Lord Rix (Crossbench)

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will suspend the imminent closure of post offices pending the judicial review of their proposals.

Lord Davies of Oldham (Deputy Chief Whip (House of Lords), HM Household; Labour)

My Lords, the Government continue to disagree strongly with the claims being made in relation to post offices through the attempts at judicial review. They will continue to defend their position, and consequently see no reason to require Post Office Ltd to delay the implementation of its network change programme. Suspension would bring uncertainty for sub-postmasters and customers alike, and add significant costs to Post Office Ltd. It would therefore not be appropriate to suspend the closure programme.

Lord Rix (Crossbench)

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that response. Are not the closures completely at odds with many of the Government's stated objectives of reducing social exclusion among old people, especially people with disabilities, who should of course be protected by the Disability Discrimination Act 2005? Furthermore, what about curbing carbon emissions? I should have thought that the buses that will be taking protesting pensioners to far-flung post offices would count for the Government in that regard. Also, if the Government lose out on the judicial review, which I believe will take place in October, instigated, incidentally, by two disabled pensioners, Jonathan Coe and Judy Brown, will not the cost of reinstating 2,500 post offices outweigh the cost of keeping them open until the result of the review is known?

Lord Davies of Oldham (Deputy Chief Whip (House of Lords), HM Household; Labour)

My Lords, the Post Office is obliged to meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act and intends to do so—and the Government will insist that that is the case. But the noble Lord will recognise the obvious fact that usage of post offices is declining at a very significant rate indeed. Only last year, eight out of 10 pensioners had their payments made direct and not through post offices; this year it is nine out of 10. The simple fact of the matter is that people are making their decisions on their own account, which is severely affecting the business of post offices. That is bound to lead to some reductions in the number of post offices.

Baroness Wilcox (Shadow Minister, Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform; Conservative)

My Lords, as this is a DBERR Question, may we on these Benches say how sorry we are to hear of the sickness of the noble Lord, Lord Jones? We wish him a swift recovery. Nobody could be a more enthusiastic and energetic salesman, and the House is the poorer for his absence. I shall miss him tomorrow very much on the Energy Bill, which we on these Benches regard as so important for this country.

Does not the recent accidental publication of a list of post offices earmarked for closure reveal that the consultation process is actually a sham?

Lord Davies of Oldham (Deputy Chief Whip (House of Lords), HM Household; Labour)

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for her comments about my noble friend and, of course, we all join in wishing him a speedy recovery—and I most of all, as an inadequate substitute on this Question.

The Post Office will fulfil its obligations on consultation and they will affect the decisions on particular post offices. That is the responsibility of the Post Office. But we should recognise that from 1999 to 2005, to help the Post Office adapt to market changes, we committed £2 billion. We have committed a further £1.7 billion up to 2011 to protect the social role of the network, which I know the whole House values. That does not alter the fact, as I have said, that due to the change in consumer demand, some post offices will inevitably close.

Lord Harrison (Labour)

My Lords, in relation to the £1.7 billion for those remaining 11,500 post offices, will my noble friend note with sadness that shadow person Alan Duncan has failed to commit any incoming Conservative Government to support that match funding? Will my noble friend concentrate particularly on the concept of the one-stop shop in our smaller communities, such as villages, whereby we can collocate public services such as post offices in one venue, such as a church, or a local pub, library or shop? We need to be visionary about this.

Lord Davies of Oldham (Deputy Chief Whip (House of Lords), HM Household; Labour)

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that latter point, which is a constructive one on how we can provide postal services, not necessarily at permanent post offices but through different arrangements, such as the one-stop shop.

On the issue of whether the Conservative Opposition are anything else except critical and are never constructive, I am sure that the House is the best judge of that.

Lord Roberts of Llandudno (Spokesperson in the Lords, International Development; Liberal Democrat)

My Lords, is it not true that the reason for fewer customers using the post offices is that they are not selling things such as motor taxation or television licences, so people cannot go there and get those things? We stress the importance of strong communities as a bulwark against the demise of law and order. Is it not true that the post office is at the heart of the community and for that reason should be defended?

Lord Davies of Oldham (Deputy Chief Whip (House of Lords), HM Household; Labour)

My Lords, necessary post office services are important to communities. That is why, as I have indicated, the Government have put £1.7 billion into protecting the role of Post Office Ltd. The noble Lord says that people cannot go to post offices for these other services, but they can. The difference is that they do not do so because pensioners have their pensions paid directly into their bank accounts.

Baroness Miller of Hendon (Conservative)

My Lords, when the Postal Services Bill was in this House, I was leading for it. I remember saying to the Minister, who is not the Minister on the Front Bench at this time, that taking away the payment of pensions through post offices was the beginning of the end for post offices. If I may follow on from the noble Lord, Lord Harrison, post offices in country areas provide an important service. Does the Minister not agree that getting your pension through the bank is different? You do not then go to the post office for other services, such as bread and all the other things that are sold there. It is an enormous pity that a service offered throughout the country has been ruined for everybody.

Lord Davies of Oldham (Deputy Chief Whip (House of Lords), HM Household; Labour)

My Lords, the noble Baroness must accept that the pattern of consumption of Post Office services has changed. To take the obvious point, why are we providing the opportunity for people to renew their car tax online or by telephone? It is easier for the consumer; the take-up is significant. Of course that has an impact on the Post Office, but is the noble Baroness really suggesting that we should freeze in time all services provided by the Post Office, in order that its business should continue, while consumers' interests are set, relatively, at nought?

Baroness Ashton of Upholland (President of the Council, Privy Council Office; Labour)

My Lords, we are out of time.