Eileen Bell (Speaker)

Order. The Business Committee has allowed two and a half hours for this debate. The Member proposing the motion will have 15 minutes, and there will be 15 minutes for the winding-up speech. All other Members will have a maximum of 10 minutes to speak.

Lord Morrow (DUP)

On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Is it not the custom that, when you are on your feet, all Members should be in their seats? Today in particular, I noted that when you stood to announce the next item of business, Members made a point of leaving the Chamber. Will you clarify for Members — yet again — that when you are on your feet, every other Member of the House should be in his or her place?

Eileen Bell (Speaker)

I am most grateful to Lord Morrow for making that comment. Indeed, I have mentioned to the Clerks that I will raise that issue again at the tomorrow’s meeting of the Business Committee. Before Christmas, it seemed that that issue was commented on every week. I am at the stage where I may bring in my school cane — however, Members may enjoy that too much.

[Laughter.]

William Hay (DUP)

I beg to move

That this Assembly deplores the introduction of proposals by the government to close a number of Post Offices across Northern Ireland; and the implications these proposals will have for rural Post Offices.

The motion stands in my name and in the name of the Member for North Down Peter Weir. However, I will accept the amendment in the names of Mr McGlone and Mr Dallat, as it certainly adds to the motion.

The debate is important because the proposed changes will have a serious, devastating and unprecedented effect on the post office network across Northern Ireland and will lead to the closure of over 100 post offices in Northern Ireland. Members have had this debate before: in March 2000, the Government announced a review of services in the post office network across Northern Ireland. The Member for East Londonderry John Dallat tabled a motion that rightly criticised a number of issues in that review.

Mr Dallat’s motion received the House’s full support, and I hope that this motion will command the same level of support.

Out of that review, the Government announced several initiatives, the real purpose of which was to strip and downgrade essential Post Office services. The Government determined that social security benefits and other important payments would be paid directly into customers’ bank accounts.

Any business, irrespective of what it is, that loses, or is stripped of, essential services, can go only one way — it must close. It will become non-profitable and will no longer be economically viable. That has been the history of Post Office services across Northern Ireland, and the outcome of every proposal that the Government or Post Office Ltd have acted on here. In March 2004, the Government announced more initiatives, which, they claimed, were about transforming Post Office branches in Northern Ireland. Those initiatives led to the closure of almost 20 post offices.

Alistair Darling is the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry at Westminster. I do not know whose darling he is, but after this debate he will probably not be the darling of this House. In December 2006, he announced a restructuring plan to help modernise post offices. As I have said, every initiative from the Government or Post Office Ltd has ended in the closure of post offices. That has been the bottom line.

Every Member will agree that local post offices, whether in rural or urban areas, are a vital part of our community. The Government’s latest proposals will have a major impact, especially in rural communities across the country. The closure of village post offices will have a disastrous effect on rural life. I acknowledge that the plans will also result in the closure of urban post offices, but my information suggests that the rural community will suffer more than anyone else in Northern Ireland.

Iris Robinson (DUP)

Does the Member agree that the rural community will suffer a double whammy? Not every small village or hamlet has a bank. Our roads infrastructure and bus services are so poor that even to travel to larger towns requires a major effort, meaning that rural communities are the worst hit by closures.

William Hay (DUP)

I agree with the hon Member. The figures show that the vast majority of post office closures will occur in the rural community. When considered alongside the effect that draft PPS 14 will have on rural planning, the proposed closure of rural schools, and rural transport concerns, we are all aware of the serious effect that those closures will have. The rural community is facing many other problems, but insult is added to injury when we see what the Government have planned in the way of post office closures in Northern Ireland.

Every Member would agree that rural and urban post offices form the backbone of local society and economy and that they provide essential services to the community. Post offices in Northern Ireland have been social outlets, especially for the elderly. Going to the post office is probably the only time that many elderly people get out and socialise. People in Northern Ireland have always felt that post offices provide more than a service — they are a vital social outlet.

The Government’s plans threaten the whole post office network on a large scale as never before. If the proposals go through as the Government plan, 2,500 post offices across the United Kingdom would close, including 100 in Northern Ireland. However, the tragedy is that it does not stop there. Post Office Ltd has told Government in the past few days that of the 14,300 post offices in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, it intends to operate just 4,000 in the next few years. By 2009, 2,500 post offices will have closed, but Post Office Ltd has said that it wants to go further. For commercial reasons, it would like to operate only 4,000 post offices in the United Kingdom, which is a serious situation for post offices in Northern Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales.

The closures do not affect post offices only. Many small businesses, including shops, are built around post offices in rural areas and they operate successfully. My greatest fear is that the number of intended closures will have serious financial knock-on effects for small businesses. That is a tragedy.

Members have debated this issue before. The Member for East Londonderry, John Dallat, moved a motion in the House in 2000. At that time, Members believed that the Government would listen to their views on post office closures and how we might run post offices in future. Practically all the debate fell on deaf ears. Indeed, before 2000 the Government and Post Office Ltd were determined to have fewer post offices across the United Kingdom. Eighty-two per cent of small businesses believe that the closure of post offices will have a serious effect on their business. Information from the small business sector shows that 88% of small firms send their mail through the Post Office every day and 69% send invoices: 87% of mail is business mail. That is a flavour of the real — if limited — business carried out by post offices in Northern Ireland. Just imagine the effect that the Government’s proposed post office closures would have on the small business sector in Northern Ireland.

This is not simply a matter of the closure of post offices; I believe that it will have serious consequences for the entire Northern Ireland economy. There is no doubt that the Government’s proposals — if they are allowed to get away with them — will lead to the United Kingdom being absolutely stripped of post offices, particularly in Northern Ireland.

The Government have proposed mobile post offices — that may work in England and Wales, but it will not work in Northern Ireland. That suggestion is intended to soften the blow of the closure of post offices. This House should be very critical of the Government’s proposals and should call on them to sustain our post office network, particularly in rural areas. The Government must put real finances into the post offices that are still open and operating. Those post offices want to operate and remain open for business, but we face the problem of a Government that have continually withdrawn services, leaving those offices non-profitable.

The Government tell us that the post office network is £2 million in debt, but that is simply due to the Government’s stripping of services at every opportunity. The Government say that they are examining the development of mobile post offices across Northern Ireland. The Government believe that that proposal might work, but the only measure that will work in Northern Ireland — and, I believe, in England, Scotland and Wales — is for us to clearly tell the Government that if they really want to sustain post offices in the long term, they must provide long-term finances and recognise that post office services are vitally important to the Northern Ireland economy.

John Dallat (Social Democratic and Labour Party)

I beg to move the following amendment: Leave out all after “for” and insert:

“all Post Offices, urban, suburban and rural; and calls on a future devolved administration to work in conjunction with the Post Office and the Social Security Agency to retain Post Office card accounts; and further calls for the development of other government and financial services which address the needs of recipients of state benefits and pensions, other Post Office users and future potential customers.”

I welcome the decision by Mr Hay and the DUP to accept the amendment. I am delighted that we shall be unanimous in our determination to ensure that the post office network continues to exist. Mr Hay pointed out that a previous Assembly had debated this issue. At that stage, it seemed that the future of the post office network was guaranteed, particularly in rural areas, but also in disadvantaged suburban and urban areas. At that time, officials from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister visited Coleraine, which was to be the site of a pilot scheme for new services. Unfortunately, other political matters overcame the need to save the post offices, and the matter was ignored by the various Government Departments that could have introduced new services throughout the post office network and thereby removed the threat of closure that so many offices now face. The Government could at least have defended the present service, rather than stand idly by and watch those offices be whittled away.

There are various predictions about the number of sub-post offices that might close — some say 100 of the 540 that still exist. However, we all know that the situation will probably be much worse if we do not immediately begin to develop our own model for future post office services. The amendment was intended to illustrate what could and should be done.

