§ 25. Mr. Nabarroasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that postal staff at the House of Commons date-stamp outgoing letters by hand, involving hundreds of thousands of manually applied date-stamps monthly; what steps he has taken to assess the wastage of labour; and, having regard to the near uniformity of House of Commons envelopes, whether he will consult with Her Majesty's Stationery Office to arrange complete uniformity of envelopes for letterheads, followed by complete mechanisation of date stamping.
§ Miss PikeThe amount of mail handled at the House of Commons Post Office is not far short of the normal standard for provision of a date stamping machine. Accommodation in the post office is, however, limited, and because of the incidence of work at the office any savings of time arising from the introduction of a machine could not be recovered. In consequence, I am satisfied that no change should be made at present.
The lack of uniformity of envelope sizes is a drawback in the field of postal mechanisation generally, but I could not claim that it is a critical hindrance to mechanised date stamping.
§ Mr. NabarroYes, but is my hon. Friend aware that the General Post Office is notoriously reticent in mechanisation programmes—
§ Mr. StracheyThe expert on reticence.
§ Mr. Nabarro—and as now we are all having to pay 3d. for an ordinary letter instead of 2½d., instead of 2d. at an earlier date, would not it be appropriate if my right hon. Friend examined his costs for letters with a view to increasing mechanisation and putting the cost of postage back where it should be, namely, 2d. for an ordinary letter?
§ Miss PikeI assure my hon. Friend that we are neither reticent in going forward with and talking about mechanisation nor backward with the schemes which we are pressing forward at present.