| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
PETITIONS
Tetra Masts (Llanidloes)
6.14 pm
Lembit Öpik (Montgomeryshire) (LD): My petition comes from the people of Llanidloes in my constituency and relates to their considerable concerns regarding the development of Tetra masts, which are a form of communication system. It has been signed by approximately 800 people.
The Petition of the citizens of the Town and district of Llanidloes
Declares that we are deeply concerned and strongly opposed to the proposal to erect and operate a Tetra Mast on the Maes y Llan Industrial Estate at Llanidloes, Powys because it is our belief that the technology is known to be risky and that proper studies on its safety have not been undertaken.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to halt the roll-out of TETRA.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.
To lie upon the table.
Post Offices (Leigh)
6.16 pm
Andy Burnham (Leigh) (Lab): This petition of 1,600 people in the Leigh constituency represents the hard work of many people in my constituency who are deeply concerned about the Post Office's plans to close seven post offices in the Leigh area—a former mining area with poor public transport and a legacy of ill health and disability, and people who have trouble accessing a post office.
Declares that the loss of seven well used local Post Offices is too severe, leaves thousands of people more than a mile from the nearest Post Office and would give elderly and disabled people great difficulty in accessing a service.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to support the campaign to keep open Leigh constituency's post offices by doing all in its power to bring about a review of the Post Office Ltd.'s proposals.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.
To lie upon the Table.
28 Oct 2004 : Column 1671
28 Oct 2004 : Column 1673
Post Office Closures (Burton)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Heppell.]
6.17 pm
Mrs. Janet Dean (Burton): I am grateful for the opportunity to raise my concerns about the extent of proposed post office closures in Burton-upon-Trent. First, I must make it clear that I understand the need for the review of the urban network of post offices. It is important that we ensure that the network's remaining post offices have improved facilities for their customers and are economically viable.
There has been a gradual change in the use of local post offices. Long before the Government decided to move away from pension and benefit order books, many people were choosing to have their payments made directly into their bank accounts. I remember being asked about 20 years ago whether I would like my child benefit to be paid into my bank account. Like many people at that time, I chose to retain my weekly payments through the post office in order to support my local branch. I believe that new parents did not have that option. Many people who have become pensioners in recent years have been used to having their wages paid into the bank, and it has therefore been natural for them to receive their pensions in the same way.
The role of the local post office has changed, and even with the development of new services such as those stemming from agreements with some of the high street banks, many branches are not viable. I have therefore reluctantly accepted that some of the post offices in the urban area of my constituency will have to close, even though I recognise that the closure of any individual branch will adversely affect those who currently use it.
The network reinvention programme is important to ensure that post offices do not just wither on the vine. I welcome the fact that more than £81,000 will be invested where necessary in the remaining branches in my constituency. I am glad that those who own sub-post offices that close under the scheme will be able to claim compensation, which in many cases will help to offset the loss of their initial investment in the branch. However, I believe that in the case of the post office area plan for Burton, Post Office Ltd has gone too far. I believe that the plan proposes the closure of too many branches and has failed to take into account the community role of post offices.
The initial consultation document, dated 18 August this year, announced the proposal to close 11 branches in Burton-upon-Trent. One of those branches had been closed for more than a year. The plan includes the opening of one new branch, which means a net loss of nine branches of those currently open. Incidentally, having studied the consultation document again in preparation for tonight's debate, Post Office Ltd has made an error in calculating the number of branches that would remain under the current proposals. It appears to have lost an urban branch—I calculate that nine, rather than eight, urban post offices would remain under its proposals.
On Tuesday this week, I received a letter from Post Office Ltd advising me that a final decision had been taken to close all but three of the 11 branches. Although
28 Oct 2004 : Column 1674
I am pleased that Post Office Ltd has listened to the views of local councillors, Postwatch and me regarding the difficulties that local people will face if the three post offices at Anglesey road, Calais road and Melbourne avenue close, I regret that the decision on the other eight should have been made so swiftly and before the stage 1 escalation meeting, which will take place on Friday 5 November. I understand that some sub-post office owners are keen to know whether they can close under the programme, but it may have been wise to delay decisions on post offices that are geographically close to those at which Postwatch opposes closure.
It would have been better to examine the black holes that would remain if all the proposed closures went ahead. That particularly applies in the cases of the Calais road and Anglesey road branches—Melbourne avenue stands on its own. In my submission, I grouped the Calais road, Horninglow road north and Tutbury road branches together, saying that the proposed main receiving branch for those branches' customers at a new post office in the Dean and Smedley pharmacy is too far away. That is particularly true for those who currently use the Calais road branch.
"Several of the letters enclosed are from users of the Calais Road branch expressing their concern at the distance that they would have to travel to the receiving branch. I share those concerns. There is also one letter from a customer of the current Horninglow branch setting out the problem that those like herself, with visual impairment, would have in walking to the proposed alternative branch. She mentions the difficulty in crossing roads such as Victoria Crescent. You will note that one of the enclosed letters contains a petition from residents of Curtis Court sheltered accommodation who would be seriously affected by the proposal. I believe that further consideration should be given to retaining or opening a branch to serve the Horninglow area, as well as the proposed new office at the pharmacy, which I understand would be a large branch with the need for five serving positions. It would seem sensible to split this capacity between two post offices."