During the long regime of direct rule, we have been forced to adopt models in practically every facet of life that are alien to the rural environment in which many of us live. The issues that face rural communities were highlighted during today’s earlier debate on agriculture. By and large, we do not live in cities of hundreds of thousands, or millions, of people in close proximity to one another. We are a scattered community with a poor transport infrastructure, and the further one moves from the greater Belfast area, the truer that becomes. In those circumstances, the post office is often the hub of the local community and performs a unique service — in both parts of the island. The post offices are worth saving, not just for the sake of keeping them, but to improve, update and enhance the level of service for the people whom we represent.

I am an eternal optimist. Assuming that there will be a new Assembly, it must immediately put its stamp on the urgency of the delivery of Government services. It would be reasonable for the Assembly to do a deal with the Social Security Agency, over which it would have the control, to continue the payment of benefits through the Post Office card system. The Assembly would not be dependent on Britain for that. The Assembly could also direct the Departments to make better use of the Post Office in their attempts to put into the public arena the information, advice and help that those people who are often in the greatest need require to qualify for the millions of pounds of unclaimed benefits.

In the Republic of Ireland, where post offices are experiencing similar difficulties, the Government have acted to inject new life and services into the network. That is not perfect, but it is a start that will sustain rural post offices in areas where there are no banks and no other means to address financial matters.

In life, everything changes, and the Post Office is no different. The tragedy is that no one is controlling the changes in the Post Office, and rather than modernise post offices in a way that ensures that they keep pace with the passage of time, the Government are quite happy to allow them to be killed off. There have been various schemes, but none of them has been supported properly. Perhaps the worst example of that is the card system, which worked very well and was welcomed by many people who did not want to use banks.

Despite their best efforts, postmasters — in particular, sub-postmasters — have been treated extremely badly. Indeed, very often, as we heard during a recent meeting in the Long Gallery, they are forced to invest their own finances to keep in place services that are not only wanted, but badly needed. That is shameful and illustrates just how far removed Government are from the people whom they are supposed to represent. That must change now. I suggest that that is another reason to get the Assembly up and running.

In other parts of the world, post offices are used as centres where various public services can pitch their tents to deal with and listen to members of the public. In some rural areas, the police or their administrators are available at certain times to deal not necessarily with serious crime, but with local issues and complaints from members of the public. There may be a role for organisations such as Citizens Advice that support and help the public in an ever-complex society. There are no limits to how the Post Office could be modernised to continue serving the people, which has been its role since the introduction of the penny black stamp and the mail coaches.

We remember many people from the past for what they created. Examples are John Boyd Dunlop who invented the pneumatic tyre, Harry Ferguson who invented the hydraulic tractor, and many others who transformed the lives of people today. Would it not be a pity if this generation were to be remembered for what it destroyed rather than what it created? Let us begin by saving the Post Office and let us do that from today.

Some Members:

Hear, hear.

Roy Beggs (UUP)

Although I support the motion, I welcome the amendment tabled by Mr McGlone and Mr Dallat. There is a need to go further than the motion, and I am pleased that Mr Hay has accepted the amendment. The amendment enhances the motion by highlighting that, because both are at risk from the current proposals, there is a need to support urban and rural post offices.

Recently, there have been a number of closures in my constituency. Kilwaughter post office closed after financial uncertainty meant that it failed to attract a new sub-postmaster. Furthermore, in the urban Carrickfergus area, Woodburn post office and Eden post office have closed. In Larne, the Harbour sub-post office and Waterloo Road post offices have closed Clearly, it is an issue that has affected and will continue to affect urban and rural post offices.

Post offices are particularly important to the rural community, but, as I said, they are also an important focal point for many urban communities. The financial pressures on the post office network exist in urban and rural settings equally.

The amendment mentions the Post Office card account and calls for a future Administration to work with the Post Office and the Social Security Agency to retain post offices. The card account has become almost the heart of post offices. With the transfer of some payments to banks, post offices now make a significant part of their earnings from the card account. Were the Government silly enough to award the contract to PayPal or some other service, it would be the death knell for many post offices, and perhaps for the whole network. It is strange that the account is out to contract, and there appears to be a real risk that it may go elsewhere. That would be unacceptable. The Government should stop playing about and sort out the details well in advance because uncertainty does not help the post office network.

There are approximately 14,000 post offices in the UK, and around 8,000 of them serve the rural community. On 14 December 2006 the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Alistair Darling announced the publication of the consultation document ‘The Post Office Network’, which includes the Government’s proposals for restructuring the national post office network. He said that he expects that 2,500 post office branches will close. However, it appears that the total may go far beyond that figure, and I do not think that that is an exaggeration. Therefore sustainability is a huge problem facing urban and rural post offices.

The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry proposed also that there should be further investigation into the role that local authorities and the devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland might play in influencing Post Office services and how they might best be delivered. However, I must issue a word of warning. Does he want to transfer more funding from the central Exchequer to a devolved Assembly or to local ratepayers or is this a neat way of passing down the costs? It would be worthwhile to have discussions on the matter, as this should not be a basis for simply transferring costs from central Government to local devolved Administrations.

The Citizens Advice Bureau has advised that the post office network serves about 84% of people in rural areas who live within one mile of a post office and that, in addition, two thirds of villages with between 500 and 1,000 inhabitants have a local post office. Not only do the post offices provide a range of postal, Government and commercial services, but their presence brings additional benefits to the local community. For example, they make a positive contribution to local businesses by increasing the number of people who pass through a particular location.

Frequently in the rural setting retail stores are under pressure owing to the success of supermarkets, etc. The post office network is a vital part of the rural community as it keeps local shops open. It must be remembered that many people do not have the ability to travel to supermarkets regularly so those rural retail operations are an essential requirement for the rural community.

Postwatch found that:

“whether affluent or disadvantaged, traditional village or post war estate, the closure of the rural post office appeared to have had far-reaching effects upon both particular individuals and the community in general. It became apparent that the post office played an extremely important role in the rural community, a role that transcended the provision of post office services or even the goods sold at the store which was often attached.”

Many bodies have recognised the importance of post offices in isolated areas. There is a real risk that if rural post offices were to close, the viability of local convenience or grocery stores would be lost. That might apply to urban areas also, meaning that pensioners or young mothers would have to walk considerable distances to get to the grocery shops. The closure of post offices could make it difficult for disadvantaged people to obtain cash and basic groceries, if these were previously provided by their local post offices.

I have noticed an increasing number of cashpoints in rural settings, but they are the type that charge users £1 to withdraw £10. Many people who cannot afford banking services, or who are not financially secure enough for the banks to want their business, are reliant on the services provided by post offices. Even if they have a bank account and are able to use a cashpoint, 10% of their money could be lost to an access company. If there is no local post office, people often have to pay for transport in order to obtain their cash. That is another problem, with many people taking all their money out at one time, which may put them more at risk.

Why do many of the main banks in Northern Ireland not allow their services to be used in the post offices? The banks in England and Wales do, and it is a major benefit to local communities in accessing their bank accounts. The issue is under review by the Competition Commission; I hope that it will force the banks’ hands, because the ability of people in Northern Ireland to access competitive banking services has been restricted. It is an important issue that must be addressed.

There is also a lack of joined-up thinking among Departments. The Post Office and the BBC are both publicly owned. Why on earth has the contract to sell television licences gone outside the public sector? We are paying for a private sector company to collect those payments. Surely the Government should adopt some joined-up thinking, retain the TV licence contract, and enable some of that income to pass through the post office network.

There have been developments in other parts of the United Kingdom. In Wales, £750,000 a year has been approved for rural retail services and post offices. The Scottish Executive are encouraging post offices to provide an Internet-access service. Such issues will also have to be addressed here.

The Ulster Farmers’ Union has highlighted the potential closure of post offices and the adverse effects on rural communities. This comes on top of the centralisation of health services, the pressure on rural schools and changes to planning policies. Rural communities are at serious risk. I support the motion and the amendment. I hope that all Members will support them.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I also support the motion and the amendment. I commend my colleagues on bringing them before us. It is an important opportunity for us to send a clear and united message of support for our post offices.

