| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Post Office Closures (Shropshire)
The Petition of users of Post Offices in the Ludlow Constituency,
Declares that plans to close 14 Post Offices in the Ludlow constituency, 9 of which are in the last remaining shop in the village, will affect many users of Post Office services, particularly vulnerable people with limited access to alternative branches and undermine sustainability of the local community. Withdrawal of the Post Office from the local shop will threaten the future of many remaining village shops, and introduction of a mobile van service for a few hours a week in 7 villages does nothing to reduce this threat to our communities.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform to be aware of the Petitioners concerns against closure of Post Offices in the Ludlow constituency and to instruct Post Office Ltd to halt the closure of these Post Offices.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Mr. Philip Dunne , Official Report, 9 June 2008; Vol. 477, c. 133 .] [P000209]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, received 25 July 2008:
The Government fully recognises the important social and economic role of post offices, particularly in rural and deprived urban communities. That is why it is determined to maintain a national post office network, allowing people to have reasonable access across the whole country, and why it has put in place a new policy and financial framework to achieve this. The Government has been investing substantial sums in the post office network, totalling £2 billion since 1999. That has, for example, paid for a computer link-up for every post office, as well as support for non-commercial branches since 2003.
In its response to the consultation on the Post Office network, the Government announced, in May 2007 confirmation of its decision to extend funding of up to £1.7 billion to 2011, including provision of a £150 million Social Network Payment to support the post office network up to this time. The Government strategy includes provision for 2,500 compensated closures and 500 new Outreach services.
The 500 new and innovative Outreach locations (operated in partnership with other local services, such as pubs, village halls, churches and mobile post offices) will mitigate closures, primarily in smaller and more remote communities. Post Office Limited (POL) announced on 9 April that it will extend Outreach trials into urban areas which, if successful, could mean additional Outreach branches over and above the 500 originally planned.
Nevertheless, there will need to be up to 2,500 compensated post office closures within the defined access criteria.
POL is responsible for implementing the network change programme at a local level. It is developing a rolling programme of some 50 local consultations on detailed area plans, based on groups of Parliamentary constituencies. The first area plans went out to local consultation on 2 October last year and these plans will continue to be rolled out at regular intervals until August, with the whole programme scheduled to take around 15 months to complete. The consultation period for Shropshire and Staffordshire, including the Ludlow constituency, finished on 9 June, and POL will publish its Area Plan Decision Booklet on its website in due course. I understand that in 6 of the cases where the post office is the only shop in the village there will be an Outreach replacement service. Details of the closures and any further reviews will be available on the POL website at: www.postoffice.co.uk/networkchange.
POL develops its proposals with the participation of sub-postmasters, local authorities and the consumer watchdog, Postwatch. It takes into account the numeric access criteria set out by Government, as well as local factors affecting ease of access (such as local geography), when drawing up its implementation plans. POL is also required to consider the availability of public transport and alternative access to key post office services, local demographics and the impact on the local economy. Local consultations provide the opportunity to raise any specific concerns over particular proposals.
The Government does not have a role in proposals or decisions for individual post offices. No decisions on individual Post Offices are taken until after local consultations. Those decisions are made by POL, in light of the responses to the consultation, while subject to a four-stage appeals process involving Postwatch. After the public consultation process, the review process will apply when Postwatch shows that:
POL has not given due consideration to material evidence received during the public consultation in coming to its decision or;
evidence emerges from the consultation that the proposal for the branch does not meet the Government’s policy requirements.
The aim of the further review process is for POL and Postwatch to reach an agreed way forward by bilateral review, with 3 stages available at increasing levels of seniority. An addition to the review process last November provides for very difficult cases which remain unresolved after stage 3. At this final stage, the Chairman of Royal Mail Group will review the issues and reach a final decision.
The Petition of users of Montford Bridge Post Office,
Declares that that the plan to close five Post Offices in the Shrewsbury and Atcham constituency will have a detrimental effect on the lives of local residents. The local Post Office is a vital and integral element of the local community, supporting social interaction between residents. They should not simply be assessed on an economic basis without taking into consideration the social economic value they offer to the local community. The proposed partial replacement of three of the Post Offices earmarked for closure by a mobile vehicle with restricted hours, and in some cases parked on the side of roads or in lay-bys, is a substandard solution not benefiting the world we live in today.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to instruct Post Office Ltd. to ensure that Montford Bridge Post Office is kept open.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Daniel Kawczynski , Official Report, 25 June 2008; Vol. 478, c. 465 .] [P000215]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, received 11 September 2008:
The Government fully recognises the important social and economic role of post offices, particularly in rural and deprived urban communities. That is why it is determined to maintain a national post office network allowing people to have reasonable access across the whole country and has put in place a new policy and financial framework to achieve this. The Government has been investing substantial sums in the post office network, totalling £2 billion since 1999. That has, for example, paid for a computer link-up for every post office as well as support for non-commercial branches since 2003.
In its response to the consultation on the Post Office network the Government announced in May 2007 confirmation of its decision to extend funding of up to £1.7 billion to 2011, including provision of £150 million Social Network Payment to support the post office network up to 2011. The Government strategy includes provision for 2,500 compensated closures and 500 new Outreach services.
The 500 new and innovative Outreach locations, operated in partnership with other local services such as in pubs, village halls, churches or in mobile post offices, will mitigate closures, primarily in smaller and more remote communities. Post Office Limited (POL) announced on 9 April that it will extend Outreach trials into urban areas which, if successful, could mean additional Outreach branches over and above the 500 originally planned. Nevertheless, there will need to be up to 2,500 compensated post office closures within the defined access criteria.
POL is responsible for implementing the network change programme at a local level. It is developing a rolling programme of some 50 local consultations on detailed area plans, based on groups of Parliamentary constituencies. The first area plans went out to local consultation on 2 October last year and these plans will continue to be rolled out at regular intervals until August, with the whole programme scheduled to take around 15 months to complete. The consultation period for Shropshire and Staffordshire ended on 9 June and POL published its final decision on 1 July. Having considered all representations and the criteria for the network change programme POL has confirmed that it is to proceed with the proposed closure of the Montford Bridge branch and its replacement with an Outreach service. The Area Plan Decision Booklet for Shropshire and Staffordshire is available on the POL website at: www.postoffice.co.uk/networkchange.
POL develops its proposals with the participation of sub-postmasters, local authorities and the consumer watchdog, Postwatch, and takes into account the numeric access criteria set out by Government as well as local factors affecting ease of access, such as local geography: rivers, mountains etc when drawing up its implementation plans. POL is also required to consider the availability of public transport and alternative access to key post
office services, local demographics and the impact on the local economy. Local consultations provide the opportunity to raise any specific concerns over particular proposals.
The Government does not have a role in proposals or decisions for individual post offices. No decisions on individual Post Offices are taken until after local consultations. Those decisions are made by POL in light of the responses to the consultation while subject to a four-stage appeals process involving Postwatch. The Review Process for closure decisions after public consultation process applies where Postwatch shows that, for an individual branch:
POL has not given due consideration to material evidence received during the public consultation in coming to its decision or;
where evidence emerges from the consultation that the proposal for the branch does not meet the Government’s policy requirements.
The aim of the further review process is for POL and Postwatch to reach an agreed way forward by bilateral review with 3 stages available at increasing levels of seniority. An addition to the review process last November provides that for very difficult cases which remain unresolved after stage 3, Allan Leighton, Chairman of Royal Mail Group will review the issues and reach a final decision.
Communities and Local Government
Car Boot Sale (Catchpenny Farm)
The Petition of concerned members of the public,
Declares that the mid-weekly car boot sale and market at Catchpenny Farm, near Fitzwilliam has, for the moment, ceased. The Petitioners believe that this mid-weekly market has been beneficial to the local economy, contributes to strengthening the community and is highly popular. The Petitioners further expect, since they pay their Council Tax to Wakefield MDC, that this Council exists to promote economic development and community well-being and therefore will wish to restore the weekly car boot sale and market.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to do all in its power to co-operate with Wakefield MDC in order to reinstate a mid-weekly car boot sale and market such as the one formerly held at Catchpenny Farm near Fitzwilliam.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Jon Trickett , Official Report, 10 June 2008; Vol. 477, c. 280.] [P000211]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, received 31 July 2008:
The Secretary of State acknowledges the concerns of the petitioners in relation to the cessation of the Catchpenny Farm car boot sale and market.
It is understood that the car boot sale and market at Catchpenny Farm, Fitzwilliam, ceased following action taken by Wakefield Metropolitan District Council through the Courts to secure an injunction against the operator.
