Post Office scandal latest: Long silences as ex-boss Paula Vennells ...

By Paul Kelso, business correspondent

Paula Vennells arrived at the Post Office Inquiry a former chief executive, a former Church of England lay preacher and an ex-CBE, with only her reputation, and perhaps her liberty, left to defend.

After more than five hours of questioning she has done very little to restore the former, with the latter still very much a live issue.

While she was giving evidence her nemesis Alan Bates was meeting the Metropolitan Police to discuss their ongoing investigation.

The day went horribly for Ms Vennells from the moment she stepped from her car in torrential rain and was met by the sort of media scrum reserved for superstars and the shamed.

Read the rest of Paul's analysis here...

The inquiry heard evidence from the most prominent figure to date: former Post Office chief executive Paula Vennells.

Her testimony was being closely watched by wrongly-convicted sub-postmasters, hoping to see the truth told.

Here are the key moments.

Apology: She began with the first of what would be several apologies to sub-postmasters and their families, saying she was "very affected" by their stories.

Alarm was sounded: Jason Beer KC showed the inquiry letters from multiple sub-postmasters complaining about the Horizon system in 2013, and Ms Vennells admitted there was a not a good enough system to deal with complaints.

Complaints branded 'noise': Ms Vennells says she regrets calling sub-postmaster's complaints "noise" in an email sent in March 2015.

'Bad news is good news': She denied that there was a conspiracy to keep information from her or that other staff hid bad news from her. She added she put in place a campaign called "Bad news is good news" to encourage people to share difficult information.

Royal Mail chief withdraws support: Text messages were displayed showing the former head of Royal Mail, Moya Greene, telling Ms Vennells she could no longer support her, adding: "I think you knew."

Tears: Ms Vennells cried several times throughout the questioning, including when recalling the death of sub-postmaster Martin Griffiths, who took his own life. She apologised for asking for information on his mental health.

Remote access: A witness described Fujitsu's remote access as the "Wild West", said Jason Beer. A review found that "balancing transaction postings" could be made via the Horizon IT system without sub-postmaster approval in 2014.

MP's letter: The inquiry was shown a letter from former Ashfield MP Gloria De Piero which asked Ms Vennells to investigate a sub-postmaster's complaint in 2015.

Select committee strategy: Jason Beer asked Ms Vennells about a purported strategy to hold back information unless she was pushed, and she said she didn't ask for it and wouldn't have gone into the meeting unprepared.

The inquiry is now being shown notes, which told Paula Vennells what she would be allowed to say to the select committee. 

The notes show a list of bullet points which she would be allowed to discuss, and then another section of information she could talk about "if pushed". 

You can see part of the list here: 

Jason Beer KC asks her about the strategy to hold back information unless she was pushed, and she says she didn't ask for it. 

She goes on to explain that she wouldn't have gone into the meeting unprepared. 

"Why would the Post Office adopt a strategy of withholding information unless pushed?" Mr Beer asks her. 

Ms Vennells avoids the question, saying he would have to ask Jane Hill, who was the head of public affairs at the Post Office at the time. 

She insists her understanding was that Horizon did not have the remote access function, and she received the notes at "very short notice". 

"Whatever anybody asks me to do, I would only tell the truth," she adds. 

Turning to 2015 when Paula Vennells was preparing to stand before a select committee, Jason Beer KC shows the inquiry an email sent by her to Post Office executives. 

In the email, which has been sent to Mark Davies and Lesley Sewell, she asks if it's possible for the Horizon IT system to be accessed remotely. 

You can see the email below...

Mr Beer asks her why she "needed" to tell the select committee that remote access was not possible - something she alludes to in her email.  

Ms Vennells says she phrased her email this way, in a bid to "get the truth in a really clear answer". 

Laughs break out in the room as Mr Beer responds: "That's an odd way of going about this, isn't it? Tell me I'm wrong." 

Ms Vennells says she "absolutely believed" remote access was not possible, and she wanted to be able to answer questions from the select committee correctly.

"I'm very sorry. I am giving you the completely truthful answer." she adds. 

After the board briefing, Paula Vennells agrees she had no information on which to conclude whether Fujitsu had used balancing transactions before 2010.

She says she was told: "It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to get the data to look at some of the questions about this because it didn't exist: Either because it had been destroyed because of data retention policies but more likely because it wasn't there any longer."

Mr Beer interrupts: "Do you know what investigation was carried out to find that documentation? Because we've got it. 

"We've got the documentation which shows - one witness described it as the Wild West - the extent to which Fujitsu could inject, amend, transactions, pre-2010, completely, before 2004, unregulated, unaudited, and unauditable."