The plan to radically reduce the number of post offices will have a dramatic effect on local communities, particularly, but not exclusively, in rural areas. Post offices are the mainstay of many shopping malls and high-street retail centres, but, in a very particular way, they benefit rural communities.

In a relevant study, Postwatch Scotland found that due to the limitations of transport in rural Scotland, if post offices were closed, there would inevitably be an increase in vehicle use and a negative impact on the environment. Therefore, the argument for maintaining a strong network of rural post offices is that it would be good for the environment and for accessing important public services.

The postal authorities have an obligation to ensure that no more than 5% of users’ premises are further than five kilometres away from an access point that is capable of receiving registered mail — normally defined as a post office — but in Scotland this has already gone beyond 19%. This part of Ireland — and the area west of the Bann in particular — has similar rurality. I echo the comments of Tom Begg, chairman of Postwatch Scotland, who said thatrural post offices need “long-term clarity” together with “short-term certainty” — a bit like the Assembly, I suppose. He said that they also need:

“a change programme based on clear criteria of customers’ needs”.

I also agree with him that:

“Change should not be a top-down approach… Government’s consultation should be based on evidence and recognition [and prioritisation] of customer needs”.

Dr Begg argued for local consultation on individual changes because:

“One size does not fit all… Local needs and capabilities differ”.

That precisely echoes the conclusions of the Assembly’s own economic subgroup in respect of Treasury’s general strategy for the regeneration of a regional economy. One size does not fit all. What works in London or in the south east of England does not necessarily benefit any other region. Clearly, rural areas will be particularly affected by the loss of a service as essential as the local post office. In many rural areas, the post office is not only a commercial enterprise, but the eyes and ears of a community. Often the postmaster or postmistress is the first to realise that an elderly member of the community may be ill or in need of assistance as a direct result of noting the disruption of longstanding routine or because regular clients do not turn up to collect their pensions or avail of other post office services.

The closure of post offices will affect economically deprived areas the most, as it is in these areas that many people have no economic rationale to have bank accounts. Of course, these citizens are often the most vulnerable in society and are therefore even more dependent on post offices for essential services. If these cost-saving measures are permitted to go ahead, the most disadvantaged in society will suffer: the elderly; people on low incomes; people with disabilities; people who cannot afford to own or maintain a motor vehicle. Many people in these categories carry out most of their financial transactions in the local post office, and closure would be a major disruption to their way of life. In rural districts, where transport provision is often very limited and banking facilities invariably scarce, how can those without personal transport access bank or post office services?

The withdrawal of Government business has created this crisis. Deliberate Government policy and dogma is the real reason that many local offices are now considered unviable. It is the inevitable result, not of the loss of any traditional customer base, but of Government action in running down many services that were once the mainstay of post offices.

(Mr speaker is in charge of proceedings of the House of Commons in..." class="glossary">Deputy Speaker [Mr Wells] in the Chair)

This Government understands cause and effect better than most. When payment of benefits moved from payment books to electronic accounts, post offices lost out dramatically because Government encouraged recipients to have their benefits paid through bank accounts. The loss of the NIE powercards, TV licence saving stamps and other prepayment cards to convenience stores was yet another blow. Therefore I contend that it is deliberate Government policy that has the post office network in the state that it is in; and deliberate Government policy is required to secure the survival of this essential community service.

Rather than closing post offices, Government should be looking for ways of expanding the range of services available through this vital community network. Post offices provide community and social benefits, as well as direct and indirect economic benefits, and should therefore be supported to the maximum extent. The Government need to realise that investment and support for building up human and social capital is as important as many other mainstream Government programmes for giving local and sometimes isolated communities a sense of worth and well-being.

For the rural community, all of this is additional evidence of Government’s intention to destroy a traditional way of life. First came PPS 14; then the announcement that some — perhaps many — rural schools would have to close; and now the local post offices may also be shut.

Those developments continue the worrying erosion of essential services in rural areas. That will lead to depopulation and the fragmentation of long-standing communities.

To survive, rural communities need the post office network. We need to see actions that will regenerate our local communities and our rural communities, not irresponsible and unaccountable actions that will decimate them.

UFU president, Kenneth Sharkey, speaking on behalf of the farming community on the potential closure of post offices, said:

“This is removing a very valuable service from the rural areas affected and is another example of how policy makers are ignoring the impact of their decisions on rural communities”.

He continued:

“Many farming families live in isolated areas and they feel their services are becoming less and less accessible.”

The UFU highlighted recent decisions that will impact negatively on rural communities. Issues causing concern included: healthcare services being centralised; rural schools facing an uncertain future; plans to reduce the number of fire appliances covering rural areas; draft PPS 14 dashing many people’s expectations of living in their communities; many school bus routes in rural areas not being treated, despite icy and frosty conditions; and the wider transportation policy, particularly as it affects the rural community.

The cumulative effect of all those measures will serve only to force people out of rural areas and into larger towns and cities, further depopulating the countryside. This Assembly should unanimously endorse the motion in order to make it clear that that will not happen. I support the motion and the amendment.

Sean Neeson (Alliance)

I also support the motion and the amendment. I deeply regret the fact that this Assembly has no powers. These debates are beginning to resemble the weekly rituals that we experienced at the Forum for Political Dialogue in the Interpoint Centre. This is not so much a transitional Assembly as a pretend Assembly, given the way in which things are going. It is like the old definition of an Irish Parliament — everybody talks but nobody listens.

On 24 October 2006, more than 30 MLAs met with the National Federation of SubPostmasters (NFSP) in the Long Gallery. That meeting came before the statement from the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Alistair Darling, on 14 December 2006. One could understand the NFSP’s deep concerns about the future of small post offices in Northern Ireland and the business as a whole. In my constituency of East Antrim, several small post offices have already been closed. My local post office at Milebush has closed, and many people miss it badly.

Mr Hay outlined how the closure of post offices affects other businesses. My colleague Naomi Long reminded me today of the experience in Ballybeen. After its post office was closed, the shops alongside it closed down. When the post office was moved out of the town centre in Carrickfergus, businesses there were also badly affected. Therefore the closure of post offices does have an impact on other businesses.

One of the NFSP’s main concerns was the possible demise of the Post Office card accounts (POCAs) by 2010. Some 4·3 million people use POCAs every week to access their pension and benefit payments. POCAs currently bring in an average of 10% of a sub-postmaster’s income. December’s ministerial statement seems to suggest that the POCA will continue or at least that another method of payment will be introduced. That is to be welcomed, and it reflects the efforts of the NFSP’s national campaign at Westminster and in other UK regions.

A great deal of pressure and competition has been coming from the banks and building societies. According to an NFSP briefing paper, recent research from the National Consumer Council (NCC) has found that:

“the Post Office is well regarded as offering a good, accessible service”.

The briefing paper continues:

“and is viewed as both better trusted and more accessible than the banks.”

Older people and the less well off tend to use post offices most. Research by Postcomm shows that sub-postmasters and post offices play an invaluable roll in communities by providing support for vulnerable residents, including older and disabled people.

Post offices in rural areas also provide a focal point for communities. The Welsh Assembly created a post office development fund, which provided grants of up to £50,000 to 125 small post offices in a bid to ensure that they continued to exist as the hub of their communities. Research has shown that that particular scheme has worked very well.

As I said at the outset, if the Assembly is serious about making life better here, the restoration of devolution by 26 March 2007 is seriously needed.

Esmond Birnie (UUP)

I support the motion and the amendment. My party agrees with the fundamental principles of the motion, and the amendment brings additional value to it in two senses. First, it widens the scope of con-sideration to all post offices, not simply those in rural areas — there is also an issue about post offices in urban areas, which I will refer to later. Secondly, the amend-ment makes valuable suggestions as to how the Govern-ment and their agencies might react to that position.

The context to the motion is the proposal to shut around 2,500 rural Post Office branches across the UK. In the last few years, there has already been a reduction of around 3,000 branches in urban areas across the UK. Northern Ireland has been part of that so-called rationalisation of the network.

I want to highlight those bodies that have responsibility for the current situation and might have responsibility for its improvement. First and foremost are the Post Office and Royal Mail. It must be emphasised that, to some extent, they are victims of the situation. The Post Office is primarily a commercial organisation. However, as has already, rightly, been indicated in this debate, its business and operations have significant social and community benefits. Given that the Post Office is required to balance its books, there is a problem when demand for its services is in a trend decline.

It is to the credit of the Post Office, Royal Mail and indeed Postwatch, the associated consumer protection watchdog, that elaborate consultation processes are in place to deal with situations that arise from proposed closures. However, my experience in south-east Belfast — and I am sure that many other Members can confirm this from their own experiences — is that in the past six years there have been between six and 10 branch closures and relocations. I am aware of only one case in which the decision has been reversed following consultation. Therefore, my experience is that while consultations pretty much run their course, the decisions go ahead as previously announced.

Critically, the Government also have responsibility for those matters. Postcomm has recently reported on the extent to which the reduction in the UK-wide post office network, both urban and rural, is largely a product of the fact that the Government, and their agencies and corporations, have stripped back the number and type of products that can be provided by post offices. I am sure that that point has been made many times during the debate.

Consider the move away from the payment of benefits at post offices, the prospective withdrawal of the Post Office card account in three years’ time, and, more recently, the fact that the Post Office lost the contract to sell television licences. Strictly speaking, the decision on the contract was not so much central Government’s as the BBC’s. Of course, the BBC is a public corporation, and we should perhaps be asking why it decided to make that decision.

It is also important to mention a third set of organisations with responsibility in this area: the high-street or commercial banks — although thus far they may not have adequately recognised their role. Like the post offices, banks are commercial, and, as we well know, profit-seeking and profit-making organisations. It is entirely understandable that the major banks, such as the Ulster Bank, Northern Bank, Allied Irish Bank, and so on, do not relish competition, and that has been the subject of enquiries by the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland and the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in recent months.

However, the banks in Northern Ireland could have done more to ally themselves with the network of Post Office branches. Arrangements could have been worked out to allow banks to use post offices as additional outlets at which certain bank services — the operation of accounts and so forth — could be provided. We have still to come to terms with the fact that a high percentage of people on low incomes in the Province do not have proper access even to basic bank accounts. That denies them many advantages, such as debit arrangements, which are taken for granted by those of us who do have bank accounts.

At the heart of the debate is the need to resolve a tension between two different ways of running organisations and two different logics. On the one hand is the market-based, commercial approach, and, in normal circumstances, the importance of that approach would be stressed for most business activities because it provides a competitive service and choice for the customer and it maximises the benefits to the customer.

However, a second approach may apply to post offices. There is a strong argument for advocating that the postal service be regarded as a universal service. In other words, provision should be the same wherever you live, be it on the Orkney Islands, in Strabane or central London, regardless of location or density of population. Basic postage rates and delivery standards — next-day delivery for first-class letters, for example — should be the same, regardless of where people live. If we accept that logic for that aspect of the postal service, we should also accept that there is a need to ensure that universal provision of service applies to the geographical spread or density of the network. That is why the amendment quite properly refers to the scale of the Post Office network, both urban and rural.

Jim Wells (DUP)

I apologise to Jim Shannon.

Jim Shannon (DUP)

Mr speaker is in charge of proceedings of the House of Commons in..." class="glossary">Deputy Speaker, your apology is accepted. I knew that you would call me in time.

The Post Office network reaches into every urban community and almost every sizeable rural settlement. The fact that 94% of the UK population lives within one mile of a post office is an indication of their importance.

The Post Office has around 28 million customers who use the 170 different services available to meet their individual needs, at their convenience. The Post Office has more branches in the UK than all of the banks and building societies combined. Those figures paint a fairly positive picture, but the reality is not so rosy.

Post offices have had to face more than their fair share of challenges in the last few years. Every business has its ups and downs, but the network has had to take one bitter blow after another. Some 2,500 urban post offices have been closed under the network’s reinvention programme. The network has been losing £3 million a week, and it is currently supported by an annual £150 million social network payment from the Government. That payment was set to expire in March 2008, but I am glad to say that the deadline has been extended until 2011.

Nevertheless, the future sustainability of the Post Office beyond 2011 is anyone’s guess. It may seem to be a hopeless loss and bad business to keep pouring money into something that appears to be unsustainable. However, it should be taken into account that Royal Mail Group registered recorded profits of £537 million for 2004-05, while the Post Office recorded a 7% loss of £110 million in the same period. The crux of the problem has been the change to the direct payment of pensions and benefits, which traditionally accounted for 40% of Post Office income. The maths are not difficult — a 40% loss of income has resulted in a 7% drop in profits. It is clear what, if not who, is to blame for that loss.

While the introduction of the Post Office card account has alleviated some losses, the Government have revealed their intention of withdrawing the card account by 2010 and have already begun the migration of card accounts into bank accounts. Frighteningly, 10% of sub-postmasters’ pay comes from the card account, while other Government contracts, which are under threat, such as bill payments, account for a further 5% of that pay. The new products, despite being great for everyday customer use, do not come close to offsetting the loss of Government contracts.

There is yet another set of numbers, which speak for themselves. The biggest petition ever signed in the United Kingdom was carried in 98 mail sacks to London on 18 October 2006. Those sacks contained four million signatures of people who did not want the closure of any more post offices. That cannot and should not be overlooked. That volume of support is almost unheard of, and that warrants a more detailed study as to why so many people are worried about post office closures.

The Government must step in and halt the absurd withdrawal of support for a national institution. Instead of desecrating that institution and running it down, there must be more provision for the suite of post office-based banking products, including an enhanced form of the card account, and offering improved customer service options that include financially excluded groups.

The Government must realise the important role that post offices play in the social life of towns and, more importantly, villages, as a place where members of the community can mix and mingle, where the vulnerable elderly are recognised and looked after by friendly staff who understand their needs, and where the youngest children can come to open their first savings accounts and learn a little about the other vital services offered. That is a vital part of country and town life, and its loss will socially exclude even more people who feel uncomfortable with banks, or who cannot use the internet to access their accounts or download the stamps that they need.

The 2007 consultation on the future of the Post Office states the aim for 90% of people to live within one mile of a post office. At present, in the rural community, 95% of people are, on average, three miles away and that rises to six miles in more remote areas. Imagine how that distance will lengthen with the closure of more post offices.

The mobile van service, which has been mentioned during the debate, is ludicrous. Opening a community hall once a week does not come close to fulfilling the needs of our rural communities, or the needs of our vulnerable elderly, for whom taking a bus into a main town elevates the fear and probability of being watched and perhaps attacked. That fear is prevalent in the older community.

The Government have a duty to the 28 million customers who use post offices each year. Those people require, and have come to depend on, Post Office services. They do not want the unnecessary changes that have been brought about by pen-pushers in Whitehall who have no idea what it is like to live in rural areas.

A survey by the National Consumer Council (NCC) showed, overwhelmingly, that post offices were thought to be more accessible than banks and, more importantly, more trustworthy. As well as that, only 4% of villages have a bank, but at least 60% of villages have a post office. It is clear that many people do not have access to a bank, and, if rural post offices are closed, those people will be isolated from the necessary funds and weekly essentials, as have been, and should be, provided by post offices.

Rural businesses that are situated near to post offices attribute over 15% of their business to them. A recent survey by the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) cited that an overwhelming 82% of small businesses said that the closure of their local post office would adversely affect them. The Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) has stated that post office closures will hit blind and partially sighted people particularly hard. They will be left feeling even more socially and financially excluded than they already do, and they will no longer be able to rely on local post offices to help with the mountain of forms pushed on them by the pen-pushers.

Many people see post offices as their link to the wider world. They are places where staff are available to help them, where they are known and where their abilities and disabilities are known and catered for. The Post Office is an institution that must be given precedence for Government business, where it is reasonable and just, as is the case here. Members should encourage the public to support the Post Office’s valid and useful system to help them to learn about the many services that the Post Office provides and to inform them of how well trained the staff are to offer advice and support. That should be the task before the House; we should not have to fight the Government for the Post Office’s very existence.

