Examination of Witnesses (Questions 58-59)
POSTWATCH
29 JANUARY 2008
Q58 Chairman: Mr Webber, it is just worth
putting on record again we are talking today about the closure
programme and we are quite restricted on that purpose. We are
very grateful to you for coming in. We understand why your Chairman
cannot be with us today. I also ought to say publicly that we
will actually have another short set of witnesses next week, subject
to their availability. We hope the Communication Workers' Union
will be able to come and talk about different aspects, in particular
the high street Crown post office franchising programme. We hope
to have that additional set of witnesses next week, subject to
their availability. Thank you very much indeed for your written
evidence to us. I believe you would like to make a brief opening
comment which, in the circumstances, would be very helpful.
Mr Webber: Thank you. It actually
echoes much of what George Thomson said in his opening comments.
I was not around for Urban Reinvention, the last closure programme,
but colleagues tell me that by comparison this programme is vastly
better organised, vastly better run, the relationship between
Postwatch and Post Office Limited, although by no means cosy,
is a very constructive one, and I think we are acting as strong
critical friends. We have a much closer role in terms of a lengthy
pre-consultation, and I am sure you will want to ask about that.
It does mean that the plans which reach the public, when they
do reach public consultation, are much better than they would
otherwise have been, and probably than they were in terms of Urban
Reinvention. That said, we do have a number of concerns, and I
hope we will cover those in the course of the next minutes. The
main ones I think probably stem from the speed with which the
process is being implemented. I can understand why the Government
and why Post Office Limited want the programme to be implemented
at the speed it is; but, nonetheless, it means there is not as
much time for reflection as we would like. It means that Postwatch,
as well as the Committee itself, remain deeply concerned about
a six-week public consultation period; and we argued strongly,
and I know the Committee argued strongly, for a 12-week public
consultation period. The main focus of our concern, I think, is
Post Office Limited ("failures" is too strong a word)
inadequacies in terms of communicating with their customers and
with the communities that they are serving. The mechanics of the
process are working pretty well given the speed with which it
is being implemented. Their communication with customers is not
as good as we would like it to be, although it is getting better.
Q59 Chairman: Thank you, that is
very helpful. You are happy then about the Post Office's processes.
Do you think the branch information that is available is sufficiently
robust? We have heard some suggestions that it is not always as
accurate as people would like?
Mr Webber: Generally it is pretty
good. With a programme like this, with the whole of the UK being
covered, obviously general answers provide only general truths.
There are weaknesses, but in general it is pretty good. Obviously
one of the weaknesses is that we all have to rely on census data
which is now pretty solidly out-of-date, since we are seven or
eight years from the last census. Apart from that, in general
the information is relatively good.
|
