It is the done thing today for an executive banged to rights to offer up a grovelling apology. Several have already said ‘sorry’ or rather, no doubt on the advice of a lawyer, expressed ‘regret’ which creates the impression they are as much a victim of the scandal as the postmasters they victimised. Others offer their apology on behalf of the Post Office or Fujitsu (we have yet to hear from politicians.)
First, it is for the chairman of the enquiry and, to some extent the postmasters, to decide the level of ‘sorry’ experienced by anyone discovered to have acted unlawfully, although one can understand why those fighting for their careers and reputations might want to decide this for themselves and in advance of the outcome of the enquiry.
Second, those three letters ‘Ltd’ after both ‘The Post Office’ and ‘Fujitsu.’ These two organisations are limited liability companies, legal entities, not people. Companies do not have emotions so are incapable of feeling sorry or experiencing regret. Their structure, and term ‘limited liability’ provides a clue here, renders any apology by those who own and operate these organisations meaningless.
The corporation is a fundamental component of capitalism, its benefits usually outweigh its obvious flaws, although not in the case of Post Office Ltd which became apparent during the transition from a public service to a limited liability company. The key metric by which the success of a company is measured is profit. This profit is generated when selling a product or service to a customer for more than it cost to produce. The alternative view is this ‘surplus value’ is unpaid labour: not rewarding the worker fully for the wealth they are creating. While postmasters were regarded as both customer and worker this alone does not explain why they were doubly screwed by a Post Office under pressure to show a profit.
Overlooked by the government when The Post Office was split from the Royal Mail and made a limited company was The Post Office Investigation Branch. This private police force, which had existed for over 300 years, could prosecute anyone suspected of interfering with mail. Its remit was based, if not on the letter, on the sentiment of Charles II’s original Post Office Act 1660 and prioritised protecting the mail over administering justice. Until recently a gibbet stood on the old North Road, close to the Village of Caxton in Cambridgeshire. I’m sure some of those whose parcels have been photographed on their doorsteps then thrown back in a delivery driver’s van would like to bring Caxton Gibbet back in to use. However this borderline lynch mob system of justice has no place in a civilised society and, in retrospect the anachronistic special investigations department of The Post Office Ltd should have been disbanded in 2011. The people who should be apologising for not doing this have remained suspiciously silent.