The future of the Post Office must be considered with a view to how the Government will sustain post offices in the long term, not simply abandoned without thought for those who rely on them and trust them. Why should small towns and villages be made to suffer once again the costs of a revolution that is unnecessary and repugnant to the people for whom we have the greatest duty of care: the pensioners, children, disabled and millions of others who depend on the services that are so excellently provided by people who work so hard in post offices. The Post Office deserves the reputation that it has acquired over the years as trustworthy and secure premises for the everyday needs of local communities. I support the motion and the amendment.

Francie Brolly (Sinn Féin)

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. At the root of the legislation and policies that are threatening country dwellers, there seems to be a widespread lack of understanding and knowledge of the rural way of life. As we know only too well, bias is cradled in ignorance. In the certainty that the nitty-gritty of the motion and amendment will be well and fully presented by others, I will take a wider look at what lies behind this kind of legislation and the reason why legislators think that they can make these changes.

In debating the motion, it is important to consider the historical and — it now seems — endemic bias against rural dwelling and rural development. Historically, the Roman Empire has a lot to answer for in this part of the world.

Some Members:

Hear, hear.

Francie Brolly (Sinn Féin)

Not only the Roman Catholics. I have no doubt that the building of cities by the Romans was an important part of their control strategy: if the people were herded together, they could be monitored, serviced, educated and disciplined more efficiently and more economically.

The cities were beautifully constructed to sugar the pill of wrenching people from their natural, rustic environment, and citizens of Rome had rights that did not apply to the general population. The right not to be flogged for transgressions was one of many attractive incentives offered to them —

Peter Weir (DUP)

We are all interested in the history lesson. Would the Member even bring it up to 1798? At least that is AD instead of BC.

Mitchel McLaughlin (Sinn Féin)

Do you not want to hear about 1690?

Francie Brolly (Sinn Féin)

He knows all about it. Thank you for that intervention. I intend to carry on, and I will get to the point.

One incentive to go to the cities was that, if you were a citizen of Rome, you had a right not to be flogged when you transgressed. In that way people were persuaded to leave their wee farms, and head up the Appian Way.

Thus, the building of cities, the marketing of city dwelling and the inevitable development of a bias towards urban culture came about courtesy of the invasion and occupation of England by the Romans. As the English gradually became almost as Roman as the Romans, native leaders emerged to promote and maintain the Pax Romani. Centuries later, the English did what the Romans did not do — they invaded and occupied Ireland.

Among other things, civitas is the Latin word for city. A related word, civilitas, has come into the English language as meaning civility or being civilised. When the Romans invaded and occupied England, the natives naturally struggled with the language of their new masters, just as the colonised Gaels of Ireland and Scotland were later to have difficulty with the mishmash of Anglo-Saxon Latin that is modern English. West Cork English and lowland Scottish English are good examples of the many regional dialectal products of the failure of the Gael to master English and speak it like gentlemen. Is it plausible that the early Roman English failed to appreciate the distinction between the words civitas — a city —

Jim Wells (DUP)

I am sure that this has some relevance to the closure of rural post offices, but would the Member come to the point.

Francie Brolly (Sinn Féin)

I can assure you that I will come to the point, and I will do so within the 10 minutes. You have interrupted my flow.

Is it plausible that the early Roman English failed to appreciate the distinction between the words civitas, meaning a city, and civilitas, meaning civilisation, and that the legacy of that is that, to this day, to be considered civilised one must live in a city — Belfast? Could that be why rural dwellers, and their places, are given derogatory names such as “culchie” and “the back of beyond” by city dwellers? The term “culchie”, as my hon Friend said earlier, specifically describes a native of Kiltimagh in Co Mayo.

Whatever the historic origins of anti-rural bias, there can be no doubt that such a bias does exist, and that the corridors of power are trodden mainly by city slickers — we can name-call too — who have little understanding of country people and no understanding of Latin.

Country people from this part of Ireland have been under siege by current British direct rule to an unprecedented degree. The ink is not dry on one piece of repressive and destructive anti-rural legislation before the next is prepared.

Therefore those of us who live in rural Ireland need our city cousins to stand with us in our fight to maintain a viable and vibrant rural constituency and to appreciate that country people, who love and care for their countryside, are its eyes, ears and protectors. Down through the ages, rural communities have proven to be the safe repository of our indigenous cultures and genuine enlightenment.

Everyone must say no to an Administration that seem intent on destroying the urban/rural balance that has served us so well for hundreds of years. Everyone must reject any legislation or proposal that would contribute further to rural decline, be that the centralisation of healthcare services, the decimation of the rural school network, reduction of cover for the Fire and Rescue Service, Draft PPS 14, reluctance to provide proper public transport, road infrastructure and road maintenance in rural areas and —

Danny Kennedy (UUP)

What about post offices? [Laughter.]

Francie Brolly (Sinn Féin)

Mr Kennedy took the words out of my mouth. [Laughter.]

Finally, everyone must say no to the proposal to close rural post offices, which for so many country people are their focal point and potential lifeline. I support the motion.

Dominic Bradley (Social Democratic and Labour Party)

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tá áthas orm seans a fháil leis an rún seo a phlé. I was going to title my speech, “The role of the Vikings in the desecration of rural post offices in Northern Ireland.” [Laughter.] However, after hearing Mr Brolly’s speech, I changed my mind.

I am pleased to support the motion. As Members have said, rural community life has been under threat from various sources for several years. Not least among them, as you know, Mr speaker is in charge of proceedings of the House of Commons in..." class="glossary">Deputy Speaker, is Draft PPS 14, which Members have debated in the House. During that debate, I outlined the dangers to small rural schools inherent in that draft policy.

The latest threat to rural life is the news that several post offices are threatened with closure. The withdrawal of the POCA creates the risk of hundreds of post offices closing as a direct result of the loss of income and spin-off businesses that the card account generated. That could potentially affect every area in Northern Ireland.

More than four million people use the card account to access pensions and benefits, and it is due to be scrapped in 2010. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has already begun to take away the card account from more than 40,000 customers, forcing them to have their pensions and benefits paid into bank accounts. Many banks still refuse to allow their customers free access to their accounts at the post office.

Post Office Ltd is still outside the Link system. A bank account is of no use to pensioners or persons without a car whose nearest bank is miles away and who cannot draw money from their local post office because their bank has not signed up to the scheme. Millions of customers chose the POCA as their most suitable method of payment. The Government should respect that choice, not restrict it.

A recent Age Concern report shows that 99% of older people in rural areas consider their local post office to be a lifeline. Many older rural dwellers already feel isolated, and that report shows that 56% of those aged over 60 who live in the countryside fear that post office closures will leave them even more isolated. Some 73% of older people believe that they will not be able to access similar services to those provided by the Post Office if its card account is withdrawn. The only viable way in which to ensure that rural dwellers, especially older people, have access to the services that they require is to retain the POCA, thereby ensuring the survival of many small post offices.

The closures will create problems for disadvantaged residents who want to get cash and basic groceries, given that those services were previously provided by their local post office. Problems will be created for the elderly, the disabled and anyone who has restricted mobility, such as mothers with young children, who may experience difficulty travelling to branches that are further away.

The increased pressure that closures put on other branches means that we can expect longer queues and poorer services and facilities. Local residents will feel a loss of independence and community spirit, and there will be damaging repercussions on local shops and businesses.

The threat is not only to rural post offices. ‘The Last Post’, a report from the New Economics Foundation, states that when an urban post office closes, businesses, community groups and local people experience significant knock-on effects. One in six of the urban closures occurred in deprived areas where the role of the Post Office is, in the words of the report, “particularly valuable”.

Evidence published in November from the Trade and Industry Select Committee showed that sub-postmasters in urban areas are also under threat from the withdrawal of the Post Office Card Account. The account is currently worth £403 a month to those sub-postmasters, compared to an average of £249 a month. The New Economics Foundation believes that that lost income could prove to be the “tipping point” at which many post offices become no longer viable.

