| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Stephen Byers): Will the hon. Lady give way?
Mrs. Browning: I will in a moment.
If the Secretary of State is going to talk us through the payment streams of each transaction movement from the time that it leaves the Department of Social Security, we will welcome that. What is interesting is that the "Dear colleague" letter that we received this week contains no mention of that. One would have thought that, if the Minister for Competitiveness had the answer to that, it would have been a good idea to put it in the letter that was circulated to every Member yesterday.
Mr. Byers: Does the hon. Lady agree that one of the reasons why there was a number of closures last year in the post office network was because of the misleading information put around by a number of Members? [Interruption.] We have just had a very good example of that misleading information from the hon. Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown). Benefit recipients have a choice: if they want to receive the benefit payment in cash at the post office, they will be entitled to do so. It is important that we put the record straight.
Mrs. Browning: I am afraid that the Secretary of State misunderstands the problem for sub-post offices. He has outlined what he believes to be his Government's pledge in relation to recipients. We would grateful if he explained how that will work, but the focus of the debate is income for sub-post offices. In the transaction, where is the income to come from for sub-post offices to make up the money that the Government--
Mrs. Browning: It is no good the Secretary of State shaking his head. That is where the loss of income will come from. Therefore, he must explain to sub-post offices how they will make up the income drop by way of transactions, for which he has been unable to produce an audit trail to show that money will be into post offices and those businesses.
This morning, in the Methodist hall, I listened to the National Federation of Sub-Postmasters offer the Government--although there was no Government representative there--the hand of friendship.
The Minister of State, Department of Social Security (Mr. Jeff Rooker): I was there.
Mrs. Browning: If the right hon. Gentleman was there, he kept his head down at back of the hall. I am sorry that he was not noticed.
Those in the hall made it clear that they do not want handouts; they want to do business. They want a plan for the future. They need the Government to behave in a more business-like manner, to negotiate and to make decisions now, not in three years' time.
Tomorrow is the Secretary of State's birthday. I anticipate that he will receive about 18,000 birthday cards, one from every sub-post office, asking him to think again. They will tell him:
- For your benefit, give us today the answers that will benefit sub post offices--before it is too late.
4.9 pm
The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Stephen Byers): I beg to move, To leave out from "House" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof:
- 'welcomes the fact that the Government is committed to a national post office network and is taking steps to secure this; welcomes the Government's moves to plan the introduction of automated credit transfer; welcomes the Postal Services Bill which will enable the Post Office to modernise, so building up new business for the network; welcomes the investment of £500 million to ensure the network is computerised, so enabling a successful and modern network to emerge; welcomes the Government's introduction for the first time of criteria for access to Post Office services; welcomes the commitment to give benefit recipients the choice of having benefits paid in cash via a post office even after the switch to automated credit transfer is complete in 2005; and applauds the work of the sub-postmasters and postmistresses and condemns those who make their lives harder by talking down the network.'.
Mr. Byers: If the hon. Gentleman does not mind, I shall open the card a little later. I am also looking forward to the present that comes with it.
I know that the hon. Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning) and many other hon. Members have had the opportunity today of discussing with sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses and representatives of the National Federation of Sub-Postmasters their concerns about the future of the post office network. I want to use this opportunity to deal with some of the concerns that have, quite understandably, been expressed by those individuals who often have committed many of their own resources to their business--a sub-post office. We are a Government who listen to the concerns of the communities that have
been affected. We have also listened, and we shall continue listening, to the concerns of those who are responsible for running the post office network.We recognise the vital role that local post offices play not only in rural communities, but in our inner cities. Many thousands of post offices in our inner cities and in our rural communities perform a useful and important community function. We recognise that they have that important role to play.
Very often, the post office is the focal point of the local community, providing access to cash, postal services and other daily items. Very often, for the elderly and those who are less mobile, the post office is where their benefits are available. We recognise that.
Mr. Byers: I shall give way when I have made some progress.
The Government recognise the invaluable role that sub-postmasters and mistresses play in communities and the way in which they develop and deliver those important services. The Government's commitment is to ensure that people have convenient access to the services of Post Office Counters.
The Post Office is still the largest retail network in Europe. Some 60 per cent. of rural parishes have a post office, and more than nine out of 10 people live within a mile of a post office.
Mr. Oliver Letwin (West Dorset): Before the Secretary of State tires himself, and possibly the House, with repetition of those pieties, will he understand that what we need to hear today is a clear and unambiguous statement that the Government will take time off from their current proposals and develop a serious, workable and practicable alternative?
Mr. Byers: I hope that, once I have had time to make progress in my speech, I shall have dealt with those concerns in a way that the hon. Gentleman will feel is not pious.
Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough): Will the Secretary of State guarantee that, after 2003, on one side of the counter, when pensioners who currently do not have a bank account are forced to have one, turn up at the post office and draw their pension in cash, they will not be charged any extra money whatsoever--bank charges or anything else? Will they will be in exactly the same position as now? On the other side of the counter, will he guarantee that the sub-postmaster will receive a reasonable reward for the transaction?
Mr. Byers: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security has already addressed that issue. [Hon. Members: "What is the answer?"] The answer is yes. I hope that that will go a long way towards reassuring the hon. Gentleman and his constituents. That is the policy, and my right hon. Friend has already stated it.
Mr. Alan Duncan (Rutland and Melton): Will the Secretary of State then explain to the House exactly what the components and total of the sub-postmaster's income deriving from that process will be?
Mr. Byers: I was answering the question of the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh) on a "reasonable" amount. These matters are all subject to negotiation. We are talking about something that will occur in 2003, which is some years away. There will be a process of discussion. We have a very good working relationship with the national federation, which enables us to talk about the details of implementing the transition to automated credit transfer, and we shall do that. However, the answer to the specific question of the hon. Member for Gainsborough is, quite simply, yes.
Mr. Mike Hancock (Portsmouth, South): I was grateful for the Secretary of State's comments on the plight of urban post offices. I should be grateful if he explained to me and those of my constituents who visited Westminster today what choice will exist for those who can exercise a choice under the proposals, but who, in doing so, rob someone else of the choice of being able to continue to use the post office's facilities, because the post office will no longer exist? The viability of urban post offices is very much under threat, and many will disappear. In my constituency, probably half of them will go within two years of implementation of the proposals, unless the Government come up with a plan that will not only give security to postmasters, so that they can continue operating, but allow people to exercise choice in how they receive and use their benefit.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |