§ 1. Sir G. Nabarroasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will state the cumulative Giro losses to 31st December, 1971, or latest convenient date; when he intends to eliminate losses; and how he proposes to finance the losses.
§ The Minister of Posts and Telecommunications (Mr. Christopher Chataway)Cumulative losses to March, 1971, of £13.7 million were financed by the Post Office. As foreshadowed in my statement on 17th November last year, the service is being reshaped by the Post Office so as to make it profitable. New financial objectives will be agreed with the Board as soon as this reconstruction is completed.—[Vol. 826, c. 424.]
§ Sir G. NabarroHaving regard to the fact that the Government refuse to underwrite the losses of the Coal Board by subsidy, why should the Minister continue to underwrite the losses of this nationalised industry, the Post Office Giro, which up to December had already lost £20 million and is still losing money—a drain on taxpayers like myself?
§ Mr. ChatawayThere is no question of the Government underwriting these losses. As my hon. Friend will know, Cooper Bros. were employed as consultants to consider the future of Giro and came to the conclusion that it should not be closed. On that basis, the Post Office was authorised to proceed to the reconstruction that I have described.
§ Mr. CrawshawIs the right hon. Gentleman surprised that Giro has had difficulty when so many of his hon. Friends are seeking to sell it or to get rid of it? Is not the answer to the problem to make certain of the continued existence of Giro by saying that nothing will happen to it for the next five years so that public confidence can be restored? Is it likely that people will open accounts with Giro when hon. Gentlemen opposite are saying week after week that it should be got rid of? Will the right hon. Gentleman say that it is proposed to continue Giro indefinitely?
§ Mr. ChatawayI certainly would not say of any activity of the Post Office or of any other nationalised industry that it would necessarily be continued indefinitely. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?] Any activity has to pay its way. If any service were to make a substantial loss over a period, naturally its future would be looked at. I gave the Government's decision in my statement in November, and I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's suggestiton that the nature of the difficulties relates to the criticisms made of Giro. It is clear that it got off to a bad start.
§ Mr. WaddingtonIs my right hon. Friend aware that the most flagrant abuses of the system came to light in a criminal trial in Manchester last autumn? Is he satisfied that those who are required to operate Giro know how the system works, or is supposed to work, and is he satisfied that opportunities for abuse have, as far as possible, been closed?
§ Mr. ChatawayI am completely satisfied that the Post Office has taken extremely seriously the incidents to which my hon. and learned Friend has referred.
§ Mr. Gregor MackenzieWe on this side welcome the Minister's decision, not least because of the unemployment throughout the country. We hope that now the uncertainty has been removed he and his colleagues will do what they can to publicise the advantage of Giro. I press him, as I have sometimes done before, to say what he feels about the suggestion contained in page 4 of the Post Office Report that in all appropriate circumstances Government Departments should give a lead by using the Giro services.
§ Mr. ChatawayThe Government's position is that Government Departments should be free to choose the service which is best suited to them. This leaves them absolutely free to choose Giro if they believe it is the best service from their point of view.