| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Committees
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord): With the leave of the House, we shall take together motions 5, 6 and 7.
That Mrs Maria Miller be discharged from the Children, Schools and Families Committee and Adam Afriyie be added.
That Adam Afriyie be discharged from the Innovation, Universities and Skills Committee and Mr Tim Boswell be added.
That Mr Stephen Crabb be discharged from the Welsh Affairs Committee and Mark Pritchard be added.— [Tony Cunningham, on behalf of the Committee of Selection.]
petitions
Post Office Closures (Cheshire)
8.11 pm
Mr. Stephen O'Brien (Eddisbury) (Con): In rural and remote areas, post offices are often the lifeblood, and the last remaining outpost, of community life. That is certainly true in Eddisbury, where they are vital. However, we are now faced with a brutal, unnecessary and appalling process whereby the post offices in four wards in my constituency are being decimated by a Government-inspired death by a thousand cuts.
I wish to present four petitions regarding four post offices that are threatened with closure, as is the case for Meadowbank post office, which is on the outskirts of Winsford, the main conurbation in my constituency, and three post offices in much more rural villages or hamlets: Cholmondeley, Tilston and Threapwood.
All the petitions declare that the enormous
community value as well as the services available
at the respective post offices
are vital and must be maintained.
The petitioners of Cholmondeley, Tilston, Threapwood and Meadowbank, and their respective neighbouring districts—they are all relatively cut off from other areas where people may access services—request that the
House of Commons urges the Government and Post Office Ltd. to retain
the post office in each particular area
and the full services that our post offices provide to local people and the most vulnerable groups in our communities; and further requests that the Government and Post Office Ltd. withdraw their plans and undertake an honest review to examine how, rather than destroying our Post Offices, we can secure their long term future.
Following is the full text of the petitions:
[ The Petition of residents of Cholmondeley and its neighbouring districts,
Declares that the community value as well as the services available at Cholmondeley Post Office are vital and must be maintained.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government and Post Office Ltd. to retain Cholmondeley Post Office and the full services that our post offices provide to local people and the most vulnerable groups in our communities; and further requests that the Government and Post Office Ltd. withdraw their plans and undertake an honest review to examine how, rather than destroying our Post Offices, we can secure their l ong term future.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. ]
[The Petition of residents of Meadowbank and its neighbouring districts,
Declares that the community value as well as the services available at Meadowbank Post Office are vital and must be maintained.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government and Post Office Ltd. to retain Meadowbank Post Office and the full services that our post offices provide to local people and the most vulnerable groups in our communities; and further
requests that the Government and Post Office Ltd. withdraw their plans and undertake an honest review to examine how, rather than destroying our Post Offices, we can secure their l ong term future.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. ]
[The Petition of residents of Tilston and its neighbouring districts ,
Declares that the community value as well as the services available at Tilston Post Office are vital and must be maintained.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government and Post Office Ltd. to retain Tilston Post Office and the full services that our post offices provide to local people and the most vulnerable groups in our communities; and further requests that the Government and Post Office Ltd. withdraw their plans and undertake an honest review to examine how, rather than destroying our Post Offices, we can secure their l ong term future.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. ]
[The Petition of residents of Threapwood and its neighbouring districts,
Declares that that the community value as well as the services available at Threapwood Post Office are vital and must be maintained.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government and Post Office Ltd. to retain Threapwood Post Office and the full services that our post offices provide to local people and the most vulnerable groups in our communities; and further requests that the Government and Post Office Ltd. withdraw their plans and undertake an honest review to examine how, rather than destroying our Post Offices, we can secure their l ong term future.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. ]
Rail Services (Kettering)
8.13 pm
Mr. Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): I have the privilege of presenting a petition on behalf of a group called Kettering Rail Users, which is understandably appalled, as am I, by the cuts in train services to and from Kettering that are proposed by Stagecoach’s subsidiary, East Midlands Trains. The petition has been signed by 2,485 people.
To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.
The Humble Petition of Mr Christopher Groome of Kettering Rail Users and others of like disposition listed below,
Sheweth,
That East Midlands Trains, part of The Stagecoach group, proposes, in December 2008, to cut, from present levels, the number of weekday passenger trains from Kettering to London by 5%, the number of weekday passenger trains from London to Kettering by 18% and the number of weekday passenger trains from London to Kettering by 30% in the evening peak, whilst halving the main passenger rail service northbound from Kettering.
Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House urges Her Majesty’s Department of Transport to call upon East Midlands Trains in its proposed timetable to reinstate these services together with fast and semi-fast services to and from London and a far more frequent service northbound so as to restore Kettering’s inter-city rail service and provide the Borough of Kettering with the rail service it needs to serve a rapidly expanding local population.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, etc.
Post Office Closures (West Sussex)
8.15 pm
Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con): I have pleasure in presenting a substantial petition that has been signed by no fewer than 5,002 residents of Worthing and Adur in West Sussex on the subject of local post offices. The petition appears under the title “Local People need Local Post Offices”. I will shortly have the fortune to speak on this subject in a little more detail in the Adjournment debate. Such a substantial number of signatures has been raised in the space of just a few weeks.
