Letter from Claire Curtis-Thomas MP
I wish to add my voice to the substantial and
growing body of people who are disturbed at the plans to close
local Post Offices. As Member of Parliament for Crosby, I object
particularly strongly to the proposals to shut the Post Office
at Rawson Road in Seaforth in Freshfield.
It is my contention, and one which is clearly
supported by the many constituents who have made their views known
to me, that these closures would result in very real hardship
to their respective communities. It is the vulnerable members
of our communities who will be hardest hit. Many do not own cars,
and have little or no access to public transport, while those
who are car owners will inevitably add yet more environmentally
damaging emissions to the atmosphere as they are forced to travel
greater distances. If the Rawson Road office is closed, those
on foot will have to negotiate busy and dangerous roads (either
the hazardous A5036 dual-carriageway in Seaforth or the equally
busy A565 in Waterloo). The notional mileages to other branches
listed in the Branch Access Report bear no relation to the reality
of lengthy detours nor, of course, do they take into account the
undoubted stress of such journeys for the elderly and infirm.
It also needs pointing out that the Rawson Road branch is situated
conveniently close to the local Medical Centre, as well as to
local low-cost supermarkets, making visits to the two both easy
and convenient.
These statements are strongly supported by significant
and reliable statistical evidence. A survey carried out by Mrs
Sue Schofield (copy enclosed) (not printed here) logged
the responses of 190 customers using the branch on three separate
recent occasions and found the following. Over the three days
no fewer than 72% of those using the branch came on foot, and
67% did not own a car. 71% made use of the nearby shopping facilities
while they were in the area. 37% of those questioned were aged
60 and over, and many more were approaching that age bracket,
while as many as 28% admitted to disabilities or health problems.
The vast majority were, of course, from the area surrounding Rawson
Road.
The figures effectively speak for themselves
and conclusions are not difficult to draw. For many users, a walk
of half an hour or so to their nearest alternative branch would
be demanding and stressful, and in some cases very difficult indeed,
and for most of these private transport is not available. Those
using the branch clearly prop up the local shops, and its withdrawal
might well result in closures in an area desperately in need of
such facilities.
In further support of the special needs of the
Seaforth community, the information supplied by the Government's
2004 Index of Multiple Deprivation is highly significant. The
area served by the Rawson Road branch ranks as the 981st most
deprived out of 32,482 nationally, while the same area ranks 11th
out of 190 areas within Sefton itself. The area faces severe social,
crime and behavioural problems, and relies heavily upon the few
remaining facilities to sustain its sense of community. It would
seem highly likely that closure would accelerate the process of
deprivation and the running-down of an area and a community.
I find it deplorable that the Post Office authorities
should be putting short-term financial considerations above long-term
social benefits. Local Post Offices, where customers are known
and made welcome, provide meeting places and congenial surroundings
for many people, and represent an invaluable community resource
in an increasingly impersonal and often threatening urban environment.
Closing small, friendly branches merely adds to the process of
depersonalisation and centralisation as larger offices struggle
to cope with long and frustrating queues and are less and less
able to offer the reassuring local services that people need.
Values such as these are difficult to quantify in cold economic
terms—but as we seek to strengthen and preserve local identity
and loyalties we should be seeking to preserve them rather than
erode them. Criteria for closure which are merely concerned with
cost and geographical distance and which ignore the findings I
present above are surely flawed.
In conclusion, I must add that I feel there
is more than a little irony—as well as a degree of inept
timing—in the current TV advertising campaign for "The
People's Post Office". Unless these ill-advised closure proposals
are reversed, many of the people I serve will react only with
disbelief.
12 December 2007
| 
