Post Office Closure - House of Commons Report

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Click link for PDF - Below is the Conclusions and recommendations section

Conclusions and recommendations

Role of Government and the future of the network

1. In answer to a Parliamentary Question, the Government said a network of around
7,500 offices would suffice to meet the national criteria. We do not think it is
satisfactory simply to accept that the network may continue to shrink in an
unplanned way between now and 2011; Post Office Ltd should be obliged to use its
best endeavours to keep the network at a minimum of 11,500 fixed outlets.
(Paragraph 7)

The Consultation Process

2. We urge the new National Consumer Council to place continued monitoring of the
post office network among its highest priorities. (Paragraph 8)

3. Post Office Ltd should be far clearer about the basis on which the public is being
consulted. All its literature should make it clear that there will be reductions in Post
Office provision, and that the question being asked is simply whether the right
branches have been identified for closure. (Paragraph 12)

Confidentiality

4. If people are to respond sensibly to proposals to close a particular sub-post office,
they need to know why that branch has been put forward for closure. There may be
some details which need to be kept confidential, but this should be strictly limited,
given the substantial public investment in the network and the keen public interest in
the outcome. We welcome the fact that Post Office Ltd has been prepared to share
more information as the process has evolved; it should give such information at the
outset of the consultation process. (Paragraph 14)

5. Area Plan Proposals and their associated publicity should make it clear that closure,
although likely, is not inevitable, and that the status of post offices scheduled to
remain open may change. The notification that an office, is to remain open should be
far more clearly worded. (Paragraph 16)

6. The Chief Executive of Post Office Ltd told us that the proposals in Local Area Plans
were refined through the pre-consultation process and that this preparation is some
compensation for the limited time allowed for public consultation. If this is so,
commercial confidentiality should not prevent Post Office Ltd from holding the
discussions necessary to make sensible proposals. (Paragraph 17)

Local Authority and MP involvement

7. We also note that although Postwatch appears to be doing a good job in influencing
proposals in the pre-consultation period, several of the MPs who responded to our
request felt that Postwatch could have been more closely involved in discussions with
them. Postwatch is the only organisation able to take proposals to review; it would
be helpful if it always discussed its position with interested MPs. (Paragraph 20)

Profitability

8. Local authorities and local MPs should be more closely involved in the preconsultation
process. Postwatch appears to be doing a good job, but it simply does
not have the wider responsibilities of local government, or the representative role of
MPs. The Chief Executive of Post Office Ltd told us that local authorities were
involved in drawing up local area plans before they went out to public consultation;
clearly, some local authorities do not feel they have been properly involved. Local
Area Plans would be improved if local authorities and Post Office Ltd worked
together. (Paragraph 21)

9. Postwatch should scrutinise proposals to close post offices which are commercially
viable for Post Office Ltd particularly closely and, if necessary, have powers to block
them. (Paragraph 22)

Alternative support for Post Offices

10. We welcome Post Office Ltd’s apparent willingness to contemplate introducing
locally supported post offices. (Paragraph 24)

Management style

11. The Post Office’s future is a matter of public debate. As we have said, Post Office Ltd
is not solely a commercial enterprise. Its network provides access to essential
services, and has a greater reach than any other. The Government is the sole
shareholder, and the public has a right to expect Government-controlled enterprises
to behave in an exemplary way. After the experience of this inexcusable lapse, we
expect Post Office Ltd to do so in future. (Paragraph 28)

The Government Access Criteria

12. The evidence we have received from local authorities suggests the detailed
information required to implement the access criteria properly has not always been
taken fully into account. We are particularly concerned that in some cases the local
area plan has failed to reflect arrangements to transfer Crown Offices to franchised
premises in a different location. If Post Office Ltd cannot take into account
information about matters that it controls, confidence in the wider information
underlying these plans is undermined. Post Office Ltd must do more to demonstrate
that local area plans are accurate and based on current information. (Paragraph 31)

13. We underline the fact that the geographic access criteria are national, and can be met
even if coverage in certain local areas falls well below the national standard. We do
not know the extent to which the national criteria are met in each local area plan. We
expect Post Office Ltd, as far as possible, to take the geographic access criteria into
account at local area plan level, not just meet them nationally. (Paragraph 32)

Accessibility

14. We welcome the fact that Postwatch surveys proposed franchises for accessibility.
We trust it also considers accessibility when it considers proposals for sub-post office
closure made as part of the Network Change Programme. However, we are far from
convinced that Post Office Ltd itself is fully engaged with the need to ensure that
services are accessible to all. This needs to be given much higher priority. (Paragraph
34)

Local economies

15. We believe that there should be a presumption against closing a post office where
this is the last shop in the village, or in a deprived urban area. (Paragraph 35)
16. Post Office Ltd must take great care to ensure that any reduction in compensation to
a sub-post office that closes, but where the remaining business intends to offer new
and competing services, is not excessive. The purpose of reducing compensation is to
limit competition with, and encourage business to migrate to, remaining post offices
nearby. The argument for this reduction is weaker in areas where there is no ready
access to such offices. Because of the importance of such facilities to the local
communities, Post Office Ltd should always be realistic in its assessment of the
degree to which alternative services would really displace business for the Post Office
Network. When reaching its decisions it should give the benefit of the doubt to the
business and so to the people it serves. (Paragraph 38)

17. The timetable for the Network Change Programme is extremely compressed. We
would be concerned if postmasters had to decide whether to accept the cut in
compensation before they had the time to establish whether they could attract bill
payment or other services, or explore the terms of such contracts. Postmasters
should be given adequate time to explore these factors before deciding what
compensation to accept. (Paragraph 39)

Outreach

18. We agree that open-ended questions about the type of Outreach which may be
appropriate are not helpful but welcome the fact that in recent consultations Post
Office Ltd suggests what Outreach arrangements could be provided. We also
welcome the assurance that Outreach services will continue until at least 2011. In
addition we welcome the statement from Post Office Ltd that they are prepared to
consider Outreach services in areas which had previously lost their postal services
but are within the new national criteria. (Paragraph 42)

19. We believe a single outreach session of two hours a week is generally unacceptable;
there should normally be at least two sessions per week. (Paragraph 43)

20. We welcome the proposals to introduce Post Office provision to remote areas. If this
cannot be done by voluntary Outreach arrangements, we expect the Post Office to
provide the necessary services itself. (Paragraph 44)

Proportionality

21. We welcome the fact that Post Office Ltd appears to be taking a flexible and
pragmatic approach to the requirement that the closures should not fall
disproportionately in particular areas, and that its programme takes some account of
the varying levels of current provision. (Paragraph 45)

22. The Network Change Programme has a difficult balancing act to perform between
responding to local needs and concerns and ensuring that the necessary reduction in
the network is achieved. We welcome the Minister’s assurance that areas which are
considered late in the process will not be disadvantaged. We intend to keep this, and
other aspects of the programme, under review. (Paragraph 46)

Conclusion

23. Post Office Ltd has been given the task of reducing the network by a fixed number of
branches in a fixed period. The Network Change Programme began in July 2007 and
the final consultation is scheduled to end in October 2008. That is a very challenging
timetable. As we always feared, this has meant that consultation has been curtailed,
and the whole process has been rushed. The failure to realise at the outset that the
consultation timetable should take account of the “purdahâ€