid out. Those postmasters—some, unfortunately, are no longer with us—need answers to this injustice. Fujitsu is hiding behind the inquiry. It could make the interim payment now. The Government must stop giving this company contracts: that is the only thing which will stop it and wake it up. Can my noble friend indicate when that decision will be made to stop giving Fujitsu work?

I share the frustrations my noble friend expresses. The Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that this inquiry takes place, and the findings will be published soon. As he will note, the first volume of the inquiry has been published, and it makes it clear that Fujitsu has an obligation to make compensation for the sufferings of all these postmasters. We are determined to ensure that Fujitsu plays its part.

I share the frustrations my noble friend expresses. The Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that this inquiry takes place, and the findings will be published soon. As he will note, the first volume of the inquiry has been published, and it makes it clear that Fujitsu has an obligation to make compensation for the sufferings of all these postmasters. We are determined to ensure that Fujitsu plays its part.

My Lords, it might help if your Lordships understand the scale of our commitment to Fujitsu. On my count, there are 30-plus live UK contracts, worth at least £5 billion through the lives of those contracts. Since the 2019 High Court ruling, HMRC alone has awarded eight contracts to Fujitsu. We do not need an independent inquiry to know that Fujitsu should be paying compensation, so what is stopping the Government pushing it to do that?

My Lords, it might help if your Lordships understand the scale of our commitment to Fujitsu. On my count, there are 30-plus live UK contracts, worth at least £5 billion through the lives of those contracts. Since the 2019 High Court ruling, HMRC alone has awarded eight contracts to Fujitsu. We do not need an independent inquiry to know that Fujitsu should be paying compensation, so what is stopping the Government pushing it to do that?

The noble Lord touches on several points; let me go through each of them. First, the suggestion that we should simply walk away from existing Fujitsu contracts does not take account of the impact on public services.

The noble Lord touches on several points; let me go through each of them. First, the suggestion that we should simply walk away from existing Fujitsu contracts does not take account of the impact on public services.

Oh!

Oh!

Bear with me. For instance, Fujitsu provides communications between our submarines at sea and HQ. It supports HMRC’s self-assessment scheme and the Home Office border operation. It is also supporting the current Horizon scheme. Although a replacement is being developed and the Government are committed to the Green Paper that we just published, we are investing £483 million over the next two years to support the transformation, replacing Horizon and transitioning away from Fujitsu.

Bear with me. For instance, Fujitsu provides communications between our submarines at sea and HQ. It supports HMRC’s self-assessment scheme and the Home Office border operation. It is also supporting the current Horizon scheme. Although a replacement is being developed and the Government are committed to the Green Paper that we just published, we are investing £483 million over the next two years to support the transformation, replacing Horizon and transitioning away from Fujitsu.

My Lords, if there is sufficient evidence to support the assertions two noble Lords have made about the extent of Fujitsu’s knowledge of the failures in their system—and I believe there is such evidence—have the Government not considered taking legal action against Fujitsu to enforce what would almost certainly be its legal liability to pay compensation for the massive losses its action has caused? Why are the Government just relying on a vague indication by Fujitsu that it has a moral obligation? A very great deal of money could be recovered for the taxpayer if a successful legal action was brought against this international company.

My Lords, if there is sufficient evidence to support the assertions two noble Lords have made about the extent of Fujitsu’s knowledge of the failures in their system—and I believe there is such evidence—have the Government not considered taking legal action against Fujitsu to enforce what would almost certainly be its legal liability to pay compensation for the massive losses its action has caused? Why are the Government just relying on a vague indication by Fujitsu that it has a moral obligation? A very great deal of money could be recovered for the taxpayer if a successful legal action was brought against this international company.

I have the utmost respect for the noble Lord but, as a former Secretary of State and Minister, he should know that the Government speak to government lawyers on a regular basis. An inquiry is taking place, and we should wait for it to finish and for the report to be published. An interim report has been published, and Fujitsu has committed to making a payment. When and how that happens is being consulted on and discussed between the two parties.

I have the utmost respect for the noble Lord but, as a former Secretary of State and Minister, he should know that the Government speak to government lawyers on a regular basis. An inquiry is taking place, and we should wait for it to finish and for the report to be published. An interim report has been published, and Fujitsu has committed to making a payment. When and how that happens is being consulted on and discussed between the two parties.

Can the Minister confirm that Fujitsu has a role in the national emergency alert system on which our entire society depends? If so, is it time for a rethink?

Can the Minister confirm that Fujitsu has a role in the national emergency alert system on which our entire society depends? If so, is it time for a rethink?

I am afraid I do not know the answer to that, but I will definitely find out and write to the noble Lord.

I am afraid I do not know the answer to that, but I will definitely find out and write to the noble Lord.

My Lords, is it not inconceivable, in the circumstances that have developed, that Fujitsu could get away without making a payment? Should there not now be a ring-fenced fund into which it is required to pay, so that all the liability does not land on the taxpayer?

My Lords, is it not inconceivable, in the circumstances that have developed, that Fujitsu could get away without making a payment? Should there not now be a ring-fenced fund into which it is required to pay, so that all the liability does not land on the taxpayer?

As I mentioned earlier, we are in constant conversation with Fujitsu. It has already committed to pay compensation, but how and when that happens is currently being consulted on.

As I mentioned earlier, we are in constant conversation with Fujitsu. It has already committed to pay compensation, but how and when that happens is currently being consulted on.

My Lords, does the Minister accept that it is wholly unacceptable for the taxpayer to be picking up the full cost of this scandal while Fujitsu, whose systems were at the heart of the failings, has yet to make any meaningful financial contribution? Can he confirm whether the Government will take advantage of the new procurement regime put in place by the previous Government, which allows the exclusion of suppliers from future procurement processes on the grounds of professional misconduct?

My Lords, does the Minister accept that it is wholly unacceptable for the taxpayer to be picking up the full cost of this scandal while Fujitsu, whose systems were at the heart of the failings, has yet to make any meaningful financial contribution? Can he confirm whether the Government will take advantage of the new procurement regime put in place by the previous Government, which allows the exclusion of suppliers from future procurement processes on the grounds of professional misconduct?