A different approach for the Post Office

By Kristofor Brown

Surprising to those who know or have a perception about my politics, I have much sympathy for Peter Mandelson when he says Royal Mail needs a fresh source of capital and management expertise. There are a number of Postal companies like TNT, FedEx, DHL etc who can offer distinct experience in transforming the efficiency of Royal Mail.

Let us be clear, the Post Office is far more than simply a business set on making profit. It’s a British institution with a distinct social objective to ensure people across the country can communicate effectively six days a week, almost every week of the year. But in an age in which e-mail, text messaging and social networking appear to offer a quicker, easier and cheaper form of communication, I as a consumer have the question the financial relevance of the Post Office in its current form.

Earlier today I went to the Post Office to post off my application for the Young Labour coming up in Gillingham. Before the application could be sent to the Labour Party for processing I needed to send it onto a friend to countersign it, I knew that today was the last possible day I could send it as it needed to be at their door tomorrow. After waiting for almost an hour in a queue of nearly ninety customers to only three counter staff I was told that the best way to ensure the letter arrives with the person the next day is to send via recorded delivery. I objected as it was unlikely the person would be at home to sign for it at midday, when the post usually arrives, only to be left a little red card saying they will need to collect the letter from a sorting office miles away during a time that most people would be at work. The other option offered was the standard first class stamp but was told by the counter worker “you know what the post is like”. If Young Labour members don’t see me at the conference, they will know who to blame. But in all seriousness, if you haven’t been affected by a story similar to this, you probably know someone who has. This can’t be allowed to continue for the ordinary consumer.

The facts are there to support my claim. Royal Mail loses about one million letters and parcels a month and is ranked bottom in the efficiency table of European postal operators. So I believe there is a very strong case to bring in the private sector to drive the Postal Office forward into the 21st century. However, I recognise the arguments of the CWU and those who want to keep Royal Mail in public ownership. Where does the privatisation stop? Undoubtedly if the Tories take office they’ll sell off not just some but all of the service. Then we could be in an awful situation where there is limited public regulation to keep the service in check to make sure it works for the consumer and treats workers fairly and Royal Mail becomes simply about profit and not the promise it was established for.

So let’s try a new radical approach to our great Post Office, one which is embedded with the values of co-operation and the idea that the Post Office is ‘the people’s Post Office’. Transforming each individual branch into a local social enterprise would ensure the needs of individual communities are met and are provided with a personalised and efficient service.
Under the framework, local people could elect two or three individuals from their area to represent them on their local Post Office branch management board to ensure their views, concerns and consumer aspirations are met. To provide management efficiency and to help fund the service, local and national businesses will be invited to become stakeholders and will be entitled to representatives on the management boards. Finally, the to ensure that the Post Office is fair and is not entirely about the consumer, workers can elect one or two representatives to the management board to ensure their interests are met. Nationally, Royal Mail will work as a regulatory board constructed on the same principles of the local Post Offices and will provide co-ordination amongst branches.

There are already examples where the Post Office has become a co-operative, particularly the Midcounties Co-operative which operatives around 85 branches. Although, they may not be run on the same lines I’ve suggested, the whole idea behind a lot of co-operatives is to engage in a customer led service. My understanding is that the Midcounties Co-operative is looking to take on more branches as the current batch prove to be successful.

Also, with my proposed framework, what’s stopping local branches from becoming more than just a postal service? One option could be to offer free internet portals, where customers could use the web for their correspondence – something that is increasingly outdating our standard forms of communication, something I’ve already touched upon with social networks , e-mail and text messaging. Another option could be for local branches to double as Credit Unions – an absolute vital financial service particularly in areas of high social deprivation. As part of that, centres could tie in with third sector organisations like the Citizens Advice Bureau and offer advice on a wide range of issues to people in most need.

These are only suggestions, but giving the freedom to the Post Office to be run by local people and businesses and allowing them to set a number of additional services as they see fit could dramatically change the face of Royal Mail. Competition between each local branch would mean services are only likely to improve.

If given the choice between the current arguments over the Post Office and a new radical local shakeup. I know which one I would choose.

Cllr Kristofor Brown

London Borough of Enfield
www.krisbrown.org.uk