Primary responsibility for the day to day administration of planning control rightly rests with the local planning authority for an area. Local planning authorities are best placed to carry out what is in their view proper planning for their areas. They have a wide range of discretionary enforcement powers to enable them to deal with unauthorised development and can, if they feel an unauthorised development is unacceptable, take enforcement action against those concerned. They can
also take action in the Courts under section 187B of the Town and Country Planning Act where they consider it expedient for any actual or apprehended breaches of planning control to be restricted.
It is for the local authority concerned to determine whether Civil or enforcement action should be taken in any particular case and, if so, the type of action appropriate, taking account of local circumstances. These are not matters in which the Secretary of State would become involved, unless an appeal is made against an enforcement notice issued by a local planning authority. It would not therefore be appropriate for the Secretary of State to offer any comments or observations on the propositions raised by this petition.
Planning and Development (Essex)
The Petition of J Everett, the residents of Castle Point and others,
Declares that they suspect that there is a hidden agenda in respect of the public open space bounded by the Chase Thundersley on the north side, and by Runneymede Chase on the east side. They have reached this conclusion firstly because a large area adjacent to the annex of the SEEVIC College has been fenced off and they challenge the legal right for this to have been done. Second because Castle Point councillors have decided to no longer regularly cut the grass allowing it to become largely overgrown, and they suspect this is an attempt by councillors to deter people from using the public open space so that the land can be developed. Third, because lately it appears that students of SEEVIC College have been allowed or encouraged to take over the area during breaks, making other users of this public open space feel like interlopers and leaving the space littered with food wrappers, drinks cans and bottles and other rubbish, adding to its dereliction. They further believe that this land, like all public assets, belongs to the people, not to the council or the councillors, and councillors should respect that fact and keep the public fully informed of their and their officers' discussions and intentions regarding land use and the future of all our public assets. They therefore urge councillors to return this land to full and proper public use and to protect it in future, for many valid planning and community interest reasons, and to ensure that this matter is dealt with by councillors rather than officers given its importance to the wider community and the need to protect their valuable public open spaces.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to press all Castle Point councillors, since they have the direct responsibility for this matter, to ensure this public open space is retained for its ancient and established previous use and to immediately publish its discussions and intentions regarding land in this area and behind the Runnemede swimming pool and to be transparent in future with the public on all planning and land use matters.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Bob Spink , Official Report, 2 July 2008; Vol. 478, c. 994.] [P000227]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, received 31 July 2008:
The Secretary of State acknowledges the concerns of the petitioners regarding the land bounded by the Chase Thundersley on the north side and by Runneymede Chase on the east side.
It is our understanding that the land which is subject of proposals by SEEVIC is not public open space and has been allocated for Local Government purposes. This area has been fenced and SEEVIC have applied to Castle Point Borough Council for planning permission to build on this land. The land concerned is bounded to the north by an area of public open space which has not been fenced. Further information on planning, including the minutes of meetings of the Planning Committee are publicly available on the Council's website.
Planning and Development (Salisbury)
The Petition of the citizens of South Wiltshire,
Declares that the Government proposals to impose the building of an additional 12,400 houses on our community will change forever the character of this unique part of rural England's landscape and heritage; has been proposed with inadequate time for proper consultation; is not supported by proposals for new physical or social infrastructure and will result in the loss of prime agricultural land.
Further declares that the underlying planning assumptions of economic and population growth in central southern England are speculative and flawed and ignore the special nature of the open landscape and natural environment which enhances biodiversity in a precious, pollution-free, low-carbon area which is as important to the whole of England as the speculative construction of new houses.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to annul these proposals and bearing in mind the imminent abolition of Salisbury District Council and Wiltshire County council and their replacement by a new Unitary Wiltshire Council as Planning Authority to delay any decision on future housing options for at least one year and to leave development policy in the hands of their locally-elected planning authority, pursuing organic and sustainable growth in our local economy and in the provision of new homes.
And the Petitioners remain, etc. —[Presented by Robert Key , Official Report, 12 June 2008; Vol. 477, c. 566.] [P000212]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, received 31 July 2008:
The Secretary of State acknowledges the concerns of the petitioners regarding the recommendations of the Panel Report into the draft Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South West in relation to the future development of Salisbury and south Wiltshire.
As the process of producing the draft South West RSS is bound by regulation and propriety guidance, which seeks to put all interested parties on an even footing, it is not possible to discuss the merits of the Regional Spatial Strategy or the recommendations of the independent Panel Report at this stage.
This guidance is to ensure that the process is fair and transparent and that representations to the Secretary of State are channelled through the proper statutory consultation process.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |