HL Deb 15 January 1988 vol 491 cc1445-6

11.18 a.m.

Lord Ferrier

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will exercise their powers under Section 3 of the Telecommunications Act 1984 to ensure that discussions are held by British Telecom with the Post Office to make the Telemessage service proposals available to the public.

Lord Beaverbrook

My Lords, in this instance it is the Director General of Telecommunications rather than Ministers to whom the Telecommunications Act gives relevant powers. However, I can confirm to my noble friend that British Telecom and the Post Office have voluntarily entered into discussions about Telemessage.

Lord Ferrier

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his reply, which I welcome. is he aware that a Motion for short debate that I have suggested has been standing on the books awaiting the result of a ballot since July last year? Hope springs eternal in the human breast and as the winners will be pulled from the hat on the 20th January, we may be able to have a short debate on this topic on the 10th February. Does he agree that as the subject is very complicated, perhaps we can extend the debate?

Lord Beaverbrook

My Lords, I am afraid I have to tell my noble friend that I do not possess magical powers, but I wish him the very best of luck in being successful on this occasion.

Lord Williams of Elvel

My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that the noble Lord, Lord Ferrier, has been and is extremely persistent in his pursuit of this point, and is quite right to be so? It is a relatively small problem which affects a certain number of people living in rural areas who need to send messages quickly, often messages of a life or death nature. Is the noble Lord aware that we are glad that British Telecom and the Post Office have voluntarily agreed to enter into negotiations? However, will he also use ministerial powers to ensure that the Post Office, which he can direct, brings these discussions to an appropriate conclusion?

Lord Beaverbrook

My Lords, I should like to join the noble Lord in expressing admiration for the persistence of my noble friend in this matter. However, my understanding is that there would be little wider benefit for the user in making the service available at post offices. Telemessage promises delivery of a message the next day. The advantages for the consumer are that it requires only a quick telephone call from home or from a nearby callbox. If a customer goes to a post office, there are already similar post office services which assure next-day delivery.

However, British Telecom and the Post Office are considering the issue again, but I must emphasise that this is a commercial matter for their judgment.

Lord Orr-Ewing

My Lords, does this matter—which is rather important to some people—not also lie within the responsibility of Oftel and the Director General, Mr. Bryan Carsberg? He has an interest in considering whether BT is carrying out its functions efficiently and economically. This service lays down that there is a minimum charge of £4 for 50 words. Sometimes messages are much shorter than that, and few people carry eight 50p pieces and no telephone coinbox allows for £1 coins at this stage. All these matters are against the user expanding what could be a useful service.

Lord Beaverbrook

My Lords, I do not want to comment further on the merits or the cost of the British Telecom overnight service or the Post Office overnight service. However, British Telecom's licence includes obligations to consider social factors and to provide, for example, services to rural areas for the disabled, directory information services and a public emergency calls service. The Director General of Oftel ensures that BT complies with its licence conditions.

Baroness Strange

My Lords, does the Minister agree that a century ago in London a person could send out an invitation to tea, receive an answer to that invitation, have the person to tea, and read the thank-you letter, all on the same day? Now, assuming that he has a telephone, he can receive a telemessage only the next day. Does the Minister agree that that is progress?

Lord Beaverbrook

My Lords, I find it difficult to comment on what was possible 100 years ago. I am sure that many noble Lords and many outside your Lordships' House will regret the passing of the telegram service in 1982. However, the widespread use of the telephone led to the service becoming very uneconomic, with losses at that time of up to £50 million a year.

Lord Ferrier

My Lords, perhaps I may raise two small supplementary points relating to the reply of the Minister. This is not solely a commercial matter. The noble Baroness, Lady Strange, has pointed out that there is an obligation on government to provide some means for brief and urgent private messages to be sent. Is the Minister aware that I am already in correspondence with the Director General of Oftel and with the Post Office?—and very comprehensive my correspondence has been.

Lord Beaverbrook

My Lords, yes. I have seen much of the noble Lord's correspondence, and indeed it has been very comprehensive.

On my noble friend's first point on the sending of immediate life or death messages, from time to time the position is reviewed by BT. I understand that BT is exploring the possibilities of special arrangements for life or death messages.