§ 10. Mr. PickthallTo ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the external financing limit for the Post Office in the next two financial years.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Technology (Mr. Patrick McLoughlin)The external financing limits for the Post Office for 1994–95 and 1995–96 are, respectively, minus £226 million and minus £213 million.
§ Mr. PickthallDoes the Minister agree that, in essence, that is an extra tax on the Post Office and thus on post office users? How does he justify to those post office users the fact that that gleaning of money from the Post Office will increase by more than 150 per cent. in the next three years? Does he agree with the Post Office Users National Council that that will mean lower capital investment, job losses, poorer quality services in parts of the Post Office and, most importantly, that it might prevent the Post Office from cashing in on its commercial success and becoming a world beater in its area?
§ Mr. McLoughlinI can think of no part of that question with which I agree. The hon. Gentleman talks about capital investment. Between 1976 and 1979, capital investment was some £89 million, compared with £900 million over the next three years. Under the last five years of a Labour Government, postal charges increased 122 per cent.—compared with 31 per cent. over the last five years of this Government.
§ Mr. JenkinWill my hon. Friend confirm that BT contributes substantially more to the Exchequer as a result of being privatised and able to develop its services? Could not the same principles be applied to the Post Office, or at least to part of it?
§ Mr. McLoughlinI am grateful for my hon. Friend's views. The Government are conducting a wide-ranging review of the Post Office and will bear in mind my hon. Friend's representations.
§ Mr. Robin CookIs the Minister aware that that wide-ranging review has been going on for 18 months while the Government dither over what to do with the Post Office? Does he have any idea of the damage done by that prolonged delay? Has he seen the statement by the chairman of the Post Office that that delay has already caused a sense of crisis and may cause a spiral of decline? Why does the Minister not admit today—and thus end the uncertainty—that the Government cannot find a way of privatising the Post Office which would not place at risk thousands of Post Office branches, and that the best way of keeping the Post Office successful is to retain it in the public sector where it can provide a public service?
§ Mr. McLoughlinThe hon. Gentleman must be patient. No doubt he will attack whatever conclusions we reach as a result of the review. As to post office closures, 19,000 of the country's 20,000 post offices are already private businesses.
§ Mr. Clifton-BrownMy hon. Friend will be aware that electronic mail is a fast-growing business world wide. What discussions has he had with the Post Office to ensure that it develops a share of that business?
§ Mr. McLoughlinA number of matters are continually being discussed with the Post Office. One aspect being taken into account in the review is the way in which the Post Office may want to compete in other markets and the best way for it to do so.
§ Mr. Malcolm BruceDoes the Minister accept that it is Government humbug to impose strict external financing limits on public bodies and then to argue that because they are so restricted those bodies must be privatised? Is not the reality that the Post Office is and will continue to be an essential public service which requires a monopoly to enable it to deliver mail to every household in the land? It needs relaxed external financing limits, to enable it to compete internationally, rather than more Government restrictions.
§ Mr. McLoughlinI will not take any lessons in humbug from the hon. Gentleman. No doubt he would have made the same argument in respect of BT and all the other privatisations that this Government took forward. They have been most successful, bringing expansion and better markets, leading to benefits for the consumer.