Dear Mr Nickolls,
Objection to Post Office Closures – The Wider Picture
My local post office is scheduled for closure. I do not wish to object on my own behalf, even though my wife and I will be seriously inconvenienced by the extra regular travel and cost involved. That would be selfish. I wish to object on wider grounds. Unlike the Government, and now Post Office Ltd, which show contempt for people through socially injurious actions, we care for the wider community.
Post Office Ltd claims to be conducting a public consultation, but that is a mockery. The document entitled, “Network Change Programme: Area Plan Proposal – Devon” highlights the problem in its opening paragraphs on page 5. THE PROBLEM IS THE GOVERNMENT. What is being called a consultation is nothing of the sort. If I fight against the closure of my post office and succeed, others are going to lose theirs. What a Government we have! Instead of caring for people, it practises the same barbaric principles as the Roman ‘games’, viz. throw them into the ring to fight for their survival, let the weakest die, and let the survivors live until the next ‘games’.
The Government have Post Office Ltd by the throat. The Post Office is helpless against the economic factors created by its persecutor, and we, the British citizens, are the ones who have to suffer. How clearly the situation is revealed by the word “prescribed” in the sixth paragraph of the Introduction!
The Government is not alone in recognising that fewer people are using Post Office
branches, from which it tries to shift the blame even though it is the major cause.
Of course, there are other factors in our changing society, but the response to these
should not be to do a Beeching on ‘the Network’. (Please make a Google search on
‘Beeching’ and note informed opinions on the success or failure of implementing his
‘infamous’ Report.) The Government has the advantage of having historical evidence
of the consequences of this type of action, but seems to be blind to it. Is ‘pig-
How should Post Office Ltd respond to this situation? Should it be lying down and passively submitting to the Government’s diktats, or should it be standing up for the people and resisting such obvious loss of vision and lack of understanding of our needs? It is difficult to respect a Government which claims a ‘green’ policy, and then increases the need for people, including the disabled and elderly, to travel further on a regular and essential basis.
The DTI’s “The Post Office Network: A Consultation Document – December 2006” is of exactly the same type as the current ‘consultation’. It is a complete mockery because of its engineered origins. Just look at its introductory paragraph:
Post offices play an important social and economic role in the communities they serve. With new technology, changing lifestyles and a wider choice of accessing services, people are visiting post offices less. The network’s losses have risen to almost £4 million a week this year and it is unsustainable in its present form. But it remains the Government’s priority to maintain a national post office network with national coverage.
The Network seems in pretty dire straits. In 2004, the Government introduced Direct Payment of state pensions, seriously undermining the profitability of Post Office branches. The first sentence of this quote is spot on. The second sentence sounds plausible, but obfuscates and conceals the Government’s responsibility and culpability for fewer visits to post offices. The third sentence is designed to make us throw up our hands in horror at the Post Office, and the fourth is meaningless platitude if comparable to other governmental assurances. Were this claim true, actions would not contradict such an assertion. Much can be learned about government, both national and local, from the techniques employed in this paragraph.
It seems that some eminent luminary was struck by a bright idea to save a bit of money using modern technology. This was implemented in 2004 without being properly thought through. Money was put before people’s needs, and the measure was foisted on us. There was no consultation of which I was aware. I was just told what was going to happen. I’m no Luddite, but I strongly object to being forced towards putting all my eggs into one electronic basket. This is especially relevant, given the Government’s dismal record on data security, and the high incidence of internet fraud and identity theft. We are all being made extremely vulnerable by the destruction of diversity and harmful centralisation. This vision of electronic Utopia is seriously flawed for many reasons, and further demonstrates the degree to which these measures lack proper planning and preparation.
By 2006, it seems that the Government began to realise the damage it had caused, tried to explain it away by citing other contributory factors, and instituting a ‘consultation’ to cover its dilemma with a semblance of democracy. I fail to see how a consultation can be valid if its terms are already decided and the process straitjacketed. The Government’s Response of May 2007 similarly lacks validity. This current ‘consultation’ by Post Office Ltd is of an identical nature, as I have already pointed out.
I am not into party politics, but I am becoming extremely concerned with the quality and characteristics of government and the lack of respect for democracy. I hate hypocrisy, and British soldiers are dying in Afghanistan and Iraq, ostensibly fighting for democracy, while both national and local government deny it in reality to the citizens of this country. The pattern is the same. Someone in high authority conceives or is fed an idea which seems attractive, and is adopted without rigorous examination and adequate foresight. This is then bulldozed through regardless, and to our certain knowledge at local government level, using untruthful statements, bullying tactics, and a refusal to engage or account. (See www.ivorytowerexeter.co.uk and www.summerway.org for details and documented examples.) In time, the flaws are revealed, and instead of working issues out, government displays wilfulness and obstinacy. No wonder much of the electorate feels disillusioned with politics and politicians.
Beeching left behind a railway network which has proved inadequate for the country’s needs. I have no wish to suggest that the network of post offices should remain frozen, but the closure of a further 2,500 branches is falling into the same error as the railways. The Post Office is one of the nation’s services, and should be supported by government. An adequate network is essential, and the Government is clearly seriously mishandling the situation. It puts considerations of personal wealth before almost everything, no matter how much hardship this causes to community and citizens. Consequently, it is responsible for the rich/poor divide, which is unquestionably the source of many evils facing our modern society.
In conclusion, the documents produced by the DTI and Post Office Ltd are not genuine consultations, even though they may appear well written, detailed and plausible. They give lip service to social aspects while creating hardship, especially for the vulnerable and elderly. An ATM is in no way equivalent to a postmaster for this section of the population, whatever the Government thinks. The Government is missing the wider picture. I object, therefore, to the scale of the closures, and urge Post Office Ltd to go back to the DTI and demand that it rethinks its socially damaging policies. Instead of depriving the post offices of their bread and butter, government should be providing them with the services and business necessary for branches to serve their communities.
From a great many conversations, it is clear that the sentiments of this objection are almost universal. Please test whether this Government really wishes to hurt us. If it persists, we will know how to react at future general elections.
Yours sincerely,
Jim Harle.
Post Office Closures -
These views of the so-
This submission was posted 28th June in letter form, and also sent the following day by email to guarantee a copy being received by the closing date of 30th June 2008.
Its inclusion on this website is due to a perceived pattern of behaviour between national and local government in their seeming wish to kill off Post Offices and Summerway Tennis respectively. Their motives are a matter for speculation.