§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Kirkhope.].
10.30 pm§ Ms. Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent,North)I am particularly grateful for the opportunity to raise in this Adjournment debate the issue of Burslem post office and the Post Office Counters Ltd. proposal to downgrade that post office. Only last night, the leader of the city of Stoke-on-Trent collected an "England for Excellence" award from the English Tourist Board. It is remarkable that the city has won that award. That is good news for Stoke-on-Trent and for tourism and it has a great deal to do with this Adjournment debate about the proposed closure of Burslem post office.
Burslem is the mother town of the Potteries, with the greatest concentration of historic buildings, and the only one of the six towns whose entire centre is a designated conservation area. Not everyone knows about the Potteries. [Interruption.] I have just heard Conservative Members referring to Arnold Bennett. Were he living today, he would no doubt be writing in great detail in journals and novels about the history of Burslem—or Bursley, as he referred to it. I am sure that he would refer in great detail to the ridiculous and unbelievable proposals by the Post Office to downgrade the purpose-built Crown post office located in the centre of Burslem.
Those who are not familiar with the work of Arnold Bennett and those who have not visited Burslem should be aware that many poeple visit Burslem via the canals. Hundreds of thousands of visitors come from all over the world to visit the mother town of the pottery industry. They come from America and all over. The fact that Stoke-on-Trent city council won that major tourism award shows that we intend to bring even more people to Burslem, but that will not happen if the Government have their way and allow Post Office Counters Ltd. to downgrade our purpose-built Crown post office.
Burslem may be the best of the pottery towns, and we are very parochial in Stoke-on-Trent, but it must be said that of late Burslem has become a run-down town. Many shops in the centre have closed down and industry in the centre of the town is having great difficulty, not least because of the Government's economic policies. Despite that, however, the city council is doing all that it can to revitalise the area, in close co-operation with local residents, local councillors, the local chamber of commerce, local industry and everyone with a legitimate interest in Burslem. That is being done in close co-operation with the Civic Trust, which to its credit has chosen to work with us in Burslem in much the same way as it has worked with other major cities, such as Halifax where the work has resulted in a major revitalisation.
I am not sure whether the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs should reply to this debate—perhaps he oversees post offices—or whether it should be a Minister from the Department of the Environment who oversees the revitalisation of inner-city areas. Either way, it makes no difference, because the issue is what the Government intend to do to assist inner-city areas such as Burslem and a Minister from either Department should make sure that his colleagues in other Departments know of the needs of Burslem.
679 Some of the successes of Stoke-on-Trent city council include its commitment to a rolling programme of £50,000 per annum to be invested in the regeneration of Burslem over the next five years. That has the full support of Staffordshire county council. The city council, has consulted some 70 local organisations about a local draft plan which is going full speed ahead with the full co-operation of the Civic Trust. Part of that includes plans to go ahead with the St. John's square lighting scheme for one of the principal public places in the town centre.
The city council is holding a major survey of the old town hall, which is a grade 2 listed building, and its work to increase the leisure activities will be a major asset to the town. It is going ahead with the Waterloo road face-lift scheme, at a cost of about £71,000 in phase 1 and £63,000 in phase 2. It is also acutely aware of the problem of car parking and has a project for the Nicholas street community car park.
Cultural activities add to the quality of life. I am thinking particularly of the Burslem road race and the Potteries folk festival which we may develop even further in view of the increasing emphasis on tourism. We have a continuing strategy to work towards re-establishing an open market in the centre of town. Work has already commenced on a by-pass which will take traffic out of the town centre. There is a major investment of about £200,000 by Staffordshire county council in the Burslem enterprise centre. Up to 40 units will be created once it is completed. I have the fullest regard for the work of my colleague, councillor Mike Tappin, in that respect.
The city council has plans to work jointly with English Heritage and its historic buildings fund. Royal Doulton, a key industry in Burslem, has selected a site in front of the old town hall to erect the Sir Henry Doulton statue. The magnificent old town hall and Queen's theatre complex is about to be revamped and again key money will be spent on making it a centre for cultural activities of one kind or another. Just down the road we have started to build the northern area leisure centre. Clearly a great deal is happening in Burslem.
In this key town in the very centre of the Potteries is the purpose-built Crown post office erected in 1937. Over the years, the post office staff have provided an important service to our local community. Every resident and everyone connected with Burslem in any way wants the post office to remain in the purpose-built building, providing the service that its trained staff have performed so carefully over the years.
In the midst of all that, the Post Office delivers a body blow to Burslem. There has been no recognition from the Commission, the Department of the Environment or the Government generally of the real need to revitalise Burslem. They have rejected all our attempts—every effort that we have made—to get special inner-city status for Burslem. We have not had the help which the Government say that they are giving to inner-city areas such as Burslem. We have not had the help which it was suggested in the Queen's Speech that the Government would give to inner-city areas. Instead, the Government are standing over the counter services of post offices and suggesting that Crown post offices can be downgraded. It is a body blow for Burslem and we do not wish to see the downgrading take place.
680 The Post Office has refused to have any genuine consultation procedure for its plans and future proposals for the Crown post office at Burslem. The problem is not confined to Burslem. In north Staffordshire—at Kidsgrove, in my constituency—there has been a similar proposal, as there has at Stone, which has been met by a vigorous campaign. It is important to put the proposals into a national context and to recognise that it is proposed to downgrade 380 Crown post offices. Burslem is not alone.
Given the joint partnership scheme that we have with the Civic Trust and the unique consultation exercise that the city of Stoke-on-Trent has undertaken in Burslem, it is not for the Post Office to say that the post office must be downgraded. We do not even have an assurance that the service will be continued in the purpose-built building. The letter that I received from Mr. Grey, who has been responsible for the Post Office's plans, suggests that he will be looking for other accommodation in the town. It is unacceptable that our assets should be sold off, or got rid of, to enable the Post Office to run a service elsewhere. The Government are not providing a subsidy for an important local service and everything is being done at Burslem's expense. Main post offices have served the local community diligently for many years. They have provided a professional, courteous and confidential service. I say to all those involved with the communication workers that we support the work that they are doing.
As I have said, the consultation exercise on which the Post Office has embarked has been a sham. When there were rumours that the Post Office would seek to downgrade the Crown post office at Burslem, I at once contacted the Post Office and Mr. Grey. Public meetings were organised immediately in Burslem, and I organised a meeting with Mr. Grey. He said that it was pure speculation and that there was no intention on the Post Office's part to consider either the closure or downgrading of Burslem Crown post office.
Extensive details have been given as to why the downgrading should not take place at this time. The Civic Trust remains as committed as I am, and as local residents and the city council are, to ensuring that the post office retains its Crown status in its purpose-built building. The debate provides an opportunity to ask the Government exactly what help they are prepared to give. Will the Post Office ride roughshod over local people in each and every one of the 380 towns where the consultation procedure is taking place? When the consultation procedure ends, will it say, "The Post Office has not really listened to what you have said and has not taken into account all the work that the city council and the Civic Trust have done; we shall downgrade the Crown post office and the service can go to any other building"? That will undermine every initiative that the city council, with the support of the entire community, is taking in Burslem.
I welcome the opportunity to hear from the Minister exactly how he intends to ensure that, at least in Burslem, the Post Office undertakes a proper consultation exercise, listens to local people and allows us to keep our Crown post office in the building specially built for it in the centre of Burslem.
The one message that I want to get across today is that just as this is the mother of Parliaments, Burslem is the mother town of the Potteries and in no circumstances do we want our post office downgraded.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Industry and Consumer Affairs (Mr. Edward Leigh)I am delighted to have this opportunity to reply to the hon. Memlber for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms. Walley). I congratulate her on drawing a place in the ballot and also on being a fine ambassador for Stoke-on-Trent. It did not surprise me that, when my hon. Friend the Member for Dorset, North (Mr. Baker) made a literary allusion, the hon. Lady was quick off the mark and topped it with one of her own.
I am delighted to be supported by my hon. Friends this evening. I am not sure whether you, Mr. Speaker, are aware that this is the first time that I have had the opportunity to speak from the Dispatch Box.
§ Mr. SpeakerThat is why I am here.
§ Mr. Nicholas Baker (Dorset, North)It is the first of many speeches.
§ Mr. LeighI hope that it will be the first of many.
The debate gives me an opportunity to explain Government policy in two areas about which we feel strongly and to which we are entirely committed—urban regeneration and the provision of efficient post office services. I shall start with urban regeneration because the hon. Lady dealt with that at some length. We wish to establish a climate of enterprise led by industry and commerce, which will lead to a lasting revival in our inner-city areas. We believe that that primarily depends on the effective working of the market. However, the Government recognise the need for effective Government assistance to those areas that traditionally have faced difficulties. This is contrary to the impression given by the hon. Lady. The Government have committed up to £4 billion in their action for cities programme. It is a record of which the Government can be proud, and it shows our commitment to the area.
§ Ms. WalleyHad I realised that this was the first time that the Minister had appeared at the Dispatch Box, I too would have added my congratulations. Can he tell us exactly how much money has been allocated to Stoke-on-Trent?
§ Mr. LeighI am delighted to answer the hon. Lady. During recent years, Stoke-on-Trent has benefited from substantial aid under the Government's inner-city programmes. For example, since 1979–80, more than £14 million has been paid in derelict land grant to assist with the cost of land reclamation. The Government are aware of the problems and are committed to helping.
It must be said that inner-city regeneration is not just a job for the Government. It is being achieved through the joint efforts of many organisations and individuals who have a stake in the future of our inner cities. Local problems will benefit most from a local approach. The project to which the hon. Lady referred is an example involving the local authority, voluntary organisations and the private sector in action to conserve and improve an historic centre. The House listened with care to what the hon. Lady said about the historic nature of the centre of Burslem and sympathised with her point of view.
The hon. Lady drew attention to the place of Burslem main post office in the regeneration of the town. In the short time available, I shall try to explain the 682 Government's position on the post office, and especially their position on counter services. Post Office Counters Ltd. was incorporated in 1987 and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Post Office. Since then, it has made a small operating profit on its turnover of £875 million.
Conservative Members can be proud of the Government's record in turning this part of the Post Office service into a profitable enterprise, especially as Post Office services are increasingly becoming subject to competition. Automated funds transferred directly into bank and building society accounts provide an alternative means of delivering pension and benefit payments and for the payment of bills.
Stamps—an interesting point of which I was not aware until this week when I started to take a particular interest in these matters—are now sold in some 40,000 other retail outlets. That is the kind of competition that the Post Office is facing and meeting, and on which it is moving from success to success.
Another interesting point of which hon. Members may not be aware is that the Post Office has a network of more than 20,000 post offices throughout the United Kingdom. That is considerably more than any bank or building society, and it is worth pointing out that it is more per head of population than in France, Germany, Japan or the United States.
In urban areas, our aim is to have nothing less than offices distributed in sufficient numbers so that no one is more than one mile from a post office, and in rural areas no more than two miles. In the United Kingdom, post offices are, rightly, easily accessible to all except those in the remotest areas. Therefore, we have made clear our commitment to the Post Office and I am more than happy to do so again today. It is also important that I make it clear that we are committed to having a post office network adequate to fulfil its statutory duties. I also know that the Post Office has made clear its own commitment to the maintenance of its network.
The hon. Lady dealt at some length with what she took to be a downgrading from Crown status to agency status, so in the few minutes available to me, let me reply to that point.
We must not forget that it has always been the case that only a small proportion of post offices, now some 1,300 out of more than 20,000, are directly owned and operated as Crown post offices by Post Office Counters. Sub post offices have always formed the vast majority of the network, and there are at present about 19,300. These are franchised by Post Office Counters to self-employed agents, sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses, the great majority of whom operate a private business alongside their post office counters.
That arrangement has worked well and brings benefits to both parties. The post office brings in a nucleus of business from regular customers who buy stamps, post parcels and collect benefits and pensions, which provide potential customers for the sub-postmaster or mistress's private business. The range of private businesses is wide, including general stores, confectioners and newsagents.
The important point which was not made by the hon. Lady, is that overhead costs are shared between the two businesses. Sub and agency offices can therefore have significant advantages over the directly run Crown offices, because the shared overheads make them generally less expensive to run.
683 That was recognised by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission in its 1988 report on the provision of counter services at Crown post offices. The report noted that, at the time, the unit costs of Crown offices could be 60 to 100 per cent. higher than those of sub offices, and it endorsed Post Office Counters' plans to convert Crown offices to agency offices.
Those conversions are part of a process, which began in 1988, of restructuring the post office network to give a more cost-effective service and, like any other retail network, to respond to movements in population.
The hon. Lady made some unpleasant remarks about downgrading. What she said was an insult to the thousands of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses who provide an excellent service, which has been recognised as such by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission and of which we should be proud.
§ Ms. WalleyDoes the Minister accept that there is a problem with security, that there has been an increase in attacks on premises which have not been purpose-built and that one asset of the Crown post office is that extra security is built into its design? Does the Minister further accept that, if a Crown post office were to be downgraded, the people there would be made more vulnerable?
§ Mr. LeighWe are determined to ensure that will not happen, and no doubt the Post Office will take full account of that aspect in the consultation process.
The hon. Lady implied that an agency post office will be less efficient than a Crown office, but there is no evidence to support that suggestion. Exactly the same services are provided by an agency office as by a Crown office. If only one thing comes out of this debate, I hope that at least that is now clear.
As to the people of Burslem—the House is concerned with the provision of services to the public, not just with status—they will receive exactly the same service as they did before.
§ Mrs. Teresa Gorman (Billericay)A better service.
§ Mr. LeighIf not a better service, as my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay (Mrs. Gorman) says.
Despite my confidence in the proposals, because of the place of the post office in a local community, changes to the network require careful consultation. I give the hon. Lady an assurance that we are insistent that such consultation will take place. I understand that Post Office Counters is currently consulting local interested parties about its proposals for the conversion of Burslem post 684 office to agency status. No final decisions will be taken until that process is completed in December. No doubt the hon. Lady will make her views known to the Post Office directly, but if it helps, I shall ensure that tonight's debate is brought to the attention of the chairman of the Post Office.
However, it would not be appropriate for me to intervene in the consultation process or in the final decision. Decisions about the day-to-day running of Post Office business, such as the type and level of service provision in particular areas, are for the Post Office board. The Government's role is rightly confined to broad issues of general policy and overall financial control.
Nevertheless, I shall make a general point about conversions. It is wrong to suggest that Crown offices are in some way intrinsically superior to agency offices. They are not. I cannot stress that enough.
Despite the competition that it faces, Post Office Counters has been able to maintain its business, by improving efficiency and competitiveness. At present, we see no reason to embrace the strategy of managed decline that was suggested in the Monopolies and Mergers Commission's recent report on counter services. We are fully committed to maintaining a network adequate to enable the Post Office to fulfil its statutory duties.
As I said, converted offices will continue to offer all the services available at the Crown offices that they replace, together with the flexibility of the sub-postmaster to offer non-Post Office business. We heard nothing on that aspect from the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North. We have a scheme to ensure that all existing services are provided, and at the same time the public will be able to profit and benefit from all the other services offered as part of the business.
Local offices are required to meet quality service standards set by the Post Office, and we recognise the vital role that they play as a focus of the community, as well as in delivering a service. Although business volume has remained more or less static in recent years, Post Office Counters performed well—meeting both its profit and cost reduction targets. We hope and expect that it will continue to operate successfully.
I am delighted to have this first opportunity to speak at the Dispatch Box, and I apologise if my delivery has been somewhat halting—but it has been a rather nerve-wracking experience. I am delighted to be able to emphasise the total commitment that this Government have to a successful and vibrant Post Office network that will meet the demands of the public right into the next century.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at one minute to Eleven o'clock.