The local post office is as integral to the community infrastructure as the local school, the doctor’s surgery or the library. It is often in the local shop, and one supports the other. Without the business that the post office generates, the shop will close, and the community will lose two key services in one fell swoop. If our local communities are to remain strong and vibrant, they must retain those vital services, not least, the local post offices.

The Government can still act to allow the Post Office to retain the card account and to extend the range of services that it offers, and they must do so before it is too late.

Mr speaker is in charge of proceedings of the House of Commons in..." class="glossary">Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to support the motion and the amendment. Go raibh míle maith agat.

Robin Newton (DUP)

I support the motion, and I am indebted to my colleagues for tabling it. I shall concentrate on two areas: the social and business aspects of the impacts of the closures.

There is an affection for local post offices. Closing them would create a great deal of emotion. In making his announcement, Alistair Darling said that the loss-making Post Office network — and we know that it is a loss-making network — cannot be left as it is and needs to be rescued. Any sensible person will realise that, in a UK context, that rescue plan means taking about 2,500 offices out of circulation. There can be no doubt that that plan will have a negative impact on the Post Office network throughout the Province, where there may be dozens of closures.

The section of the community that will be hardest hit by the plan will, of course, be our senior citizens. However, others will also be hit hard, and I will discuss them later. Closing local post offices will mean that senior citizens will have to travel increased distances for their pensions or for their other business. That will make them more vulnerable. We all know that our senior citizens are in many cases being specifically targeted because they have money in their home or on their persons at some stage in the day. That makes them more vulnerable to those who prey on them.

As other Members have said, post offices are not just places to buy stamps. They are, in many cases, a part of the fabric of society and a focal point in many urban districts and villages. They serve needs far beyond the commercial, and Government financial support for the service should be a priority. It is the actions of the Government that have created the problems: they have steadily withdrawn Post Office services: the sale of TV licences, pension payments and so on.

I will quote a sub-postmistress who appeared on a local BBC news broadcast. When interviewed, she told it like it is. She accused the Government of stealthily eating away at the income of post offices through the withdrawal of services:

“We’d like the government to undertake an assessment of the social …role played by post offices in communities right across the UK and for them to provide ongoing support to the non commercial parts of the network. We’d like a network that is viable, a network that isn’t subsidised totally.

“We want the work and we want to do it well and we want to serve our customers. We are a part of a community.”

She continued:

“In many places when the post office closes, the community loses its heart, the people don’t come down to the towns and villages... and the communities just die.”

I can testify to the truth of that with respect to urban post offices as well.

With respect to business, there are nearly 14,000 post offices in the UK; 480 of them are Crown offices, and 13,280 are private businesses. Those are small, independently-owned businesses, each of which is important to the success of the Northern Ireland economy in the regional context.

A Member who spoke earlier referred to research carried out by the New Economics Foundation, an independent think-tank separate from the Government. For the first time a reputable organisation has quantified the contribution that urban post offices make in some of the most deprived areas of the UK. The report says that they play a particularly valuable role in deprived urban areas and outlines the threat that they now face from changes to the Post Office network. As has already been said, post offices in urban areas have borne the brunt of recent closures. Over the past two years more than eight urban post offices have closed for every rural post office closure. More than one in six of the urban post office closures took place in deprived areas. Three wards in East Belfast are among the ten most deprived wards in Northern Ireland.

Further in-depth analysis of the impact of post office closures on small businesses reveals that in Manchester, following the closure of the local post office, 60% of local businesses witnessed significant impact to their businesses, their clients, their customers or to the area in general. Local businesses also reported difficulties with making cash deposits and other banking issues. Extra costs were incurred with increased staff time required to visit post offices further away; and there were longer queues at the remaining post offices. Trade associations noticed the knock-on effect in reduced footfall in shops in the vicinity of the closed post office, and small businesses reported significant loss of custom. That indicates that in an urban district a post office performs the same function as an anchor tenant in a huge shopping centre.

The danger is that when an amenity such as a post office disappears from a community, those who are financially mobile are more likely to leave, leaving a higher concentration of deprivation, which, in turn, can lead to further loss of amenities. Analysis by the New Economics Foundation (NEF) of the social value — as distinct from the business value — of urban post offices reveals that 66% of people surveyed in Manchester said that they would be affected by the closure of their local post office.

The NEF analysis found that groups affected by post office closure included schools, local universities, credit unions, and community groups. Some 53% of people surveyed in the vicinity of just one closed post office in Manchester now buy groceries elsewhere as a direct result of the closure of the post office, which has meant significant implications for that community and the local traders. Qualitative research from the NEF study emphasises the vital and overlooked social services role played by post offices. That evidence supports previous research that found that half of sub-postmasters in disadvantaged areas keep an eye out for between 20 and 50 vulnerable customers.

The issue is clearly not one of stopping a haemorrhaging network of offices; there is more to the problem than the Government are prepared to consider. Any decision regarding the Post Office network must be taken holistically. A thorough review of the social and economic impact of post offices should be undertaken, and a balanced decision made. The Government must take significant steps to safeguard the vital role that post offices play at the heart of communities.

Michelle Gildernew (Sinn Féin)

Go raibh mile maith agat, a Leas Cheann Comhairle. Like many in the Chamber today I am in favour of the motion and the amendment on the closure of post offices, both rural and urban, though I am going to concentrate mainly on rural post offices.

As has already been said, post offices are a vital backbone of our communities, especially in rural areas, where they are often the last piece of social infra-structure left in place. This matter is similar to this morning’s topic of the challenges facing the farming community in that both amount to the same thing — death by a thousand cuts. Services have been haemorrhaging from post offices over the years and now they have nearly nothing left, rendering them no longer viable or sustainable.

I recently made representations on behalf of the proprietors of a post office in Augher who were trying to expand its services in an attempt to sustain their business. It is one of the many that has a shop relying on its footfall. It was difficult for me to help them to enhance and improve the services that they already provided. Part of the reason for that difficulty can be traced back to the first Assembly and our experiences in the Committee for Social Development, when changes were being made to the legislation concerning the move from benefit books and giro cheques to card transactions. That Committee fought hard to ensure that Post Office services were not lost; I was opposed to anything that would cause a deterioration of those services.

Since then, I have had first-hand experience of the difficulties that those changes caused. When my first child was born I went to open a Post Office account for my family allowance payments. If I had given my bank details the matter would have been sorted in two minutes. However, because I wanted to use my local post office I had to fill out forms and bring them back to be stamped in the post office, which was much more difficult and inconvenient. I felt that I was being pushed towards using the bank and away from the post office. Nevertheless, because of my commitment to local rural post offices, I did my best to ensure that I used that service.

That death by a thousand cuts is evident in the age profile of sub-postmasters and ‑postmistresses. The Federation of Small Businesses issued a briefing today containing a survey of its members. I wonder whether the federation has surveyed how many sub-postmasters and ‑postmistresses are approaching retirement age. Again, there is a correlation between this issue and farming. Post offices are becoming so unprofitable that people are not being encouraged into the business. Obviously, more money can be made more easily in other businesses. Many of the people who run local post offices are keen to get out of that business.

It does not seem to me that running a local post office that is not attached to some other venture could be profitable in 2007, given the reduction in transactions and services that they are facing. The British Govern-ment’s policy is to run them down to such an extent that they cannot be sustained. I welcome and support the motion and the amendment, and I hope that we can do all in our power to ensure that that vibrant link with rural communities, the elderly and the vulnerable, and those without access to public transport — the local post office — is kept and maintained and is sustainable and viable. Go raibh mile maith agaibh.

Derek Hussey (UUP)

I support the amendment, although I have a greater affinity with the original motion, which concentrates on the area that I am concerned about.

On 14 December 2006, Alistair Darling made a statement to the House of Commons on the Post Office. He said:

“We will therefore consider what role local authorities in England and the devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland might play in influencing how the postal services are best delivered in the future.”

I wonder what notice Mr Darling will take of our debate today. It is a pity that the MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone, Ms Gildernew, could not have been in the House of Commons to challenge Mr Darling when he made his statement.

