Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "The London Standard" channel.

  1. This would be the same John Healey who announced cuts in British military spending not so long ago, I assume?
    193
  2. I agree. In my own dealings and negotiations with Shop Stewards and Union Officials in the 1980s, one consistent feature was that, whether in my opinion they were being reasonable or unreasonable, they believed they were arguing for the best interests of their members. This person doesn't seem to have the slightest interest at all in the welfare of the members of the Federation he ran.
    24
  3.  @Fercough  'I admire his brain power.' Not to mention his self-control!
    21
  4. Is it correct that there was a deeply moving moment at the end, when SNP MSPs formed a guard of honour for Humsa as he walked from the building, before he graciously accepted a lift home in Sturgeon's shiny new camper van?
    16
  5. I thought Bogerd was bad, but this creature is on a totally different level.
    14
  6. Whatever your opinion of Zelensky, the idea that Ukraine can actually defeat Russia is about as credible as that of Belgium defeating Germany in 1940. Like it or not, this war must end by negotiation.
    8
  7.  @johnwainwright6205  Unfortunately, the previous two, Kelly Tolhurst and Pat MacFadden, demonstrated a similar level of irrelevance. It seems that, if these people represent the norm, the Civil Service, not those elected by the public, are the ones making all the decisions.
    7
  8. She seems determined to refer to 'The Board', The Post Office' and 'The Business.' None of these things have consciousness, or make decisions. However, people within them do. In most cases, these 'people' were actually one person, Paula Vennells.
    6
  9.  @kitfrew9983  Didn't the Clan Yousaf fight bravely for Bonnie Prince Charlie at Culloden?
    6
  10. I did read somewhere that she has the largest collection of completed 1000 piece jigsaw puzzles and sudoku books in the UK. As, apparently, none of her staff ever told her anything, she must have found something to fill her time in the big office with the large desk and the comfy chair, after all.
    6
  11.  @stevec6427  Professional criticism of policy is part of the game. Vicious personal character attacks are something else.
    6
  12. I think that Larry the Downing Street cat is comparatively rational, although I suspect he isn't allowed near the Cabinet for that very reason.
    6
  13. One hopes that action will be taken against all forms of violent & disruptive behaviour, but one has, given Starmer's record to date, considerable doubts about the possibility.
    5
  14.  @WhichDoctor1  As the UK Defence Journal put it, after Healey's November cuts :- 'Defence Secretary John Healey has announced the retirement of several ageing military assets, including Royal Navy ships, drones, and helicopters, as part of a broader effort to modernise the UK’s Armed Forces and address significant financial pressures in the defence budget.' The broader effort is simply Mr. Healey saying that there will be 'Jam Tomorrow' for the Armed Forces, as these 'modernisations are, in reality, several years away.
    5
  15. The impression I received was that he ran the Federation as his own personal Fiefdom.
    5
  16.  nannieg7622  No. Justin Welby did. Not most members of the C of E.
    4
  17.  @blackwaterposeidonthewhipp7730  All I saw was someone who was determined to be confrontational throughout.
    4
  18. What, not a Life Peerage? She would thrive in the House of the Living Dead.
    4
  19.  @MrAndrewFarrow  I think that the suggestion was simply that each Minister should have done the job which he/she was paid, handsomely, to do. Do you consider that really too much to expect?
    4
  20. Yer karn't 'elp larfing, can yer?
    3
  21.  @dave9997  Not really. He wouldn't know how to work one anyway.
    3
  22. It would be so much easier, as well as cutting out the middleman.
    2
  23. You forgot the 'my people are very clever. They tell me what to do, and I do it.' The same applied to Tolhurst, MacFadden, & Davey, of course.
    2
  24. Sarcasm doesn't come across well in writing.
    2
  25.  @Francoop4  Then I apologise. Instead, you have my pity, mingled with my contempt.
    2
  26. Perhaps you lack understanding of how such an investigation works? The footage is part of the evidence relevant to that investigation, and will not be available until it has been examined. I wonder if you have simply made your mind up anyway?
    2
  27. Unfair. He was moved from stamp-licking duties because of his habit of licking the wrong side of the stamp.
    2
  28.  @firstname4865  I don't think that was what the post actually said? Actually, all four ministers used the same self-justifying excuse, that 'my people are very smart and tell me what to do, say, and think. I am, as a Minister, very busy, and shouldn't be expected to think for myself. That is why I signed all those letters in the bottom of my Red Box without bothering to read them.'
