Post Office Closures

I am perplexed, as I am sure other readers are, by Ian Smith's letter (BFP 1/5/09). He indicates that the EU Directive EU/67/EC and 2002/39/EC are related to the post office closures. I am sure everyone else knows it has nothing to do with the Post Office network, but relates to postal services delivered by the Royal Mail. The Royal Mail, the Regulator Postcomm, and the consumer watchdog Postwatch all support these measures so what is Ian's problem with them? These Directive set out to create common postal standards across Europe and opens up the current monopoly the Royal Mail has in the UK. Despite losing their monopoly the Royal Mail still support it.

Liberal Democrats believe a competitive market operates in the best interests of consumers Royal Mail already faces stiff competition from the German and Dutch post offices and other private companies. To compete effectively Royal Mail will need to operate in a more flexible, commercial and profitable manner. Opening up the market will enable this. If Royal Mail is to invest in its operational structure and its workforce we must equip it with the tools to generate that investment. This Directive creates a level playing field across Europe. The second also sets out a clear intention to protect rural postal network.

Perhaps Ian could explain why bearing in mind 3,000 Post Offices were closed before this Directive was passed in 1997, and why when a further 4,000 were closed prior to the latest amendment to the 2002 Directive, he considers they are relevant in any way to the Post Office closures? The fact is this government seems to be lining up the Post Office network, a vital public service, to sell it off to the private sector. Why else close a profitable post office like the one in Fornham All Saints, if not to trim off the less profitable elements to boost the market value of the rest?

The Directives by the way were negotiated and agreed by the European Commission. That is the body to which our elected government sends representatives to negotiate cross European agreements? How would Ian like such agreements to be reached?

If we make such agreements and sign them into law in the British Parliament then of course I would expect the European Court of Justice to uphold them?

Mentioning the Lisbon Treaty in a previous letter was deliberate act of waving a red rag to a bull, and as expected Ian lowered his head and charged! He may want to consider his earlier letters in which he accused the EU of being undemocratic, and demanded powers be returned to the UK. This is exactly what the Lisbon Treaty does. It introduces the long overdue reforms, makes the institutions more democratic and returns powers to the UK. Surely we all want that?

The Lib Dems have long demanded a referendum on joining the Euro, not the constitution, we don't have a constitution! We should have though!