Why stop at saving rural post offices

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/pers ... fices.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The closure of every single post office is a tragedy for every community it affects, and the Conservatives should show some political ambition and vow to save the lot, says Christopher Hope.

The Conservatives are announcing today that they will not close a single rural post office if they win power at the next general election. But the plans - while welcome to any post officionados - do not go far enough.

Why stop at rural post offices? The closure of every single post office is a tragedy for every community it affects, not just those in the countryside.

t is like cutting off the trunk of a tree. Slowly the branches die too. And it is not just a rural problem. What's wrong with saving urban post offices?

But if nothing else, Nick Herbert's plans show the immense political potency of the post office. Last year millions of people backed plans to stop a key benefits contract from being taken away from the Post Office, a move which would have consigned thousands of branches to closure.

That came as hundreds of thousands more tried to save their local branch from the fastest closure programme (and one of the most undemocratic) in history - the Network Change Programme - which saw 2,500 post offices shut in just 18 months.

The potential for own goals in the post office is always there. Lord Mandelson, who has just cancelled plans for a controversial part-privatisation of Royal Mail, is not the first politician to come unstuck.

During the closure programme, ministers were caught out when it emerged that they were trying to save their local branches while supporting the national policy of shutting post offices.

In Britain, we are now down to our last 12,000 branches (40 per cent less than a decade ago). What is alarming is that another 4,500 post offices can close and still the Government will be able to meet its "access criteria" of having a post office within three miles of 99 per cent of everyone in Britain.

The Tories' commitment is simple to understand and deliverable (all the party has to do is ensure that departments make pushing more business through the post office a priority). Attaching a "social" qualifier to justify a post office's existence goes some of the way to showing that politicians understand post offices are not just businesses. They are more important than that.

But Mr Herbert is being too timid. Why not commit, in writing, to preserving the current network for the lifetime of a Conservative government? That would show real political ambition - and it would be a sure-fire vote winner too.

[Lounge Lizard]

Yes, the Tories now are promising this, that and the other, but once in power it will be back to the days of Thatcher.