did jo swinson in fact respond to you? white like i do not recall, i can remember.r for postal affairs. we can see the date and to whom it is addressed, for some context, by that date, was it right that no post office investigation had been completed to a sufficient state for second sight to complete its own reports? second sight to complete its own re orts? , second sight to complete its own reports?- he _ second sight to complete its own reports? yes. he set out how the scheme was _ reports? yes. he set out how the scheme was meant _ reports? yes. he set out how the scheme was meant to work, if we scroll down. i will keep scrolling. keep scrolling. keep scrolling. you say that the above structure was agreed and published, the scheme launched, the documentation still available for downloading, essentially what i showed you earlier. unfortunately the reality of where the scheme is actually at is very different. as at the date of writing, this is mid—april 2014, during the time the scheme was open for applications, 150 cases were accepted, although it should be noted

with the subject. _ people including jo swinson with the subject, post office, read this. the thuggery being exerted on defenceless sub—postmasters is the post office denied legal representation are arrogant and uncontrolled post office personnel. despite _ uncontrolled post office personnel. despite assurances from on high that this type _ despite assurances from on high that this type of— despite assurances from on high that this type of thing is in the past, it's this type of thing is in the past, its clear— this type of thing is in the past, it's clear from the post office's actions — it's clear from the post office's actions that it's still alive and active — actions that it's still alive and active. and then the e—mail he received — active. and then the e—mail he received - _ active. and then the e—mail he received — hello, alan, iam writing on behalf— received — hello, alan, iam writing on behalf of— received — hello, alan, iam writing on behalf of my son—in—law martin griffiths. _ on behalf of my son—in—law martin griffiths, who has been in touch with you — griffit

ed davey, jo swinson, norman lamb.cisions. yes, they take advice, but it is ministers who decide. yes. but it is ministers who decide. yes, what do you — but it is ministers who decide. yes, what do you want _ but it is ministers who decide. yes, what do you want me _ but it is ministers who decide. yes, what do you want me to _ but it is ministers who decide. ies what do you want me to say? but it is ministers who decide. yes, what do you want me to say? fine, | what do you want me to say? fine, let me ask — what do you want me to say? fine, let me ask you _ what do you want me to say? fine, let me ask you about _ what do you want me to say? fine, let me ask you about paula - what do you want me to say? fine, let me ask you about paula vinyls. | let me ask you about paula vinyls. most of us have a perception of her from the itv drama. brute most of us have a perception of her from the itv drama.— most of us have a perception of her from the itv drama. we heard some of the recordings — from the itv drama. we heard some