Postwatch found that:

“whether affluent or disadvantaged, traditional village or post war estate, the closure of the rural post office appeared to have had far-reaching effects upon both particular individuals and the community in general. It became apparent that the post office played an extremely important role in the rural community, a role that transcended the provision of post office services or even the goods sold at the store which was often attached.”

Members are familiar with that scenario and have addressed that issue this afternoon.

I am reminded of a small rural post office between Castlederg and Ederney. It is about four or five miles out of the town up to Killeen and another seven or eight miles to Ederney. Think of the area that would be affected if that post office were to close, and think of the small hardware store attached to the post office, the adjoining village shop, the pub and the nearby chippie. There is also a small local store selling agricultural supplies.

Danny Kennedy (UUP)

What about the church?

Derek Hussey (UUP)

Killeen does not have a church. However, the orange hall is directly opposite the post office. That post office is truly at the heart of the community. Postwatch has described how many of our rural post offices are at the heart of communities.

The closure of a rural post office can result in problems for disadvantaged residents and those who live in the surrounding area when they try to access cash and basic groceries, which were often previously provided in the post office. The heart is ripped out of the community when the post office goes.

Reference was made during this morning’s debate to remarks made by Kenneth Sharkey of the Ulster Farmers’ Union, who said that it seemed inevitable that we would lose some rural post offices. Members can agree with that, despite the fact that the Government are putting this matter out to consultation. We all know about Government consultations.

A very valuable service is being removed from the rural areas affected, and that is another example of how policy makers are ignoring the impact that their decisions will have on rural communities in Northern Ireland. Many farming families live in isolated areas, and they feel that some services are becoming less and less accessible. Members will agree with that.

In the same House of Commons debate, Mr Darling said:

“The post office provides an important social and economic role, particularly for our rural communities and deprived urban areas”

— so he proposes to cut them back. The Government also published new access criteria for post offices. They stated that 90% of the population should be within one mile of a branch — that is great. In rural areas, 95% of the population should be within three miles of a branch, which doubles to six miles in remote areas — talk about being peripheral. I can think of a post office at Killeter that closed a couple of years ago. If people lived beyond Killeter towards the Donegal border, they were seven miles beyond that post office in any case, and it was another six miles from Killeter to Castlederg.

Someone who lives near the Donegal border in the Aghyaran area may have to travel 13 miles to reach the nearest post office. Even by the Government’s standards, that is not acceptable. Where are we going?

The House of Commons Trade and Industry Select Committee issued a report that attacked plans to end the Post Office card account and demanded more funding for the Post Office network. The report called for the maintenance of both urban and rural networks, which it described as “the heart of the community”. Post offices must be the gateway for Government services, and more products must be developed to assist in protecting their long-term viability. That point is relevant to the latter part of the amendment, which is very welcome. We are simply asking the Government to do what the Trade and Industry Select Committee’s report recommends.

I support an investigation into the role that local authorities and devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland might play in influencing how Post Office services are best delivered in future. The Government must at least listen to us and try to act on the good sense that they are hearing from this Chamber. I support the motion.

(Madam Speaker in the Chair)

Billy Armstrong (UUP)

I support the motion. Post offices play an important social and economic role in the communities that they serve. The announcement by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry that the Government intend to close 20% of its 600 post offices in Northern Ireland is likely to have a detrimental effect, especially on our rural areas.

As mentioned in today’s earlier debate on agriculture, it seems that the Labour Government’s policy is to concentrate on our cities and towns and to move people’s homes out of the countryside and rural areas, as imposed by the implementation of draft PPS 14. The Government’s policy means the closing of rural schools, as proposed by Sir George Bain, and forcing people out of jobs in the countryside, whether in farming, agriculture, rural schools or post offices.

It is obvious that the Labour Government are out of touch with the realities of Northern Ireland, which is a predominantly rural region of the United Kingdom whose character is defined by precisely those elements that the Government are trying to remove from our way of life.

For the second time today, I state that a devolved Assembly is essential for the future of Northern Ireland: it is time to progress to a fully democratic Assembly without delay.

Many post offices are situated away from main centres of population, and their closure would result in a marked downgrading of services for rural dwellers. A post office is not just a place to buy stamps; it is often a focal point in a district on which the elderly depend. The removal of that central point in rural communities, coupled with the closure of rural schools, could prove the death knell for rural communities.

The Government have been instrumental in funding community groups, which bring people in rural areas together. However, the Government are not consistent because they are closing the lifeline of rural areas — the post office. The very presence of post offices in rural communities makes a positive contribution to local businesses by increasing the number of people passing through a particular location.

If the post office in a rural community is closed, many people, particularly the elderly, the disabled and those without personal transport, will be cut off from society, from accessing cash and from the ability to carry out basic tasks such as buying groceries and paying bills. In Northern Ireland, rural communities can stand alone without people having to go to larger towns and cities as part of their daily lives. Rural communities have to survive without the first-class road structure and public transport systems that exist everywhere else. What is the sense in removing those facilities from our rural communities without first ensuring that those living in them will not be cut off from society?

I acknowledge the hard work and dedication of our postmasters and postmistresses who have had to deal with the modernisation of facilities in post offices, including card systems. They have also had to cope with the loss of various facilities, such as customers’ ability to pay for their television licences. They continue to provide an excellent service to their customers, despite continually having to prove their worth.

Although post offices used to be a service admin-istered by Government, they must now show that they are cost effective. Just like traffic lights, post offices will continue to provide a service for everyone in our communities. Traffic lights cost approximately £30,000 but generate no income: they are a service. They alleviate the huge cost of road traffic accidents. However, can a price be put on the rural way of life? Just as traffic lights are essential to the rural way of life, post offices are the focal points of communities.

Post offices are now present in many large supermarkets as franchises, selling off what was the Royal Mail. Many areas of Northern Ireland seem to be becoming more like other parts of Europe where it is difficult to find a post office, let alone a stamp. Is this the result of another European directive that has been filtered down to Northern Ireland?

Government policy should be to support our post offices. The Government have considered only the financial picture and have failed to recognise the contribution that post offices make to Northern Ireland society. I support the motion and the amendment.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party)

Go raibh míle maith agat. As someone who lives in and represents a rural area, I can state that the role of post offices has been articulated amply here today. In isolated communities, local post offices provide older people, disabled people and those on low incomes who cannot afford extra travel costs with access to their attendance allowances, disability living allowances, income support and pensions.

I listened intently to the debate, and feel that the Assembly should pay tribute to those postmasters and postmistresses who, over many years, when providing services to the public, showed exemplary courage when faced with numerous attacks and robberies from a variety of paramilitary fundraisers.

Some Members:

Hear, hear.

Patsy McGlone (Social Democratic and Labour Party)

As Mr Hussey said, post offices generate business for other businesses. Many post offices are located in small rural shops. Indeed, many of those are under threat from multinational retailers. Card accounts were introduced to allow people to withdraw their tax credits, benefits and pensions in post offices. The withdrawal of that system, seemingly at the whim of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), and the Post Office’s loss of the right to sell TV licences, has been referred to as death by a thousand cuts. That is exactly what it is.

This morning, I spoke to a postmistress who told me that the Government and the management of the Post Office must get their act together. The Post Office has said that it cannot plan without there being certainty, but it must plan nevertheless. As was said by my colleague from Mid Ulster, and has been stated by the National Federation of SubPostmasters, the Post Office must modernise its facilities.

It has been drawn to my attention that, for example, an elderly person who pays his or her bills either at the end of each month, every two months, or whenever suits, cannot withdraw more than £600 from a post office in one day, which means that if he or she needs to pay an exorbitant or increased fuel bill, he or she must return to the post office the next day. Indeed, unlike most supermarkets, post offices cannot provide customers with cashback. The facilities must be modernised.

The Government should be taking a leading role in ensuring that banks enable their customers to access their bank accounts and carry out a wide range of transactions in post offices. Major banking groups do not allow their customers to access their current accounts in post offices. The Government must provide balanced information about the payment options for benefit claimants and pensioners, including the availability of the cheque payment service.

