| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
'and--
(c) make provision for any person to seek and secure any reasonable correction in their details.'
Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 76, in page 62, line 16, at end insert--
'(1A) In the File--
(a) each address shall reflect the county in which the addressee resides, except in as much as the efficiency of sorting addresses near county boundaries requires reference to a neighbouring county on the official address; and
(b) each address shall include a county.'.
Mr. Page: I hope that the Minister appreciated the fact that I did not intrude into private grief a few moments ago. I shall simply say that there is greater joy in heaven over a sinner that repenteth.
These amendments are really the brainchild of my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Mr. Duncan). He has an enthusiasm for them that transcends anything else in the Bill other than the issue of homelessness, which the Minister so brutally dismissed. The knowledge that his amendment has been accepted will speed my hon. Friend's recovery and have him leaping from his sick bed with joy if the Minister is generous enough to accept it.
I will not take too long in going over these proposals, as they speak for themselves. Amendment No. 75, which would make provision for any person to seek and secure any reasonable correction in their details, is simple and straightforward. The postcode address file is what it appears to be--a database of addresses. It is rare for a name to be on the file, as the Minister pointed out in Committee, and it must be as accurate as possible.
I welcome the provision to allow access to the information that is held by the Post Office. As it is in the interests of the Post Office and of individuals for that information to be accurate, it is sensible to allow people to seek and secure reasonable corrections if the details held are wrong. I shall be intrigued to know whether the Minister can find any objection to the amendment.
Amendment No. 76 makes the relatively simple point that the postcode address should reflect the county in which the addressee resides. I understand the point made by the Minister previously--
It being Ten o'clock, the debate stood adjourned.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 15 (Exempted business),
- That, at this day's sitting, the Postal Services Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until any hour.--[Mr. Betts.]
As amended in the Standing Committee, again considered.
Question again proposed, That the amendment be made.
Mr. Page: As I was saying, I understand the point made previously by the Minister that postcodes have not hitherto reflected the counties in which people live and that there would have to be significant changes to the records kept by the Post Office. Given the problems that have arisen in recent years and computer projects in the public sector, I have some feeling for its nervousness in contemplating change. However, I can see no good reason why county affiliation should not be recognised and accepted throughout postal services as part of the postcode address file.
The Minister was good enough to explain to the Committee on 21 March how insistent he has been in including "East Yorkshire" on his outgoing mail from his constituency in Hull. He explained that invariably he lets his bank or building society know that he lives in that county. What is good enough for the Minister in his constituency as a constituency Member and as a private individual should be good enough for the postcode address file. I look forward to what the Minister has to say--
Mr. Alasdair Morgan (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Page: I am bringing my remarks to a close. I would far prefer the hon. Gentleman to address his remarks to the Minister, who is an expert on how the postcode file works.
Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones: I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in support of amendment No. 76. I never thought, given my experience of the House, that I would agree wholeheartedly with an amendment promoted by the hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Mr. Duncan). I wish him well after his hospital treatment.
I support the amendment because there is a great deal of irritation in my constituency of Ynys Mon that the name of the county is not recognised on the current database held by the Post Office. Only today, I was replying to a letter from one of my constituents who shares that irritation intensely.
The Post Office database carries in Wales the names of the counties prior to reorganisation in 1996. People in Anglesey do not like to continue to receive their letters with the county name of Gwynedd. That county, as it was then constructed, was abolished in 1996. Gwynedd is now a much smaller county. A similar situation exists in other parts of Wales. For example, my hon. Friend the Member for Ceredigion (Mr. Thomas) will have letters addressed to Dyfed and not to Ceredigion.
We are told by the Post Office that it is no longer necessary to have the county name on a letter. All that is needed is the post town and the postcode. So why are the old counties on the Post Office database? We are told that it would be far too expensive to change the database. We are told also that in a few years time, the Post Office will be changing all the databases and removing all the county names.
Historic county names are extremely important. People retain an affection for their counties. In an area such as Anglesey, which is an island, people are independently minded and want their letters addressed to them as the people of Anglesey. We are asking the Minister only to recognise that there is strong feeling on this issue. It is a small matter for the Government to accept, but to do so would make many people happy.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton: I mirror the views expressed by the hon. Member for Ynys Mon (Mr. Jones) because, as with his constituency, amendment No. 76 relates to my proud county of Cheshire. It is a very ancient county. Indeed, the Earl of Chester is a member of our royal family--[Interruption.] I am coming to postcodes.
The county name means a great deal to many people. I shall go a little further than did the hon. Member for Ynys Mon by saying that insurance companies often set
lower premiums for some counties than for others. A constituent of mine who lives in or near the village of Kettleshulme who loses "Cheshire" from his or her address may be included in Greater Manchester--[Hon. Members: "Oh!"] "Oh!" indeed--the matter is important. In Greater Manchester, the insurance premiums are higher. A cost is involved for such people, irrespective of the great affection in which most people hold the county in which they live.I am not up to scratch on exactly how postcodes are worked out, but if the postcode rather than the county is the critical factor, the Post Office could stick to the postcode but leave the county.
Mr. Alasdair Morgan: How does the amendment apply to Scotland, where counties ceased to exist in 1975? Nearer to the hon. Gentleman's home, how would it apply to areas of Lancashire that were transferred into Cheshire at that time? Would people be given a choice?
Mr. Winterton: The debates of the 1970s on local government reorganisation created considerable splits within political parties across the House. People took mixed views on the proposals of that time. I shall certainly not seek to intervene in matters internal to Scotland, irrespective of my view on devolution, which is not, as you will quickly remind me, Mr. Deputy Speaker, part of this debate.
The hon. Gentleman referred to Lancashire, and considerable feeling remains to this day about the areas of Lancashire which were transferred into what is known as Greater Manchester.
Mr. Peter Atkinson (Hexham): My hon. Friend has referred to Scotland, so he may wish to know that people who live in Berwickshire may have a Berwick-upon-Tweed postcode and address. In that case, these matters may cross a national frontier.
Mr. Winterton: I am not sure whether this is relevant, but I had the honour to Chair a sitting in Westminster Hall at which matters relating to regional aid in Berwickshire and Berwick-upon-Tweed were discussed at some length. I understand the problems relating to the border in that area. I shall not try your patience, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but my hon. Friend clearly made an important point.
I consider the two amendments eminently sensible, reasonable and rational. They could add to the attraction of the Bill by meeting the needs of many people who feel great loyalty to the county in which they live. I wish my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Mr. Duncan), who is currently in hospital, a speedy recovery, and I hope that the Minister will aid that recovery by conceding the amendments and granting the House an opportunity to be parochial, but parochial in the interests of the people whom we serve.
Mr. Baldry: Those of us who served on the Standing Committee became experts on the postcode system. To the possible surprise of the Minister, we spent almost as much time debating it as we did debating the Post Office monopoly. The reason for that--another surprise for the Minister, I suspect--was that there were concerns on both sides of the Committee about the working of the postcode system.
To his credit, the Minister took a wholly logical approach to the subject: all that mattered was the postal town and the postcode. All the members of the Committee understood that--it was perfectly rational and logical and perfectly well explained. The trouble is that matters do not work out like that on the ground.
My hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Randall), who was an Opposition Whip on the Bill, explained several problems relating to postcodes and postal addresses in his constituency. The hon. Member for Forest of Dean (Mrs. Organ) explained that, although part of her constituency was in Gloucestershire, it had a Welsh postcode and address, which caused considerable confusion.
The matter provides an interesting test of the extent to which the Minister has discussed with the Post Office the concerns expressed by Members on both sides of the House. Has he had an opportunity to discuss those concerns? Even though he might not want to propose or accept an amendment, has he been able to find a pragmatic solution to improve the situation?
The matter was not wholly fanciful, nor was it solely confined to Rutland--the concerns were shared by all members of the Committee. We devoted a considerable number of our sittings to the discussion of those problems, with no repetition or filibustering. Real concerns were expressed on both sides of the Committee. I hope that the Minister has had the opportunity to discuss them with the Post Office and that he can give the House some information on how they can be pragmatically addressed.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |