Good series Dr. Paul. I hear the hours of detail you've researched, and appreciate your presentation style of telling a story with logical context. At least I get it, so that's two of us. Cheers
Many thanks, much appreciated. That feedback gives me the feedback to keep going 😊 And, sorry for taking so long to respond. 😟I have got way more comments than I had anticipated on my videos so I'm still working my way through them.
What I saw was Civil Servants giving evidence still thinking that they could just declare something to true or untrue, without any supporting evidence. The way did when they were CS Managers. Then getting angry when they were challenged by somebody that they couldn't just slap down. They way they couldn't follow the logical sequence of questions and evidence was amazing. Is this coincidence, or the result of the way middle management are selected in the CS. Selecting people who will just do as they are told, and never question orders coming down from the top.
When I first joined the CS, I assumed that my managers would be smarter than the people they managed. Discovered the opposite. As it was people who couldn't do the basic job well, that were the ones that brown nosed their way into management. @@PaulDuckett
We are all brainwashed on a large scale. Civil servants choose that job because it is well paid and not creative, no questions asked. They do not have to stretch themselves and could not if they tried.
The Post Office ceased to be part of the Civil Service in the late 1960s. None of the senior officials at the Inquiry were ever Civil Service managers, but PO managers.
I also blame the media, government and MPs for not publishing and pursuing this more vigorously from 2005 onwards. And myself for not noticing before the last couple of years.
Really enjoying this analysis. I was aware of the scandal for years but it didn’t really ‘cut through’ until I saw the drama. I’m staying with it as I observe POL try dirty tricks to bamboozle us all. The SPMs need our continued vigilance and support.
Thanks so much for the encouragement. I was much like you. I knew about the story but it was the drama that really cut through to me too - it got me shouting at the TV! :) Yes, the SPMs certaintly do need our support. Will be interesting to see if psychology and psychologists are among those who stand by the SPMs. Historically, we (psychologists) haven't been that good at becoming involved in such issues, at least not as psychologists. When we do become involved in issues around social justice, we tend to do it as private citizens ... which is interesting / disappointing.
Hello Paul, did not realise you live in oz until I saw you with a local beer in your hand in the Mr Beer video. Great videos on this very intersting topic.
@ 7:45, I have to take issue with what you're saying here. It does sound as if you're placing some of the blame onto the customers for not believing what the Subpostmasters were saying. As you rightly say, 'we' trusted the Post Office service, and if we were told that our local Subpostmaster had been stealing, of course, we were going to believe them over what the individual subpostmaster said. We (Joe Public) had no idea that other cases like this were happening around the country. 'We' would only know about the local one. So again, 'we' would believe the post office and feel justifiably angry, so we should be prepared to listen and accept what the post office was saying. You may not have meant to sound like we, the post office users, were partly to blame, but it is how that section comes across
Yep, I think this a fair criticism. You are right to back the community on this. We were all lied to. The public were, in effect, made to trust them using every trick in the book and so they should feel bad because they ended up trusting them. So, good pick up and glad you make this critique or my video. It's much appreciated and a much needed correction. I think I got a bit carried away with it all.
haahah. Well, I was born there and lived there til 2012. And, I was born in Norfolk, so maybe that is what you are picking up there in relation to the pitchform and flaming torch motif ;)
Many of us also thought that the Church of England, who had thought of making Paula Vennels the Bishop of London. should sack her as a priest. I beleive she is no longer a priest but unsure whether she resigned or was sacked.
Hiya, thanks for your posting. Much appreciated. I think she resigned from her role as an Anglican priest. Probably jumped knowing she'd be pushed. Kinda like the CBE, giving it back just before they stripped it off her.
@@PaulDuckett you need more careful research, Paul. She is still ordained but no longer has a parish. The CofE would never have sacked her, so they allowed her to just leave her parish but retain her name as priest. Only monarchs can remove an honour, and they rarely do and then only on government advice.
Good series Dr. Paul. I hear the hours of detail you've researched, and appreciate your presentation style of telling a story with logical context. At least I get it, so that's two of us. Cheers
Many thanks, much appreciated. That feedback gives me the feedback to keep going 😊 And, sorry for taking so long to respond. 😟I have got way more comments than I had anticipated on my videos so I'm still working my way through them.
What I saw was Civil Servants giving evidence still thinking that they could just declare something to true or untrue, without any supporting evidence. The way did when they were CS Managers. Then getting angry when they were challenged by somebody that they couldn't just slap down. They way they couldn't follow the logical sequence of questions and evidence was amazing. Is this coincidence, or the result of the way middle management are selected in the CS. Selecting people who will just do as they are told, and never question orders coming down from the top.
Yes, I got that same sense of it too when watching the inquiry hearings. You have some good insights here.
When I first joined the CS, I assumed that my managers would be smarter than the people they managed. Discovered the opposite. As it was people who couldn't do the basic job well, that were the ones that brown nosed their way into management. @@PaulDuckett
We are all brainwashed on a large scale. Civil servants choose that job because it is well paid and not creative, no questions asked. They do not have to stretch themselves and could not if they tried.
The Post Office ceased to be part of the Civil Service in the late 1960s. None of the senior officials at the Inquiry were ever Civil Service managers, but PO managers.
I also blame the media, government and MPs for not publishing and pursuing this more vigorously from 2005 onwards.
And myself for not noticing before the last couple of years.
Don't be too hard on yourself. A lot of us missed it too.
Really enjoying this analysis. I was aware of the scandal for years but it didn’t really ‘cut through’ until I saw the drama. I’m staying with it as I observe POL try dirty tricks to bamboozle us all. The SPMs need our continued vigilance and support.
Thanks so much for the encouragement. I was much like you. I knew about the story but it was the drama that really cut through to me too - it got me shouting at the TV! :) Yes, the SPMs certaintly do need our support. Will be interesting to see if psychology and psychologists are among those who stand by the SPMs. Historically, we (psychologists) haven't been that good at becoming involved in such issues, at least not as psychologists. When we do become involved in issues around social justice, we tend to do it as private citizens ... which is interesting / disappointing.
Hello Paul, did not realise you live in oz until I saw you with a local beer in your hand in the Mr Beer video. Great videos on this very intersting topic.
I have known many people in my life with the same mentality as the P.O. Bosses. Those people were dentists, lawyers, bosses
Yep, I guess the trick in life is to try and weave a path that avoids them when and where we can.
@ 7:45, I have to take issue with what you're saying here. It does sound as if you're placing some of the blame onto the customers for not believing what the Subpostmasters were saying.
As you rightly say, 'we' trusted the Post Office service, and if we were told that our local Subpostmaster had been stealing, of course, we were going to believe them over what the individual subpostmaster said. We (Joe Public) had no idea that other cases like this were happening around the country. 'We' would only know about the local one. So again, 'we' would believe the post office and feel justifiably angry, so we should be prepared to listen and accept what the post office was saying.
You may not have meant to sound like we, the post office users, were partly to blame, but it is how that section comes across
Yep, I think this a fair criticism. You are right to back the community on this. We were all lied to. The public were, in effect, made to trust them using every trick in the book and so they should feel bad because they ended up trusting them. So, good pick up and glad you make this critique or my video. It's much appreciated and a much needed correction. I think I got a bit carried away with it all.
I'd call it a "dramatized expose".
That perfectly describes it, thank you.
You do make us in the UK sound like pitchfork and flaming torch brandishing folks, as in some sort of horror film! You could be correct!
haahah. Well, I was born there and lived there til 2012. And, I was born in Norfolk, so maybe that is what you are picking up there in relation to the pitchform and flaming torch motif ;)
Many of us also thought that the Church of England, who had thought of making Paula Vennels the Bishop of London. should sack her as a priest. I beleive she is no longer a priest but unsure whether she resigned or was sacked.
Hiya, thanks for your posting. Much appreciated. I think she resigned from her role as an Anglican priest. Probably jumped knowing she'd be pushed. Kinda like the CBE, giving it back just before they stripped it off her.
@@PaulDuckett you need more careful research, Paul. She is still ordained but no longer has a parish. The CofE would never have sacked her, so they allowed her to just leave her parish but retain her name as priest. Only monarchs can remove an honour, and they rarely do and then only on government advice.