She replies: "I should have seen those documents. I didn't know they existed."

The inquiry is looking into a Deloitte board briefing for the Post Office on the design of Horizon dated 23 May 2014.

They said their report was limited by the fact that it was not possible to validate how Horizon had been implemented or operated.

The review found that "balancing transaction postings" made via the Horizon IT system did not require sub-postmaster approval.

Ms Vennells says she raised the issue, but found it was incorrect.

"Why were you focusing on remote access, which is what this is about," asks Jason Beer KC.

Paula Vennells says: "Remote access wasn't a new news item, it was a very important item. So to focus on that would have been a sensible thing to do."

Jason Beer KC draws the inquiry's attention to Paula Vennells's witness statement, in particular a section regarding a letter from services firm Ernst & Young, which carried out a management audit.

They identified a risk that unrestricted access to privileged IT functions "increased the risk of unauthorised/inappropriate access which could lead to the processing of unauthorised or erroneous transactions".

Mr Beer says it is implicit in the statement that Fujitsu had remote access to Horizon - meaning individual post office accounting systems could be accessed.

"I don't believe that I understood that degree of detail," she says.

"At the time, I had been promoted to managing director just a few months previously, and this was the first time I had come across an IT audit.

"I accept fully that this is what the document said, how much of that I really understood at the time, I'm not sure."

The inquiry is shown an email sent to Paula Vennells in 2011 by the Royal Mail boss Donald Brydon, which raises questions about the Horizon system. 

The Post Office and Royal Mail used to be part of the same company but split into separate organisations in 2012. 

In the email, Mr Brydon said he was surprised to read an article about a class action by sub-postmasters and asking if there had ever been an independent audit of Horizon. 

You can see the email below...

Ms Vennells replied, saying the issued had "reared its head before" and she would get a brief circulated to new board members. 

She also reiterated a sentiment we have seen several times already, that all cases that had been taken to court had seen the Post Office's position upheld. 

We now know that this was incorrect, and several sub-postmasters had been acquitted of charges. 

You can see her reply below...

Jason Beer KC questions Ms Vennells about the emails, saying there were "pieces of folklore" that seem to have been circulated around the Post Office, including that it won every court case, there were no issues with Horizon and remote access to the IT system was not possible. 

"How is it that on all of these critical issues, so many false statements were circulating within the Post Office?" he asks. 

Ms Vennells explains that, at the time, they were "not considered to be false statements". 

While she says she "can't recall clearly" where the information came from, she adds: "The only possible source of this statement would have been through the Post Office legal team." 

Our team is working through Paula Vennells's lengthy witness statements to bring you the key lines.

She discusses the case of Martin Griffiths, a sub-postmaster who took his own life after being wrongly accused of stealing £60,000.

Ms Vennells defends her decision to request someone to look into Martin Griffith's background, including his mental health, saying she "wanted to support Mr Griffiths and his family and offer what possible care we could".

"When I received the sad news of Mr Griffiths' passing on 11 October 2013, his family were my first thought," she adds.

"As my email shows, I wanted to offer my personal assistance in any way which would be helpful. I offered to speak to or meet with Mr Griffiths' family," she explains. "This was something I had done in other cases where SPMs or their families had lost loved ones and I offered to do it here if it was something that would help them. "

She cites the "duty of care" she owed to her colleagues at the Post Office, saying she was "aware of the toll that this incident had taken" on Angela van den Bogerd and that she "did not want to put further strain on her when deciding who would undertake which tasks going forward".

"Throughout my involvement, I tried to offer care and support to those involved in this deeply sad event before looking to the needs of the business," she writes.

She explains that she had previously been given information suggesting that there were pre-existing mental health and family issues but that she could not recall who told her this.

She says she now recognises that such "rumours" about Mr Griffith's personal situation were "unhelpful" and apologises to his family.

"I am so sorry, especially to Mr Griffiths' family, because reading this now it seems a very intrusive.

"I was clumsily trying to establish the facts and, although this did need to be done, I should have waited."

Sub-postmasters watching the inquiry from Fenny Compton moan or laugh at a response from Paula Vennells.

She was just shown an email sent to her from sub-postmaster Tim McCormack in October 2015, which said the "farce" could be stopped.

He told her to "wake up and realise that the people you rely on to tell you the truth about what's happening don't have the ability to do so".

Mr McCormack warned her that a judicial review would be inevitable if she did not take action.

At the inquiry, Jason Beer KC asks what action Ms Vennells took after reading the letter.

"I don't recall. Genuinely, I don't recall," she says.