I am glad that Post Office Ltd will re-examine its proposal to close Calais road sub-post office, but it would have been better to reconsider the needs of the customers of all three branches together. Although the new post office branch in the Dean and Smedley pharmacy is too far away from those branches that I have just mentioned, it offers a central location in place of the sub-post offices currently situated at Derby Turn, Sydney street and Victoria crescent. I know that such a move would inconvenience some of my constituents, but it would offer improved facilities and would undoubtedly help to support and complement another valuable local facility, the local neighbourhood chemist.
The notice of closure letter that I received this week contains several references to the
"new Horninglow in the Dean branch".
First, the correct wording is the new Horninglow branch in the Dean and Smedley pharmacy; secondly, the "Dean" in question is no relation to me.
Turning to the Anglesey road branch and the neighbouring Walker street post office, where closure has now been confirmed, the concern that I expressed in my response to the consultation was that the proposal would close both branches in that area, and I ask for consideration to be given to maintaining one post office in the area served by the Walker street and Anglesey road post offices, even if it is in an alternative retail
28 Oct 2004 : Column 1675
outlet. The proposal is for the main receiving post office for customers of those branches to be the town's main post office, which replaced the Crown post office some years ago.
The town's main post office is situated in a Safeway store, which I understand is being converted into an Asda store. I have great concerns about the capacity of that post office to cope with additional customers. There always seem to be queues, and I was therefore relieved when Post Office Ltd's head of area told me that the intention was to increase the number of counter positions from five to eight. However, I have been now told that that is not the case and that the intention is for only five to remain. I am greatly disturbed by that, not only because of the additional customers who would be directed there by any closure but because many people who are affected by branch closures throughout the town are more likely to visit a town centre post office while shopping than to make a bus journey to an alternative local branch. It is na-ve to assume that people will always go to their main or even secondary receiving branch because it is designated as such.
The final branch that gives me grave concern is the one in Melbourne avenue at Winshill. That sub-post office is situated in an estate of mainly former local authority housing. It is on the fringe of Burton-upon-Trent, and the only receiving branch given is three quarters of a mile away. The area is hilly, with little access to other retail outlets and no access to other financial services. I am pleased that in Stapenhill, which is a similar area, there is no proposal to close either of the two post offices, which are perhaps closer together than those at Winshill. However, that poses the question of why the Melbourne avenue branch should be proposed for closure. Although I understand and sympathise with those who wish to take advantage of the closure programme, the willingness of branch owners to close their post offices cannot take precedence over the need to serve the public.
I want the Minister to consider deprivation in the three areas of Burton-upon-Trent where branch closures are still being examined. The consultation letter states:
"Calais Road, Derby Turn and Victoria Crescent are located in areas that were previously defined as being in deprived locations, however, under the revised indices based on super-output areas these branches are no longer designated as in deprived locations."
I made the point in my response that the Post Office report on Calais road stated:
"Calais Road is located in a deprived area of Burton-on-Trent."
The latter statement had not been updated, but it demonstrates that it is unwise to presume that revised ways of measuring deprivation mean that an area can suddenly become less in need of support.
The closure consultation does not recognise that the area that the Melbourne avenue branch serves is classed as being in the top 10 per cent. most deprived under the new super-outlet areas. It is also important to note that the population of Winshill is more than 8,000. Similarly, the Anglesey road sub-post office serves one area, which is classed as being in the top 20 per cent. most deprived, according to the new criteria.
28 Oct 2004 : Column 1676
I understand that money has been made available through the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to improve post offices in deprived urban areas of England. I hope that some of that funding can be used to provide services in the areas where Postwatch and I have objected to closure.
We rightly try to protect our rural post offices and I am glad that the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry recently announced that up to £300 million will be made available from 2006–08 to extend the financial support package for rural post offices. I have 14 rural post offices and know about the efforts that Post Office Ltd and Postwatch make to maintain the network. Rocester's post office is currently closed, and I know that everything is being done to restore the service to the village as soon as possible. In Uttoxeter, alternative premises were recently found when another rural branch closed because of the change in ownership of the shop.
Just as I believe that we should maintain post offices in rural areas, I believe that we should ensure that urban communities such as those on the Manners estate at Winshill and around the Calais road/Horninglow part of Burton do not suffer through the closure of their local post office.
We should examine the innovative ideas that have been developed in rural areas and use them to tackle the needs of urban dwellers. Why cannot we have part-time post offices in urban areas? Will my hon. Friend the Minister consider developing mobile post offices, which could reach the parts of our inner cities and towns that ordinary post offices cannot reach?
I started my speech by referring to the changes that have taken place in the use of post offices over many years. Despite those changes, many senior citizens want to continue to use their local post office. They have chosen to have a Post Office card account or they draw cash from their bank account at their local branch, and they enjoy meeting their friends on pension day. While that continues, mobile and part-time post offices could provide the service that they need and deserve.
I pay tribute to Postwatch for its efforts on behalf of my constituents, especially Irene Shiels, who has paced the streets of Burton and elsewhere to examine the proposals in detail. I am glad that Postwatch has referred the Melbourne avenue, Anglesey road and Calais road branches to stage 1 escalation, and I hope that Post Office Ltd will listen to the just arguments that have been put forward for the retention of post offices in those areas. I look forward to receiving any help that the Minister can offer.
6.30 pm
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |