---

Postal Services Bill [HL]

Amendments 31 and 32 seek to remove or alter the protections that are provided by the definition of "post office" in Clause 14. Post offices deliver a wide range of services, particularly postal and government services, across the country. They play a vital social and economic role in the communities they serve. As I mentioned last week, the Government have no intention of supporting any further programme of post office closures. We are committed to ensuring the continued sustainability of the post office network. That is why we decided to award the substantial new contract for the Post Office card account to the Post Office. It is why just last week the DVLA and the Post Office announced a landmark contract for the Post Office to provide the face-to-face service for the 10-year renewal of driving licences, and why we are providing £1.7 billion for it up to 2011, including £150 million a year specifically to support non-commercial branches. To cement this commitment, government will maintain the Post Office entirely in government ownership—a commitment which I note the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, who spoke for one of the opposition parties, was unable to join the Government in making during last week’s debate. On the amendments, the words "post office" are relevant in this part of the Bill only for the purpose of defining a Post Office company under Clause 2. A Post Office company must be engaged in the provision of post offices. Under Clause 1, a Post Office company must be owned in its entirety by the Crown, so the significance of the definition is that if a company is not engaged in the provision of post offices, it will not be caught by the ownership protections of Clause 1. The definition in Clause 14 is therefore purposefully drafted to be quite broad, but also to make Parliament certain of its meaning. This ensures that the protections provided by the ownership restrictions in Clauses 1 and 2 apply in all appropriate circumstances. At the same time, we do not want the legislation to be silent, leaving the public and the Post Office uncertain about the scope of these protections. Trying to encapsulate the varied and vital role of a post office in legislation is not an easy task. However, its social role encompasses the provision directly to the public of both mail services and government services. The Government’s ownership controls should therefore remain in force whenever the company is engaged in providing those services directly to the public via its unrivalled network of approximately 12,000 post offices. We would not want the removal of the stipulation that a post office must provide services from premises directly to the public, operating from post offices as noble Lords and I recognise them rather than simply providing an internet or telephone service. This face-to-face contact is the fundamental basis of the critical role that post offices play in the communities that they serve. In the light of what I have said, I ask the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.