---

Column 554

Ridsdale, Sir Julian

Roberts, Rt Hon Sir Wyn

Roe, Mrs Marion

Rossi, Sir Hugh

Rost, Peter

Rowe, Andrew

Rumbold, Rt Hon Mrs Angela

Sackville, Hon Tom

Sainsbury, Rt Hon Tim

Sayeed, Jonathan

Scott, Rt Hon Nicholas

Shaw, David (Dover)

Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)

Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')

Shelton, Sir William

Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)

Sims, Roger

Skeet, Sir Trevor

Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)

Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

Soames, Hon Nicholas

Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)

Squire, Robin

Stanbrook, Ivor

Stanley, Rt Hon Sir John

Steen, Anthony

Stern, Michael

Stevens, Lewis

Stewart, Allan (Eastwood)

Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)

Stewart, Rt Hon Sir Ian

Stokes, Sir John

Sumberg, David

Summerson, Hugo

Tapsell, Sir Peter

Taylor, Ian (Esher)

Taylor, Sir Teddy

Temple-Morris, Peter

Thatcher, Rt Hon Margaret

Thompson, Sir D. (Calder Vly)

Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

Thorne, Neil

Townend, John (Bridlington)

Townsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)

Tracey, Richard

Twinn, Dr Ian

Vaughan, Sir Gerard

Viggers, Peter

Wakeham, Rt Hon John

Waldegrave, Rt Hon William

Walden, George

Walker, Bill (T'side North)

Walker, Rt Hon P. (W'cester)

Walters, Sir Dennis

Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

Warren, Kenneth

Watts, John

Wells, Bowen

Wheeler, Sir John

Whitney, Ray

Widdecombe, Ann

Wiggin, Jerry

Wilkinson, John

Wilshire, David

Winterton, Mrs Ann

Winterton, Nicholas

Wolfson, Mark

Wood, Timothy

Yeo, Tim

Young, Sir George (Acton)

Tellers for the Noes :

Mr. David Lightbown and

Mr. John M. Taylor.

Question accordingly negatived.

Question, That the proposed words be there added, put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 30 (Questions on amendments), and agreed to.

Mr. Speaker-- forthwith declared the main Question, as amended, to be agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House congratulates Her Majesty's Government on its success in bringing down inflation ; recognises the importance of maintaining the fight against inflation to maintain competitiveness ; acknowledges the success of British manufacturing industry in reaching record figures for exports despite depressed world markets ; rejects the high tax ; high spending policies of the Opposition which City forecasters predict would cause an increase in interest rates and inflation and would be an impediment to recovery ; condemns their anti-industry policies of nationalisation, state control, a national minimum wage, renewed union power and unqualified support for the social charter which would have damaging consequences for jobs and industry ; and notes that all these policies have been rejected by business.

EMPLOYMENT

Ordered,

That the provisions of paragraph (2) of Standing Order No. 84 (Constitution of standing committees), paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 86, (Nomination of standing committees), and Standing Order No. 101 (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.) shall apply to the draft revised Code of Practice on picketing as if it were a draft statutory instrument ; and that the said draft revised Code be referred to a Standing Committee on Statutory Instruments, &c.-- [Mr. Boswell.]

SCOTTISH GRAND COMMITTEE

Ordered,

That in the course of its consideration of the Matter of the proposals of the Scottish Constitutional Convention, the Scottish Grand Committee may meet in Edinburgh on Monday 24th February at half-past Ten o'clock, and that,

---

Column 555

notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order No. 88 (Meetings of standing committees) the Committee shall have leave, at that sitting, to sit until half-past three o'clock, and that sitting shall constitute consideration on two days for the purposes of Standing Order No. 97 (Matters relating exclusively to Scotland).-- [Mr. Boswell.]

---

Column 556

Sub-postmasters

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Boswell.]

10.14 pm

Sir Anthony Grant (Cambridgeshire, South-West) : In raising this subject on the Adjournment, I want to say that it concerns not only myself as Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West but my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Sir R. Rhodes James). Like me, he has raised the matter at Post Office and ministerial level.

On the night of 18 November, the Hills road post office in Cambridge was broken into and approximately £21,000 and valuables were stolen. The sub-postmaster, Mr. Habib Khokhar, my constituent, has been charged with the offence of robbery by the police. The case has yet to be heard. I shall not refer to it as it is sub judice, except to make the general observation that everyone is innocent until proved guilty.

Mr. Khokhar's son, Mr. Naeem Khokhar, was sub-postmaster of another post office at St. Johns road, Cambridge. Both sub-post offices were closed by the Post Office authorities, and both the Khokhars' contracts were terminated--despite the fact that all charges against Mr. Naeem Khokhar have been withdrawn.

The result has been intolerable inconvenience to many of my constituents-- particularly to pensioners--who regularly use those post offices, and particularly over the Christmas period. In a busy area like Cambridge, that is not good enough. There is no reason why those post offices could not have been kept open, with alternative or temporary staff, while the matter was clarified. Both the Khokhars were willing to make all papers available and stay away from the post office while the matter was investigated and clarified.

The Post Office authorities' treatment of Mr. Naeem Khokhar, against whom no charges have been preferred, has been arbitrary and unjust in the extreme. The only reason that they gave for terminating his contract was what they called "loss of confidence". I believe that they are usurping the role of the courts in deciding a case without proper presentation of the evidence. What is worse, they are treating a man as guilty until he is proved innocent. They have not given him a fair hearing. They say that he can appeal, but that will take weeks. Meanwhile, he is likely to become destitute for want of money. The Post Office's attitude is contrary to all the rules of natural justice.

Ironically, a similar break-in took place at a nearby post office three weeks earlier, but the Post Office did not terminate that sub-postmaster's contract. No reason has been given for this inconsistent and discriminatory treatment. The Post Office failed to take into consideration the valuable service to the local community and the adverse effect on those who rely on the sub-post office, in particular pensioners and those on benefits.

I tackled the chairman of the Post Office as soon as the matter was brought to my attention and I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge has done the same on behalf of his constituents. The chairman replied that in criminal courts a higher standard of proof--beyond reasonable doubt-- applies, but that it does not apply to the Post Office's treatment of its sub-postmasters. He says that an employer is not obliged to await the outcome of a criminal prosecution. That may be good law, but the

---

Column 557

important words are "not obliged". Surely good employers would not prejudge a case without considering all the consequences. What is more, in the case of Mr. Naeem Khokhar there is no criminal prosecution. He is not being charged with anything, yet he is being treated as a criminal by the Post Office on the way that it is conducting the case. Because there is no criminal charge against him, that is all the more reason why the Post Office should have refrained from taking hasty and arbitrary action.

Mr. Menzies Campbell (Fife, North-East) : I know nothing of the circumstances, save as they have been outlined by the hon. Gentleman. In relation to the person against whom no criminal charge has been laid, will he accept that I regard the account which he has given as monstrous and reflecting extremely badly upon the Post Office?

Sir Anthony Grant : I am grateful to the hon. and learned Gentleman for saying that, because he is far more distinguished in the law than I am. I appreciate his support and his view.

The National Federation of Sub-postmasters has backed my constituent in the affair and wholly condemned the inconvenience caused to the public by the high-handed behaviour of the postal authorities.

I appreciate that Ministers must leave the day-to-day running of the Post Office to its managers, but I want Ministers to be aware that all is not well. My hon. Friend the Minister should be aware, too, that the Select Committee on Trade and Industry, of which I and the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) are members, has prepared reports on the Post Office which include criticism of treatment by the Post Office of sub-postmasters, who are an important body in the community. I shall be urging the Select Committee to press the matter further. Matters are being made worse for sub-postmasters by the Post Office's policy of engaging supermarkets like the Co-op and others to undertake its work. Sub- postmasters have an important role to play, especially in rural communities. I ask for two things--a better service for my frustrated constituents and justice for Mr. Naeem Khokhar.

10.22 pm

Sir Robert Rhodes James (Cambridge) rose --

---