    2
  29.  @firstname4865  Surely, the point was that she didn't act. She was in receipt of a polite letter from Alan Bates simply asking for a meeting to let him explain the SPMs' side of the story. She refused because her 'people' told her not to meet him. If Ministers are such unquestioning little souls, what purpose do they serve? It rather suggests that Civil Servants are running the country, rather than those supposedly elected to run it.
    2
  30. Perhaps the fact that Mr. Dunks was quite happy to claim knowledge which he did not have, and present false statements to courts based on little more than pre-written templates, thus resulting in the convictions of a number of innocent people, has escaped you?
    2
  31. Barristers generally ask questions to which they already know the answer. However, I didn't see one of them either raising his/her voice, probably because they already knew the kind of creature with which they were dealing.
    2
  32. How do we know that?
    2
  33. The fact is that he was the Federation. It was his own little fiefdom.
    2
  34.  @qwertypoiuy355  You have a credible source, I assume?
    2
  35.  @stevec6427  'I disagree.' You think anyone cares whether you disagree or not?
    2
  36. He managed to convey his feelings about Thomson, without obviously showing any of them.
    2
  37. I was on the other side, but in my own dealings and negotiations with Shop Stewards and Union Officials in the 1980s, one consistent feature was that, whether in my opinion they were being reasonable or unreasonable, they believed they were arguing for the best interests of their members. This person doesn't seem to have the slightest interest at all in the welfare of the members of the Federation he ran.
    2
  38. Wouldn't it be interesting if details and statistics of prosecutions of SPMs in pre Horizon days were to be made available? Particularly, the nature of the evidence upon which the prosecutions were founded, Once Horizon was in place, the primary evidence seems to be that, when the prosecutors were asked if their victims were thieves, the POL lawyers simply said 'Yes. Computer says so.'
    2
  39.  @MYCROFTonX  'North Korea calls itself a democracy, it was but isn't now.' The only similarity I can detect between North Korea and the Federation is that both were (and in the former case still is) run by a dictator who cared not a jot for his members/citizens. Do you really think that the role of a Trade Body is to safeguard itself whilst ignoring the concerns of the members of the body?
    2
  40.  @MYCROFTonX  'The NFSP had one job as a safeguard for SPMRs investment, anyone or anything that dragged down POL also dragged down it's members.' You repeat this nonsensical phrase over and over again. Are you really George Thomson trying to defend the indefensible?
    2
  41.  @MYCROFTonX  'he could only work by being close to POL.' Do you mean 'he could only ensure that the Federation would continue to exist by being unswervingly loyal to POL, whatever the circumstances.
    2
  42.  @dmob881  The more I, as an independent observer, read the parrot-like responses of this person, the more I suspect that it is actually George trying to justify himself! Surely the bottom line, which he refuses to address, must be, if an organisation places continued existence ahead of the concerns and welfare of the members of that organisation, then is it really fit for purpose. I believe everyone except Mycroft would be able to answer that question.
    2
  43.  @MYCROFTonX 'He was safeguarding his members life savings by ensuring that it didn't all go bad on them.' Being deprived of your livelihood, having to pay large amounts to POL under false pretences, and in some cases going to prison, is having your life savings safeguarded? You needn't continue to prove yourself delusional. I think that we have all deduced the fact by now.
    2
  44. 'If I'd been told, I'd have given her a slap or two. After all, orders is orders.'
    1
  45. Interestingly, I hve tried to find that out, with no success.
    1
  46. Sarcasm doesn't always work in writing.
    1
  47.  @DerrickJenkins-s6c  I agree. In my own dealings and negotiations with Shop Stewards and Union Officials in the 1980s, one consistent feature was that, whether in my opinion they were being reasonable or unreasonable, they believed they were arguing for the best interests of their members. This person doesn't seem to have the slightest interest at all in the welfare of the members of the Federation he ran.
    1
  48. Initially, I suspected that this was not the real Inquiry, but a clever satire involving look-alikes. The creature pretending to be the former General Secretary of the HFSP was quite incredible. As it wasn't satire, I wonder how such a thing could have attained such a position? Surely the role needed someone who had rather more attributes than the ability to be abusive, threatening, bullying, and rude, all at the same time. The over-riding impression was of someone who ran the Federation as his own personal fiefdom, and was quite happy to sell out anyone and everyone in pursuit of Post Office money. He seemingly assumed that any sub postmasters or mistresses who were prosecuted or punished by his owners the Post Office deserved what they got, because Horizon was 'Robust' and therefore they were stealing from it. What an absolutely detestable piece of (sub) humanity. I wonder how he will be assessed by Sir Wyn in the final report?
    1
  49.  @trmm763  But does that really justify Thomson totally ignoring the concerns of Federation members?
    1
  50.  @trmm763  It isn't that POL were not 'effectively challenged.' It is the fact that they were not challenged at all. At least not by the Federation. George simply chose to ignore the concerns of Federation members, preferring simply to brand them liars and thieves. All in the cause of preserving his beloved Federation, and, of course, his salary.
    1
  51. It would be interested to learn more details of pre-Horizon prosecutions, if such documentation is available. In particular, the quality of evidence presented. Not that this justifies Thomson throwing those who trusted him under the first passing bus, of course.
    1
  52. So, you believe that the role of the Federation was unquestionably to support POL's line, and to disregard any SPM concerns? That it should regard preservation of the Federation itself, and of course the salaries of senior officials, as the only raison d'etre it had? That a few hundred SPMs being wrongly punished or imprisoned was a price worth paying if it safeguarded the almighty Federation? Perhaps you might explain what leads you to conclude that what Bates, Hamilton, and others said and are saying was false? Do you really believe that SPMs in this predicament were all dishonest, as seems to be George's view? Do you suggest that other SPMs should have waited passively until the system arbitrarily decided that their turn had come?
    1
  53.  @MYCROFTonX  So someone has an 'agenda?' Oh dear, are you one of those crazy conspiracy fantasists? Have you any views about 9/11, the Moon Landings, or Titanic, perhaps?!
    1
  54.  @timsmith2279  Do you really not know? Because Post Office interrogators told them that, if they 'confessed' and undertook not to refer to the wondrously 'robust' Horizon computer, they would not demand a custodial sentence. Haven't you been watching??
    1
  55.  @timsmith2279  None. The same happens to my posts from time to time.
    1
  56. No. Barney was a pleasant, affable, character.
    1
  57. Not to put too fine a point on it, the inevitable conclusion seems to be that he was willing to sacrifice some Federation members if it meant that, by becoming a loyal servant of the mighty Post Office and accepting their funding, he could ensure the survival of the Federation, at least in name, and protect his own salary at the same time.
    1
  58. That is my worry. How many British companies are infested, at high levels, with self-serving over-promoted creatures like this one and those around her? Perhaps it explains many things?
    1
  59.  @saulgoodman2278  Sadly, as is becoming clear throughout Britain, she is far from a one-ff.
    1
  60.  @al1356  Agreed. I encountered a few myself.
    1
  61. A number of those who have given evidence are 'persons of interest' to the Police, but it is unlikely actual action can be taken until Sir Wyn releases his conclusions.
    1
  62. Really unfair. Thomson stated at the outset that he was not at the Inquiry to make friends. He succeeded totally in his ambition. It became obvious from the start that his intention was to ensure the survival of the Federation, even if this involved converting it into a paid offshoot of Post Office management. This had the happy result, also, of protecting George's salary. Surely, in his mind, the sacrifice of a few hundred SPMs was a price worth paying. After all, weren't they thieves and liars anyway?!
    1
  63. Unfair. He seems to have hated everyone. Except dear Paula, of course.
    1
  64.  @trmm763  Yes, they were self-employed small business owners. But the Federation was supposed to represent their interests. Do you really believe that you can justify George's approach of 'There were only a few, and they were probably thieves anyway. Or at least that was what dear Paula told me?' Seriously? If profit was all that mattered, perhaps employing slave labour in the sub Post Offices might have been the way forward?
    1
  65. What truth might that have been? The truth that dear Paula told him that Horizon was Robust os it must have been, or the truth that those SPMs who were experiencing problems were simply crooks and liars?
    1
  66.  @mrpastryify  “It is never difficult to distinguish between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.” P.G. Wodehouse.
    1
  67. Unfair. What have Neanderthals ever done to you?
    1
  68. Sad thing is. The other three who gave evidence demonstrated exactly the same ineptitude.
    1
  69. I wonder if Mr. Bradshaw is aware that 'I was only obeying orders' didn't work at Nuremburg? I doubt it, as he didn't actually seem aware of much.
    1
  70. Running the Federation as a personal fiefdom, and for the purpose of naked self-interest, is not, I fear, a criminal offence.
    1
  71. I disagree that he is typical. I negotiated with a few and, however much we didn't agree, it was always clear to me that they had what they believed to have been the best interests of their members at heart. This creature would clearly have thrown those he 'represented' under the nearest bus if he thought he would benefit personally by so doing.
    1
  72.  @Francoop4  You need the pity of most people if you think that Thomson came across well, as you are clearly deluded.
    1
  73.  @Francoop4  If you mean by that I have an opinion, and am able to use reasoned argument to support it, then yes I am. In this case, however, seeing the behaviour of this Thomson creature, argument was not necessary at he hoist himself with his own Petard.
    1
  74. Because the prosecutions were not 'obviously false' at the time. The courts were, and perhaps still are, in thrall to technology. When they asked Post Office prosecutors if the SPMs were guilty of theft/false accounting, the reply was 'They must have been. The almighty computer says that they were.' No-one, certainly not this vile Thomson creature, was willing to argue.
    1
  75. I think you miss the point. A friend of mine once said to me that 'people often confuse 'justice' with 'the law' when in fact any connection is tenuous at best.' Sadly, my friend was, and is, a barrister.
    1
  76.  @AtifAli-dc6cr  The victims have been released on bail. Which is not the same thing at all.
    1
  77.  @AtifAli-dc6cr  ' police officer threw the first punch and also put the bystanders in danger.' I am confident that you will have the honesty and integrity to withdraw that comment in the light of the new information released this Sunday morning. Won't you?
    1
  78. Stop being so insulting about Orangutans.
    1
  79. Put simply, because of the faith in technology. When courts asked for the evidence of wrong-doing, the Post Office prosecutors simply said 'Here it is. The almighty computer says so.' Unfortunately, doubt and disbelief was suspended in favour of this mantra. When people like Thomson, in a position at least to challenge this assumption in support of Federation members, decided to protect their own salaries instead, the whole tragedy began to unfold.
    1
  80.  @jimreynolds2399  Lawyers from the legal firms involved have been interviewed, and in most cases found wanting. What happens next will depend on the findings of the Inquiry.
    1
  81. I can't quite see him as a Diversity Manager, however!
    1
  82. It will be interesting to read Sir Wyn's assessment of him.
    1
  83. But he was certainly assiduous in the manner he protected his salary, even if that meant throwing a few SPMs off a cliff.
    1
  84. No he isn't. But neither did he provide any SPM with the kind of support they were entitled to expect from their Federation.
    1
  85. I expect that dear Alice will emerge unscathed. Being Labour Royalty will ensure that.
    1
  86. One or two look like Second Rows I used to face in the pack. Especially the two my wife calls 'The Rottweilers.'
    1
  87. You mean that selling out wrongly accused members of his Federation in order to protect that Federation and George's salary was a price worth paying? An interesting, but minority, opinion, to say the least.
    1
  88. I don't recall hearing much of an explanation of any sort from Thomson. Except perhaps that 'Horizon is robust. Paula told me.'
    1
  89. Don't you mean 'Paula' as he referred to her?
    1
  90. As we have come to expect from politicians from all parties.
    1
  91. Simpler than that. The Post Office funded the NFSP totally, thus supporting George's, presumably, excellent salary. The NFSP had been hemorrhaging membership, and thus finance, for some time, and doubtless George saw selling his soul to the PO as a means of shoring up his lifestyle.
    1
  92. He is no longer in his job, and the current leadership of the Federation have denounced him & distanced themselves from his views.
    1
  93.  @sheila1949  Even a professional would have needed to have had the patience of a Saint not to have shown irritation with that creature. When the Chair of the Inquiry, a vastly experienced Judge, showed similar 'irritation' that should tell everyone something.
    1
  94. As it seems that all decisions are made, not by the ministers themselves, but by their 'people' what actual purpose do ministers serve?
    1
  95. Ah, but you misunderstand his thought processes. If he had to convert the Federation into an offshoot of POL management in order to ensure it, and his doubtless excellent salary, survived, then the destruction of the lives of a few hundred SPMs was a price well worth paying. After all, dear Paula assured him that Horizon was wonderful, didn't she? Therefore, those SPMs who had problems must have been liars and thieves, mustn't they?
    1
  96. Rather, most people hoped was extinct.
    1
  97.  @stevec6427  Perhaps you don't know that Farage is close to Trump? I doubt he couldn't stir things up to a greater extent than Lammy, Starmer, & Rayner already have done, even if he sought to try.
    1
  98. 'Valid points?' I must have missed those.
    1
  99. So those wrongly prosecuted by POL were nothing more than collateral damage, were they? You would get on with George, I suspect.
    1
  100.  @davidallan5671  I believe that appointing LibDems to ministerial roles was part of the coalition deal with the loathsome Nick Clegg. Given the quality of the average LibDem MP, there really weren't many competent alternatives, as Swinson was to demonstrate.
    1
  101. A tragic victim, almost straight out of a play by Euripides. A lone, brave, woman, trying nobly to do good, but surrounded by evil people determined to conceal the facts from her. Before replying to me, please look up the word 'sarcasm' in a dictionary.
    1
  102. Unfair. George's opinion was always 'Guilty until proven innocent. But really guilty anyway.'
    1
  103. Did you simply pick your 200 to 300 number at random? Here is a response to a Freedom of Information request :- 'Based on the limited data available to us as of 21 May 2024, in the period of 1987 to 1998, 102 cases involving postmasters (by which we include sub postmasters as well as other individuals whose roles at the time were unknown) were commenced that resulted in a prosecution for financial discrepancies, theft, fraud, false accounting offences, and other financial mismanagement.' So, for two to three hundred each year, read, approximately ten per year. In detail, the figures are as follows :- Year. Prosecutions. Convictions. Acquittals. Dismissed Case. Unknown. 1987 2 2 1988 1 1 1989 0 1990 1 1 1991 4 3 1 1992 1 1 1993 2 1 1 1994 4 3 1 1995 2 2 1996 10 10 1997 25 22 1 2 1998 44 41 2 1 There were a number for which the date was in the 1990s but the year unknown : These amounted to 6 prosecutions, of which 4 convictions, and 2 result unknown. The Horizon system was piloted in 1996, by the way. Between 1999 & 2015 there were 900 prosecutions involving Horizon evidence. Or, 56 per year on average
    1
  104. Agreed. I negotiated with some. Whilst our disagreements were often 'lively' I generally felt that in most cases they were concerned about the best interests of their members. George, however, throughout demonstrated that he was simply concerned about the best interests of George.
    1
  105. I think that he condemned himself by the manner in which he gave his evidence, not to mention the evidence he gave.
    1
  106. Looking at him, I suspect he had eaten all the pies in advance.
    1
  107. All four former ministers followed the same basic theme, which seems to be that, 'my people are very smart and tell me what to do, say, and think. I am, as a Minister, very busy, and shouldn't be expected to think for myself. That is why I signed all those letters in the bottom of my Red Box without bothering to read them.' Would it really have been all that difficult to have arranged a private meeting with Alan Bates, simply to hear what he had to say, instead of simply repeating the civil service mantra that 'Horizon is ROBUST and you shouldn't talk to anyone who seeks to criticise the almighty Post Office.'?
    1
  108.  @alanfrost4661  I would reserve judgement until Williams presents his findings. Certainly, however, almost no-one is emerging with any credit so far.
    1
  109. Breaking News! Paula Vennells to take part in 'I'm a Celebrity Get Me out of Here!' next year.
    1
  110. Doubt he will need a job. I'm sure dear Paula ensured he was well re-imbursed for selling out the Federation members.
    1
  111. Hardly left wing when he was in the pocket (to be polite about it) of the Post Office. I suspect George's politics didn't go much beyond safeguarding his salary.
    1
  112. He did, but not with an answer related to the question.
    1
  113. Whenever someone says 'I am telling you the complete truth' you may assume that he/she certainly isn't.
    1
  114. No one ever told the Reverend Vennells that. Or, she claimed, anything else.
    1
  115. 'Better to Remain Silent and Be Thought a Fool than to Speak and Remove All Doubt.' Abe Lincoln or possibly Mark Twain. Wise advice, but sadly too late in your case. Either here or on the other site.
    1
  116.  @MYCROFTonX  Tell me when I ever claimed that Lee Castleton was a member of the Federation? You appear to be fixating on Castleton & Bates, but ignoring those other victims who unquestionably were members.
    1
  117.  @MYCROFTonX  I observe that you haven't answered my request that you 'Tell me when I ever claimed that Lee Castleton was a member of the Federation?' Don't worry. I will take your apology for making that false accusation for granted.
    1
  118. Sorry, but you seem entirely to have missed the point, which is much simpler :- 1). A number of SPMs were experiencing problems, which resulted in them making good shortfalls, in some cases losing their SPOs and in others, being prosecuted. 2). Many approached the Federation, which they (wrongly, it seems) believed was intended to protect their interests, because they did not believe that the fault was theirs. 3). The Federation, seemingly run by gorgeous George as his personal fiefdom, showed no interest in investigating these concerns. 4). Instead, George converted it from a body representing the SPMs into an offshoot of POL's management structure, with full financing from POL. Which presumably kept the Federation in existence. Some would say it also guaranteed the salaries of the Federation officials, as well? 5). As a result, the Federation swore unswerving loyalty to the mighty Horizon system, with George getting very close, in his evidence, to suggesting that those who dared question this fundamental belief were themselves thieves. That, I submit, is really the issue here.
    1
  119. Perhaps you might look at the Federation's own site, and read what it defines itself as? One sentence in particular reads :- 'Representation of Postmasters in negotiations with Post Office Ltd.' There was far more, at least supposedly, to the Federation role than you suggest. Moreover, whether Bates, Castleton, or Hamilton were members is not the issue, as many SPMs who definitely were members were punished by POL, brought their concerns to Thomson, and were ignored. Or, at least, George spoke to his friend Paula, who told him not to worry about it. Is that what you mean by 'those inside the group he took RIGHT TO THE TOP as we all heard on Friday.' How did George 'protect' these people, as you claim? Or were they simply collateral damage, of no importance to George's greater good, the protection of the Federation itself, and by extention George's position, and salary, within it? I wonder what other SPMs, nervously awaiting the time when their turn came, actually thought about their leader. The grovelling apology the Federation of today has issued about George's leadership is already clear for everyone to read.
    1
  120.  @MYCROFTonX  Do you really believe that converting the Federation into a sub-section of the Post Office was really beneficial to the SPMs? Especially when George made clear time and again that he was solely interested in the survival of the Fed., and by extension the maintenance of his own salary. How were the investments of those SPMs accused by the Post Office safeguarded, when they believed themselves to have been wronged, and the head of their Federation, after chatting to his good chum the CEO of the Post Office, effectively accused them of being thieves? If the brand really was as debased as a while series of managers, lawyers, and Board members have demonstrated, then the value of that brand had no merit. Do you seriously believe that Bates was a liar & a thief? Or Castleton, or Misra, or Hamilton? Indeed, George repeated his comment several times, in the manner of a demented parrot. It made the comments neither true nor justified. Please explain where Thomson's actual duties might be read. I wonder if they really involved protecting the Federation at all costs, even if it meant throwing a few SPMs under the first passing bus. Oh, and do you really suggest that those SPMs who believed themselves to have been wronged should actually have said to themselves, 'Our lives may have been ruined, but we should accept it for the Greater Good. The Federation, and Mr. Thomson's salary, is more important.' By the way, when have I ever said that the 'federation' was a union?
    1
  121.  @dmob881  It probably isn't Thomson. In view of his performance last Friday, I would expect that his posts would be in CAPITAL LETTERS with lots of !!!!!!!!!!!!!
    1
  122. ​ @MYCROFTonX  Now I understand. You are not a real person, you are a bot. Either that, or you are as deranged as George. 'Spock?' 'Radiation Cage?' You think that the destruction of the lives and/or aspirations of several hundred people is a joke? Had you been human, I would have said 'Shame on you.' Happily, you appear to be in a minority of one.
    1
  123. That description of him is not restricted to Australia.
    1
  124. Because that was what the 'contract' required. The alternative was to be suspended from their Post Office, and probably facing criminal charges.
    1