Why should there not be new services? There is talk of investment — there should be investment for the future. Why should sub-postmasters not provide front-line financial advice and be trained, accredited and rewarded for doing so? As Post Office Ltd’s only shareholder, the Government should oversee this process. All post offices should provide convenient access to public services, from the payment of fines to fielding lost property. Why not?

The Government must actively encourage their Departments — and local authorities — to make a range of services available and accessible through kiosks in local post offices. They are the hub of rural communities, both socially and economically.

Today we must send a clear message to Government and to Post Office Ltd that, on behalf of our constituents, we want twenty-first century services from a twenty-first century Post Office, and that they should be planning and investing in that. Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle.

Peter Weir (DUP)

I will try to keep my remarks brief. A vast range of issues has been well covered during the debate — indeed, probably a much greater range of issues than one had initially anticipated.

We have gone from the very interesting analogy between our Post Office system and the traffic lights to delving into a deep sense of history. I thought that at some stage during the debate someone would mention Postman Pat; however, it seems that it is Postman Caesar who is at the heart of our problems. Indeed, I wondered briefly whether the Member opposite mistakenly believed that he was in some sort of panel game where the idea was to describe the motion without actually making any reference to it. Fortunately, after approximately eight minutes the words “post office” did appear in the Member’s speech.

The points have been well made and well covered, and I am very glad to say that we are speaking today with one voice. It is important to recognise, as the amendment does, that this issue affects both rural and urban areas, although there is great concern that the current proposals would hit particularly hard in rural areas.

From a personal point of view, this is something that matters deeply to me. Both my parents worked all their lives in the Post Office, and I commend in particular the remarks of Mr McGlone about the faithful service that postmasters and postmistresses gave throughout the Troubles, when many of them were subjected to horrendous attacks and robberies by various paramilitary groups and criminal gangs. They strove, both in rural and urban areas, to try to retain a sense of normality and a sense of community throughout that time. In their hour of need, it is incumbent on us to stand up for them.

While we are focusing on the situation in Northern Ireland, a number of Members also pointed out that this important issue goes beyond our shores, and there are a number of indicators of that. For example, with regard to the importance of post offices, a 2004 Postwatch survey indicated that 75% of people felt that their local post office was extremely important, 59% regarded it as essential to their way of life and 91% felt that it played an important role in their community.

Since this issue has come to the fore in the last few months, a vast range of organisations has expressed concerns at the Government’s plans, including the various UK churches, all the major trades unions and the Federation of Small Businesses. Age Concern has expressed grave concerns about the effects on the elderly, and Citizens Advice has come out very strongly against the proposals. In local papers throughout the United Kingdom a range of concerns has been raised by local councillors, councils and MPs of different political parties. It is very clear that the Government do not have strong political support for their proposals. In the House of Commons an early-day motion expressing concern over the potential threat to the Post Office system was signed by 400 MPs, including Kate Hoey, who is the chair of the parliamentary all-party group on sub-post offices.

Indeed, there could be no greater expression than the petition handed to Downing Street in October, which had over four million signatures. I am informed that it was the largest petition ever on a peacetime issue. That shows the strength of feeling that there is on this.

Given that amount of heat, it was inevitable that Alistair Darling would try to alleviate the level of concern by throwing out some sops in his statement on 14 December. Two things in particular were mentioned. One was the idea of 500 mobile post offices — a number of Members have been rightly sceptical about whether that would operate particularly well in any part of the UK and especially in Northern Ireland. I do not think that any of us, with the greatest respect to the fast-food industry, want to see our post offices trans-formed into a sort of mobile chip van moving from area to area. It simply would not work in Northern Ireland. Again, I am very sceptical that it would work anywhere. There were general references to services being provided in village halls, community centres and pubs. This is a very clear spinning exercise on the part of the Government in order to pretend that they are not downgrading the system.

The proposer of the motion referred to some of the euphemisms with which we are all too familiar on this issue as with others. We are talking about “transforming” and “restructuring” post offices. Those are euphemisms; the Government are supporting post offices in the same way that a rope supports a hanging man. That is the level of support that has been provided by the Government. They have shown disregard for post offices and the rural community. As a number of Members have said, this Government are blind and deaf to the needs of that community. Time and again this Government, who see themselves largely dependent on urban votes, have disregarded countryside issues.

The second sop that was thrown out by the Minister was some movement on the original plan to scrap the card account in 2010, with an indication that there would be some kind of replacement system. That has been highlighted by a number of Members. The Minister gave no guarantee that that replacement system would be controlled by the Post Office. As Mr Beggs said, it will be put out for tender. The extent to which Labour Back-Bench Members seized on this as some great concession that would safeguard the future of post offices shows that they were happy enough to fall for the con. If the intention is to replace the card scheme with something else within the Post Office, why abolish it in the first place? It is simply an effort by the Government to get over the hump of the next election; to try to buy off some of the vast opposition to this; and then continue with what they have been doing to post offices for years.

As many Members have said, this will have a significant effect on people, particularly in rural areas. One thing that has not been mentioned is that there will be a large reduction in the number of jobs, and not just directly in the post offices themselves. In many cases the post office is the hub of the community. Remove the post office — force people to go into the towns and cities — and you not only take the custom away from the post office, you take it away from the surrounding shops as well. The level of convenience is simply not there.

It has been said that a number of villages and hamlets around the country have no bank facility. I know from experience in my constituency that that extends beyond the smallest of villages. Millisle, for example — a village of 2,500 or 3,000 people — does not have a bank. Until a few years ago, it did not even have a bank machine. If an area of that size does not have a bank, how many other small villages around the country do not have one? How much is this an attack on the heart of the rural community?

The most vulnerable in our society will be hit: the elderly, who are most dependent on post offices; the disabled; and those without personal transport. Those are the people who will suffer. It is right that we consider economics, but when we look behind that cold hard face, the daily lives of many people are adversely affected.

The present crisis has arisen because the Government have deliberately and stealthily taken services away from post offices. For example, the payment of benefits, once purely the domain of post offices, is now subject to much wider distribution. Indeed, it has been proposed that the payment of benefits should be shifted entirely away from post offices. Television licensing, car taxation and other services have also been removed. Post offices have not been allowed to operate on a level playing field.

We can propose a positive agenda for creating a productive role for post offices in the future by ending the restrictions that are placed on them. We are told of various monopolies that post offices have enjoyed in the past regarding various services that only they have provided. It is no longer appropriate that only post offices should provide those services, but let us at least create a balanced picture and allow post offices to lift some restrictions on their activities.

There is currently a limit on the amount of money that can be withdrawn from a post office at one time, which means that some people must go back a second or third time to withdraw more cash. Moreover, post offices cannot work with carriers other than Royal Mail. Perhaps that could be examined. Various suggestions were made in the House of Commons, such as a greater degree of co-ordination among post offices and local councils to identify services of outreach to the community that councils could provide. Dr Birnie mentioned the Welsh model of support. There is a vast range of possibilities. However, the most important single measure, as the amendment emphasises, is the retention of the card account scheme. If that scheme is retained, it will provide at least some security for the future.

Our concern is to protect both urban and rural communities. We face difficulties but, on this occasion, there is not a lone voice calling from the Assembly to the Government, as is often the case. We have support across the country on this issue, which affects everyone. I believe that we should use our strong and united voice to state that it is unacceptable to destroy the post offices and the way of life of many of our communities. The Assembly must clearly say no. I urge Members to support the motion, as amended.

Some Members:

Hear, hear.

Question, That the amendment be made, put and agreed to.

Main Question, as amended, put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly deplores the introduction of proposals by the government to close a number of Post Offices across Northern Ireland; and the implications these proposals will have for all Post Offices, urban, suburban and rural; and calls on a future devolved administration to work in conjunction with the Post Office and the Social Security Agency to retain Post Office card accounts; and further calls for the development of other government and financial services which address the needs of recipients of state benefits and pensions, other Post Office users and future potential customers.

Adjourned at 4.24 pm.