The Petition of Post Office Users of Worthing and Adur,
Declares that the closures proposed by the Post Office Ltd (POL) to nine post offices located in Worthing and Adur in West Sussex, which come on top of previous substantial closures and are the most severe changes suggested in the whole of Sussex, are not in the best interests of local residents many of whom are elderly and are unable to travel the increased long distances that closures will entail, local shops who rely on Post Offices to encourage local business or indeed the local community as a whole which already experiences long queues for access to post offices.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges Her Majesty’s Government to, as a matter of urgent public importance, instruct the Royal Mail Group to suspend this closure programme and redefine the criteria on which closures are being proposed with regard to the hardship it will cause communities with high levels of elderly people and deprivation and poor public transport links in particular.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.
The petitioners have very kindly attached a piece of festive tinsel to their petition.
Post Office Closures (Adur and Worthing)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn. —[Ms Diana R. Johnson.]
8.18 pm
Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con): As promised, I will opine in a little more detail regarding the calamitous prospects arising from the proposed closures of post offices in my constituency and neighbouring constituencies. I am especially pleased that my hon. Friend the Member for Worthing, West (Peter Bottomley) is in the Chamber, because he is a joint victim of the proposals. I am delighted that we have no less than two hours and 12 minutes in which to impress on the Minister the seriousness of what faces our constituents.
If ever there was a subject for a topical debate, it is this, because exactly five weeks ago, on 13 November, the Post Office published a list proposing the closure of 49 sub-post office branches throughout Sussex. In one week, the so-called consultation on the proposed closures will end. That consultation period of just six weeks closes on Christmas eve. This is not the best time of year genuinely to ascertain the views of local people and businesses that will be affected by such devastating closures. The situation is certainly not the best Christmas present for my constituents who are faced with losing post offices that they have been used to using for many years. It is particularly disgraceful that, contrary to Cabinet Office guidelines, which say that it is good practice to provide a consultation programme of at least 12 weeks, we face a truncated period of just six weeks in the run-up to Christmas.
That is not genuine consultation, and it contrasts starkly with the consultation on the reconfiguration of West Sussex hospitals, which ended just a few days before the consultation on post offices started. The consultation launched by the primary care trust—which, as I say, finished just a few days before we were faced with the shattering news about the post offices—was not six weeks long; it was not even 12 weeks, although it started off as that. It lasted for 18 weeks. It was a genuine consultation that took into account the views of thousands of our constituents across Sussex, who feel strongly about losing vital hospital services—at least I hope that it took their views into account; it certainly provided the opportunity for that to happen. The hospitals and the primary care trust ran an 18-week consultation on hospital services—a period with which we are all satisfied; there were certainly no qualms about the length of the consultation period and the opportunities for people to have their say. Why do local post offices merit only six weeks, and that in the run-up to Christmas?
On 13 November, we were given the news that no fewer than seven sub-post offices in my East Worthing and Shoreham constituency faced closure. We have already lost about 11 branches in the past few years, so we thought that we would be relatively immune to further closures. Of the seven proposed closures, five will be in the district of Adur, which covers roughly two thirds of my constituency, and two will be in east Worthing. That total of seven is the highest number of closures proposed anywhere in the Sussex division. A further two branches face closure in the constituency of
my hon. Friend the Member for Worthing, West. That is the highest number in Sussex by far. Why are we singled out for such treatment?
That is not the best Christmas present for my constituents, particularly coming on the back of recent news that Worthing borough council and Adur district council face a shortfall in excess of £600,000 in the money needed to run the bus concessionary fare scheme—a scheme that we all support and want to flourish, but for which central Government are not properly remunerating us. It also comes on top of the news, announced just a week ago, that West Sussex will yet again receive the lowest increase in Government central grant of any shire county. It is also on top of the news that we face downgrading of our local hospital services, as I have mentioned. We feel rather put upon in West Sussex, but particularly so in East Worthing and Shoreham, now that we are threatened with post office closures, too.
My constituents say to me, “What have we done to deserve being treated so unfairly by this Government? If it’s not the hospitals, the bus concessionary grant, or the post offices, it’s something else. What will we be faced with in the new year?” This year, people in Sussex, who are usually fairly genteel and law-abiding, have taken to the streets and written letters in their thousands to protest at their treatment at the hands of the Government, whether it be in respect of the health service, the transport system, or what is happening to the Post Office.
It is no surprise that I have just presented a petition signed by no fewer than 5,002 people. Many more signatures will be added in the next week or so, and I shall present them to the Post Office before the consultation ends on Christmas eve. In addition, many hundreds of letters have been written to the Post Office; my hon. Friend the Member for Worthing, West, and I have been copied in to many of them. They concern real-life experiences, and they show that when we talk about the post office closures, we are not just talking about some Post Office number-cruncher dealing with figures in his office, but about real-life experiences and examples of hardship that will be inflicted upon my constituents. It is no surprise that the public meetings that we have held on the subject so far have all been packed out.
Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury) (Con): Does my hon. Friend share my mystification about what appears to be the Post Office’s lingering death? I refer to outreach services, which have been proposed as a way not of closing post offices but of downgrading services in many parts of the country, including mine. Does he share my concern that people cannot really know what those outreach services will be, and so cannot contribute meaningfully to any consultation? That is symptomatic of the cult of consultation, in which the Government are involved in a major way; my hon. Friend mentioned the health service.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |