Kensington and Chelsea Liberal Democrats

Save Our Post Offices

Jennifer Kingsley

As part of the consultation exercise which ended today on the issue of local post office closures, Cllr. Jennifer Kingsley wrote the following letter in July to Mr. Allan Leighton, the Chairman of Post Office Ltd.

The post offices set for closure are at Proposed closures of post offices at Notting Hill W11 ('Westbourne Grove office'), Clarendon Cross W11, St. Helen's Gardens W10, Westbourne Park Road W11, and Victoria Grove, W8.

Dear Mr. Leighton

As a resident of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and borough councillor, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed closures of the post offices noted above, the first four being located within the Regents Park and North Kensington Constituency, whilst the fifth is within the Kensington and Chelsea constituency.

The post offices are well used and highly valued by the communities they serve. The Notting Hill post office, in particular, is extremely busy throughout the day and offers a notably wide range of services.

Although there would be alternative offices open in the wider area were these offices to close, the fact of the increased distance between home and the alternative sites would mean that many elderly and disabled people would find their journeys to the post office physically awkward and, in some cases, painful, and costly, if public or private transport had to be relied upon. Those who are fit and mobile can easily forget how even travelling small distances can be awesome experiences for those unable to walk easily.

Given that people are understandably concerned about community safety, they are more fearful than in the past about venturing far away from home during the cold winter months when it is dark in the early evenings. Having to access vital services farther away from home than they are used to means that their journeys could become ones of fear and anguish.

It is claimed that closures are part of a network reinvention initiative, which it is hoped will reduce costs, and by implication improve efficiency. However, proposals that reduce costs on paper do not necessarily translate into increased efficiency. If local people - residents, visitors and businesses - do not have easy access to a local post office, they may rely increasingly on e-mail and private postal services. This would ultimately reduce the viability of the post office network and, ultimately, have a harmful effect on both the local and regional economy.

Closing these post offices would undermine the sense of community and community engagement. For many people, especially the elderly, disabled, home carers and young mothers, post offices are a vital point of contact with the neighbourhood, helping to reduce feelings of alienation and loneliness, feelings from which all these people suffer. People who feel as if they are part of the community, sharing community links, are more likely to contribute to community life. At the post office one finds information about local events and services, a friendly face.

It is ironic that at a time when the government is promoting community partnerships, they are excusing the closure of post offices that do much to help foster community links and partnerships. Costs should not always be definitive factors when determining whether or not an office should be closed. The long-term social costs may be more expensive ultimately.

If the branches were closed, this would ultimately undermine the viability of the sub postmasters' businesses as a whole. If they cannot remain open and ultimately close, the community loses a vital community asset that a fashionable shop, bar or restaurant cannot replace, however tantalising these enterprises may appear.

The consultation period and process do not appear to be just. To embark on a consultation period during the summer months when many people take their holidays seems as if the post office does not wish to fully engage the community in the consultation process. Could not the consultation period have been undertaken at a time when more residents and businesses are available for comment and liaison? Would you consider extending the consultation period?

It is odd that if this is meant to be a consultation period, that the post office has not sent representatives to two of the vital community meetings arranged to discuss the closure (20 July, Lancaster Road, and 22 January, Victoria Road). Consultation is a two way process. In the same vein, it is odd that Postwatch did not see fit to attend the meeting regarding Victoria Grove as they are meant to be the consumer watchdog. Their reasoning seemed to be based on rather spurious grounds and indeed seems to go against the grain of what they are established to do. They said that they did not feel it right that they should have to address another unruly crowd of people. The first meeting was not so unruly as to mean their presence would be threatened; the second meeting was very peaceful.

I appreciate that the Post Office will be attending a meeting with RBK&C councillors on the 28 July that I understand is open to the public. However, it would be helpful if the consultation period were to be extended, representatives from the Post Office and Postwatch could be present at other community meetings, and that ultimately that the closures would not take place and ever be contemplated again.

Yours sincerely,

Councillor Mrs. Jennifer Kingsley