raise the issue in parliament. all ofthe raise the issue in parliament. fill of the cases depend on one single light, and that is that nobody but the postmasters and post mistresses could access their computers. we now know that to be untrue. i see no real reason, no logical reason, why you can t have a mass case, a mass appeal. you can t have a mass case, a mass a- eal. .,, you can t have a mass case, a mass a- eal. . you can t have a mass case, a mass a eal. . , appeal. the post office is acutely aware of the appeal. the post office is acutely aware of the human appeal. the post office is acutely aware of the human cost - appeal. the post office is acutely aware of the human cost of- appeal. the post office is acutely aware of the human cost of the l aware of the human cost of the scandal and are committed to providing full, fair and final compensation. but some campaigners have been calling forjustice for more than 20 years, and while their voices are now being heard more lou
are told the prime minister would strongly support the forfeiture committee looking again at her honour, add a cbe. the forfeiture committee is a largely independent committee is a largely independent committee chaired by a senior civil servant and which has a government lawyer on board. they can look at whether people should return their honours if they bring the system into disrepute. retained. usually it would be a case of somebody convicted of a criminal offence. they do have criteria. but that criteria, according to government sources, are flexible. if the forfeiture committee were to decide that the system had been brought into dispute, that is something they could certainly look at. strong words coming from downing street. it is probably more likely, although as i say it is independent, but it is probably more likely that the honour would be looked at. paula venables was out chief executive between 2012 and 2019 when many of these cases, many of these prosecutions, took place