Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Heald: We simply do not know. I have asked the question and been told that the number is very small. I have asked what will happen to the nearly 40 per cent. who have not responded to the letters of invitation when the order books are phased out. The answer comes back, "We will contact them again," but there is no clarity as to when the exceptions service will be introduced, whom it will apply to and what it is about. We do not even know whether it is the same thing as the technological changes that the Minister for E-Commerce and Competitiveness talked about.
Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell): Of course, there is another group who will be affected by this. Those who suffer from learning disabilities will certainly be unable to respond to the Government's letters and invitations, and they are probably not following the Under-Secretary very closely on local radio. They will also lose out.
Mr. Heald: Of course, the sad thing about the point that my hon. Friend makes so aptly is that many peopleparents, many professionals and even the individuals concernedhave spent years encouraging a little independence and the ability to manage one's own affairs. Then the Government come along with their flashy new system and suddenly, people are supposed to say, "Oh well, a carer can do it for me." That is against the whole trend of our efforts to consider and help disabled people.
The Under-Secretary really must answer the pensioner in Kent, who says:
The effect of all this is likely to be fewer customers using local post offices to collect their money, or the other services that they provide.
Mr. David Kidney (Stafford): In such instances, what is wrong with people having a bank account and cashing cheques at a time and a post office of their choice?
Mr. Heald: Nothing at all. There is no argument between the hon. Gentleman and ourselves; indeed, he signed the early-day motion that relates to the motion that we are proposing today. All that we ask for is an easy system for applying for a post office card account and proper informationpoints that are in the motion, and with which he agrees. We are all for choice and for people being able to do exactly what they wish to do, and they should have the option of a Post Office card account and easy access to it.
In small communities, neighbouring shops will also suffer. This is a deliberate policy of the Government, which will damage communities throughout the country as post offices are forced to close. It is vital that we save our local post offices.
I have placed before the House practical examples from real people. I have included many quotations from letters that I have received, and I hope that the Government respond positively during this debate to the problems highlighted by evidence from some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Those people deserve better than they have got and better than they are getting, and it is time that the Government listened to their concerns.
I invite not only my right hon. and hon. Friends but the two independent Members, the three Social Democratic and Labour party Members, the four Democratic Unionist party Members, the four Ulster Unionist party Members, the four Plaid Cymru Members, the five Scottish National party Members, the 51 Liberal Democrat Members and the 175 Labour Membersall of whom have already supported this motion as an early-day motionto demonstrate their continuing support in the Lobby this evening. I commend the motion to the House.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Malcolm Wicks) : I beg to move, To leave out from "House" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof:
May I say at the outset that I recognise that legitimate worries and concerns will always arise when changes of this sort are proposed and implemented? However, the whole House will agree that there is a difference between debating legitimate concerns and playing politics with the issues by going for inaccurate scaremongering. In view of the vulnerability of some of the people described by the hon. Member for North-East Hertfordshire (Mr. Heald), we all have duties to attend to in the House and in our constituencies on this matter.
Gregory Barker (Bexhill and Battle): The Minister's claim that changes in payment will give rise to more choice and modernisation will ring very hollow indeed among to my constituents in Old Town in Bexhill, whose post office is closing. The branch closure letter expressly states as one of the reasons for closure:
Malcolm Wicks: I hope to address some of those concerns during my speech. However, the present Government, unlike the previous Conservative Government, have invested record levels in the post office network[Interruption.] I have already said that I am not interested in playing politics with the issues, so I shall not compare the record number of post office closures under the previous Government with what is occurring now. We are going for record investment, including £450 million in the rural post office network. After the debate, I would be happy to compare records, if that is the game that the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker) wants to play.
Mr. Weir: The Minister refers to changing over the system, but the Government amendment ends by saying that
Malcolm Wicks: We added that sentence to our amendment mainly because we view the future of the Post Office, in part, as a modern banking system, through which people exercising choices can secure money for their pensions or benefits. However, I shall return to that later.
Geraldine Smith: The Minister refers to the previous Government. Is he aware that Morecambe nearly lost a Crown post office when the Conservative Government tried to privatise the Post Office? Only campaigns by the Labour party and residents saved our main Crown office.
Malcolm Wicks: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, but I hope that we can all unite on a programme that includes direct payment modernisation, which will ensure the future of the post office network. We all share that objective in common. I hope that I can now make some progress and take interventions as they arise.
It is important to understand what has been happening. People were already voting with their feet. The number of customers paid by direct payment into a bank or building society account increased by nearly 1 million last year. Six out of 10 of the new cohort of pensioners and people retiring asked for their pension to be paid into a bank or building society account, and six out of 10 new child benefit payments are made through direct payment. Those are important trends.
Mr. Heald: If everything is working out so swimmingly with people being paid their money directly to their bank and building society accounts, why force
people who do not want to do that into the new system? Many of them have spent their whole lives managing with cash. What is the point?
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |