You rightly report a ‘sense of betrayal’ at the decision to close 49 post offices in the West Midlands, including Seisdon and Codsall Wood.
The closure of these post offices is of course shocking and unnecessary. The question is, however, why Royal Mail was transformed in less than a decade from a reasonably sufficient and profitable organisation which was part of our national life to a loss-making business struggling for survival?
The cause of this strange transformation was actually a series of EU Directives which have the specific aim of undermining national postal services and introducing an EU-wide postal service. The EU dislikes national organisations because they are part of the fabric of national member-states which the EU wants to make less and less relevant.
Further, private companies can now demand that Royal Mail handles their post on their behalf at up to nine pence a packet cheaper than 2nd class charges. To make matters worse, the government has taken other business, such as payment of pensions into bank accounts, and issuing TV licences, away from post offices. In other words, Royal Mail and the post offices were set up to fail. West Midland MP’s and councillors who so loudly lament the loss of local offices have access to this information. If they are doing their job properly they know, or should know, about these Directives.
Why are they so silent about the central role of the EU in the dismemberment of Royal Mail and in post office closures? Presumably they do not want the public to know too much about the antisocial and profoundly undemocratic nature of the European Union.
Mike Lynch, Suckling Green Lane, Codsall, Wolverhampton.
5 Comments
Yes, many services were taken away from post offices.
Its what you do when you try and cut costs. Order books and giros were common but far more expensive than paying into a bank account (as well as being less secure).
Road tax? Long queues and needing a few items of paperwork spring to mind. Whereas online its convenient, no paperwork to show, merely a code to enter and card details to enter.
The post offices were set up to cost the government money. How much money should be spent, mostly for private businesses to benefit?
What services do the post offices provide that no-one else does?
Ah, I can still remember when we had two deliveries a day, post would travel the land for next day delivery and parcel post was a few days delivery time.
What do we have now? One delivery, usually in the afternoon. International carriers from abroad delivering stuff faster than parcel post from within this country.
Oh, and we also have a lot less money spent on one type of business.
Martin Davies is completely wrong about the EU’s effect on postal closures. This is a myth spread via the back door by the Labour Government to ease its conscience and the Tories because they also closed 3500 post offices and like blaming foreigners for everything.
The EU Postal Directive states that postal collection and delivery MUST be maintained even in the most remote areas by the Universal Service Provider, Royal Mail regardless of cost or competition.
It does not in any way dictate the size of the post office network as that is for the nation state to decide. It specifically allows for government subsidy of rural post offices to ensure the continuation of what it calls a vital service. It also allows Post Office Ltd to do so without competition. Successive British Governments have subsidised rural post offices to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds without breaching any EU directive or receiving a complaint from the EU.
The British Labour Government decided which post offices it wanted to close just as the British Conservative Government did before.
The British Labour Government and Royal Mail restricted Post Office Ltd from offering a choice of postal services against the suggestion of the EU.
The increase in emails, Direct Debits for things like TV licences, on-line car taxation and passport processing and the payment of benefits straight into bank accounts made sure that Post Offices lost money.
It would still be possible to make many post offices viable if the government had the will and the EU Postal Directive would support that. If we want to save our Post Offices, it’s the Government we should be fighting, not the EU.
Neville Farmer
Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Spokesman, Wyre Forest
Neville, you’ve been listening to your own party too much. Try reality for once.
Yes, the post office lost money when people started using other ways to buy or send things. They were costing money for years - giros cost many times more to cash than a bank payment!
The problem now is that many post offices are confused with shops. The owners of the shops can keep them open or shut them - the post office counters part isn’t anything like as profitable as it was a decade ago.
People buy goods and services elsewhere now - so why should one particular business be subsidised rather than others?
People seem to complain enough about Northern Rock being subsidised, yet its exactly what the post office has had for decades!
My apologies to Martin Davies. My point was aimed at the original letter writer, Mike Lynch, who seemed to think Post Offices were closing because of the EU, based on hackneyed UKIP myths and fibs.
However, Martin, the “reality” you lay claim to is at odds with your “survival of the fittest” attitude. While I agree with you that Post Offices have a hard time remaining viable, their demise is not inevitable and surely their role in society makes them worth supporting.
Post Offices are vital links with the community for many less fortunate than you or me. Are you really saying “tough luck” to those people, most of whom are among the most needy?
Much of our national infrastructure would not stand up on its own without taxpayer’s support. But that doesn’t mean it is not worth saving. Left entirely to fend for themselves, most hospitals, bus services, railways etc. would not break even. Does that mean you’d support their closure, as well?
There are two parts to most post offices. The shop part and the post counters part.
The shop part can remain open - if the owner decides to do so. Most post offices are privately owned.
Can be purchased by the locals if they feel strongly enough about keeping the shop part open.
Thats the part that tends to be the vital part of the community.
The post counters part is the bit that is closing in many places. Its been on the cards for a while - what with the internet, people wanting more convenience, other shops selling stamps and the move of benefits to mostly bank accounts.
The question becomes how long should government prop up what is mostly private enterprise?
I’ve no problem with totally government owned stuff being propped up by government. Schools, hospitals etc.
Bus services are partly propped up by money for ‘free travel’. Be simpler if everyone paid but I can’t see any government doing that.
But government is at least paying for a service.
With the post offices, what services should be paid for? If they are that essential to the community, the owner can decide to keep them going because of the profit they are making.
Though like any small shop, they are in competition with other shops selling goods much cheaper (supermarkets).