The Member's question raises issues that are relevant to the Department for Social Development; however, they also go beyond it. I accept the premise of his question, which is that there are grave social and economic issues in north Belfast. Those issues underlay the difficulties that are being discussed and lead to a situation in which so many cases are being presented as a result of intimidation.

However, in December, 70 applicants presented themselves to the Housing Executive as homeless due to intimidation. Those are not classified in relation to paramilitary threats but stem from intimidation of any kind. Of those cases, 17 originated in north Belfast. The remainder originated elsewhere. The problem is, therefore, not only confined to north Belfast. The figures for December show that the majority of cases are happening outside that area.

TOP

3.

asked the Minister for Social Development what plans the Housing Executive has to change the procedure for awarding points when allocating housing.

(AQO 674/01)

Any changes to the common selection scheme will depend on the outcome of an evaluation that is in its early stages. When the current scheme was implemented in November 2000, it was recognised that after a reasonable period of operation, an evaluation would be necessary in order to confirm that the new scheme was meeting its aims. The aims of the scheme are to ensure that the allocation of social housing is made on a fair and equitable basis, and that housing is more closely matched to the needs of applicants.

Although there are no indications that the scheme fails to deliver, the evaluation - involving the Housing Executive, the housing association movement and the Department for Social Development - commenced in December 2001. It is envisaged that the findings of the evaluation will be summarised and circulated for wide consultation during April and May 2002.

Does the Minister agree that there is widespread concern that the present system for allocating housing does not cater sufficiently for the local resident? The outsider is favoured in some cases, which causes the local person much annoyance.

The Member made a similar representation as a result of an oral question that he tabled in November 2001, which was on the same issue in relation to new homes in the Portaferry area.

The Housing Executive is aware of the concerns of many local representatives on that issue when they raise the origin of applicants and the allocation of tenancies under the selection scheme. The scheme is under evaluation, and the results of that will be published and circulated for consultation later in the spring. The Housing Executive and the Department for Social Development will be listening closely to the outcome of that consultation process, into which Members will want to feed their thoughts. The Department will have the benefit of hearing everyone's views on that and other issues when it comes to making its decisions.

Can the Minister confirm the situation regarding housing associations and their compliance with the selection scheme? Do they operate the same points system? Do they operate in conjunction with the Housing Executive? Are they all working together on the same system?

Housing associations and the Housing Executive do operate a common selection scheme. Therefore everybody comes within that scheme. If there are people who are dissatisfied with the way in which housing associations are allocating houses, those associations are subject to performance verification by the Department for Social Development every two or three years. The Department will carry out a visit to ensure that there is compliance with its performance standards. If there is not, there will be further visits in order to establish an improvement plan.

Housing associations do apply the same system. Mechanisms are in place to ensure that there is proper monitoring and compliance.

4.

asked the Minister for Social Development whether he will consider the introduction of amending legislation to facilitate the exemption of means-testing of parents of disabled children whose homes need adaptation.

(AQO 709/01)

I refer the Member to my written response to Mr McClarty's question (AQW 1299/01), which is contained in the Official Report, volume 13, No WA 7 of 18 January 2002. I stated that I have no such plans at present, but I have asked officials to review the means test element of the disabled facilities grant generally. The review will also provide advice on the potential for change and implications relating to equality and other aspects. That may take time, as the views of other agencies will need to be sought. I will respond more fully when all the considerations are complete.

I thank the Minister for his encouraging response. The Minister is aware of the Homes Fit for Children campaign, which deals with the issue, and of the Housing Executive's support for the removal of means-testing for such adaptations. I am heartened that he is examining the matter. When can disabled children and their parents expect to access homes that are adequate for their lifelong living needs?

It is an important issue, and the parents of disabled children in that situation are worthy of help. Under the means test Regulations such parents have been given additional help from November 2000 in the form of increased housing allowance, which is increased in line with inflation. Parents of disabled children currently receive £67·08, by comparison with the £51·60 awarded to all other applicants. The allowance enables more low-income families to qualify for grant aid.

Furthermore, the provisions of the draft Housing Bill that relate to the disabled facilities grant will continue to impose a mandatory duty on the Housing Executive to provide that grant, unlike other awards. Additional discretionary grant aid may be available if the cost of the mandatory scheme exceeds the grant limit.

Despite all that, I am aware of the issues and the representations. As I said, I have asked officials to carry out the review, and I will consider the matter seriously.

I thank the Minister for his lengthy answer. During the review will the Minister consider that, under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, there is nothing to prevent advantageous action? As such, the Department could consider exempting from means- testing any adaptations that are made to the homes of disabled children.

I take the Member's point. The issue concerns the means-testing of parents of disabled children. Certain issues need to be explored in detail. The hon Member's point will be borne in mind as the review proceeds.

6.

asked the Minister for Social Development to detail the number of closing orders that have been served in the past five years on properties in County Fermanagh.

(AQO 661/01)

Two hundred and ninety-five closing orders were served in County Fermanagh in the past five complete financial years.

Of those 295, how many were occupied when the closing orders were served?

That information is not readily available, because a manual search of all the records would be needed to access it. However, I will welcome and respond to representations by Members who are concerned about that issue, and who forwards to me the details of any specific case that they want investigated.

TOP

8.

asked the Minister for Social Development to outline any plans to revise the Northern Ireland Housing Executive's house sales scheme.

(AQO 703/01)

A wide-ranging consultation on proposals to change the Housing Executive's house sales scheme was recently completed. The responses are being considered, and it is expected that final proposals will be submitted to the Housing Executive's board at its February meeting. Subsequently, I will consider the board's recommendations.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his answer. When will any changes be likely to take effect? Can he confirm that under the terms of the revised scheme tenants in rural areas will not be prevented from purchasing their homes?

As I said, the final proposals will be submitted to the Housing Executive's board in February. It will then be a matter for consideration by the Department. I will want to consider carefully those matters, not least the representations of Members and others, as well as those that have yet to be made.

The current legislation provides for tenants in rural areas to buy their homes. There are no plans to change that.

What is the position of housing association tenants who wish to buy their homes?

Eighteen housing associations operate a voluntary house sales scheme identical to that provided by the Housing Executive. Two hundred and twenty housing association properties have been sold to tenants. Those figures may appear low, by comparison with those for Housing Executive sales, but the Housing Executive owns more stock than the housing associations.

The Housing Bill that I will introduce will require all housing associations to operate house sales schemes that are identical to the Housing Executive's.

Is the Minister aware that existing housing association tenants could face increased costs if some sales proceed, and if some banks hold housing associations to the terms of their loan agreement? Some existing housing association tenants are unable to purchase their homes, and many could fall within TSN criteria. How will the Minister ensure that those people will not bear additional bank costs if they remain as housing association tenants?

Most housing associations run a scheme that is identical to the Housing Executive's. That will continue after the introduction of the Housing Bill, which will oblige housing associations to implement a house sales scheme, as opposed to their having the power to operate such a scheme.

The Housing Executive will examine the issue of bank charges in connection with the current review of the right to buy scheme. If the Member has specific concerns on the matter he should submit them to that review. I will be happy to consider the matter, although it has not heretofore been raised with me as a major issue of concern.

9.

asked the Minister for Social Development to outline the timescale for adaptations to Housing Executive properties, in particular for young people who are inadvertently injured while taking part in sports.

(AQO 697/01)

Although the Housing Executive does not have a specific programme for carrying out adaptations to its properties to facilitate young people who are inadvertently injured while taking part in sports, it does carry out a wide range of works to adapt its properties to suit people with disabilities. The time taken varies considerably, according to the type of work required.

The Minister has confirmed that it is difficult to get adaptations carried out in reasonable time. That can have a disastrous effect on some families. Will he therefore ensure that a strategy is planned for people in that position?

The Housing Executive's current adaptations process should, and will, cover any cases involving the people whom the Member identified - people who are inadvertently injured while participating in sports - and they can be dealt with in accordance with the adaptations policy. Regardless of whether a person suffers a disability as the result of a sports injury, a car accident or an injury in the home, the scheme will pick up all such cases.

I take the Member's point about the speed of the adaptation process. Members will be interested to know that the Housing Executive and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety are reviewing the housing adaptation service with the aim of speeding up aspects of that work. It is hoped that a final report will be produced in spring of this year.

However, that has not stopped various improvements to the service either taking place or being planned. For example, it has been agreed that minor works, such as the installation of handrails and lever taps, and the widening of garden paths for wheelchair users, can be undertaken directly by the Housing Executive without the need to involve an occupational therapist. In many cases, the need for that involvement is the reason for delays in adaptation work. People must get a recommendation from an occupational therapist for much of the work, and, in some cases, getting a visit from an occupational therapist can take months, if not years.

Those issues fall outside my departmental responsibility, but we are working to increase the number of smaller measures that can be taken without the need to refer the matter to an occupational therapist.

12.

asked the Minister for Social Development to detail the number of contractors that have been removed from the NIHE register of approved contractors due to non-completion or bad workmanship over the past three years.

(AQO 671/01)

The information that the Member seeks is not readily available. However, in the year ending March 2001, no firms were removed solely for poor performance.

Can the Minister give his assessment of the situation in the Carrickfergus Borough Council area, and, specifically, the renovation schemes at Drumhoy Drive, Ederny Walk and Salia Avenue?

I thank the Member for his question.

It was a rather specific question.

It was a very specific question. The Member has been assiduous in his constituency duties, and it is not the first time that he has raised the issue. I have, therefore, been able to anticipate, to some extent, the sort of question that he might ask. Once again, he has lived up to his reputation.

Order. Is it another case of a well- prepared Minister happening to have a paragraph to hand?

I am grateful, Mr Speaker, for your compliment about being well prepared. However, I anticipated that the Member might raise that issue with regard to Carrickfergus, and I can confirm that the penultimate phase of the scheme that he referred to for the Salia Avenue, Drumhoy Drive and Ederny Walk areas of Carrickfergus will be completed by mid-March 2002.

That brings us to the end of Question Time. I am not sure whether a Member had a point of order which she wished to raise, but that may have passed now.

TOP

Post office provision

I beg to move

I am grateful for the opportunity to bring the motion before the House. Since the threat of post office closures became a matter of concern and was debated in the Assembly some time ago, little, if any, progress has been made in planning a successful future for this essential service. The Post Office has a new name, Consignia, but we have precious little else, except mounting evidence that the Post Office is fast approaching meltdown for those who reside in rural and socially disadvantaged urban areas. These are not just my views; people much closer to the Post Office, who experience the problems every day, share these views.

Opportunities to develop the Post Office as a key centre for communications and public services, including new e-government initiatives, Internet access and many other possibilities have been missed. In the meantime, the closure of post offices, rural post offices and sub-post offices is increasing as postmasters retire and replacements cannot be found. As we speak, 28% of sub-postmasters in rural areas and 35% in deprived urban areas are actively considering leaving the Post Office. A third of rural sub-postmasters who wish to leave cited loss of income as the main reason. Many sub-postmasters actively seek new business opportunities and feel frustrated by constraints and what they see as the Post Office's lack of dynamism with regard to developing new services and marketing those already provided.

All this is happening at a time when more than 90% of customers and residents in rural and deprived urban areas still firmly believe that post offices have a key role to play in the day-to-day life of our communities. A comprehensive survey, Post Offices and Community Needs in Rural and Deprived Urban Areas, which was carried out last September, states that 61% of deprived urban customers and 69% of rural customers use their local post offices to obtain what are called "free" community information and services. Up to 41% of customers obtain informal advice from sub-postmasters, and 29% obtain Government information. We cannot afford to lose this service, because we are committed to targeting social need (TSN), and the Post Office plays a vital role in delivering information about a variety of Government services that help to create equality of standard of living, which everyone is entitled to, but which not everyone receives.

We have been told that the Government are committed to keeping rural post offices open, but there is little evidence to show that anything practical has been done to make this a certainty. The fate of the post offices in socially deprived urban areas appears to be sealed. The decision to close post offices will be taken in the full knowledge that they provide a lifeline to many people, not least the elderly and families that cannot afford to travel to town centre outlets.

In Northern Ireland there is already worrying evidence of the decline in the standard of service offered by the Post Office and Parcel Force. This has been well publicised by the Northern Ireland committee of Postwatch, the consumer watchdog, in its news release of 5 December 2001. None of those failings is attributed to the postal workers, who do a sterling job. The failings were attributed to Consignia, which needs to be encouraged to comprehensively assess the needs of its customers and deliver a service to meet those demands. Today there is further criticism from the Federation of Small Businesses of Consignia's plan to delay some deliveries until afternoons.

I suggest that the future of our post offices is a key element in delivering a service fit for the modern age. To date, the focus has been firmly on the necessity to get Consignia into shape to be sold to the private sector. Little serious regard has been given to the essential service which it provides for the whole community, and particularly for those who live in rural communities or socially disadvantaged urban areas.

Speaking last October, a Northern Ireland spokesperson for the National Federation of SubPostmasters warned that the restructuring of the Post Office would mean survival of the fittest for some postmasters. He predicted that many post offices would close, and that already it may be too late for some of them. We accept that efforts are being made to find new business. However, many of those outlets will be gone if and when decisive action is taken. By then, the network will have become eroded to offices in centres of high population only.

Next year, post offices will lose a huge chunk of their business when social security payments are due to be made by automatic credit transfers payable through banks. That will bring its own problems for many people who live in small communities, where there is a post office but no bank. It will also create problems for people who do not have, or want, bank accounts but who believe that they are entitled to their payments with the minimum of inconvenience and outlay.

Post offices often double up as mini-markets, providing essential items such as milk, bread, coal and other necessities. There is every possibility that when a post office closes, so too will the shop, thus compounding the isolation problems.

Progress on the development of a universal bank by the Post Office is disappointing, and its efforts to promote Post Office banking services in their current form is also to be regretted. Must they wait until the writing is on the wall for the more vulnerable post offices? The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, has pledged his support for the retention of post offices in rural and urban areas, but what will be the value of such a pledge when this public service is privatised, and the focus moves to maximising profits, which can be made only in areas of large population? Action is needed, but nothing is happening. My understanding is that no pilot study is taking place in Northern Ireland, where the needs of our people are quite different from those in Leicestershire and Rutland, where studies are taking place.

I would like the Assembly to take a direct interest in the future of the Post Office, and I look forward to hearing about any developments. I wish to see a task force being set up to define a strategy that meets the needs of the people of Northern Ireland. I would encourage much closer co-operation with the postal services in the Republic, where similar dilemmas are being experienced as a direct result of pressure from the European Union to free up postal services in order to encourage competition. Greater efforts must be made to define service standards, and clearly understood procedures must be put in place to deal with proposed post office closures. People must be made aware that the Post Office continues to exploit opportunities for new commercial services and pay for the cost of introducing those services. The problem of attracting new sub-postmasters must be addressed by the introduction of new and relevant financial and delivery packages. That is what is happening in other sectors of industry and commerce where, for whatever reason, there are recruitment problems, and there is no reason why the Post Office should not do likewise.

The Post Office plays a key role in the delivery of Government and community information. If that service is lost, the socially disadvantaged, the marginalised and the elderly will suffer most. There must be a clearer definition of post offices' public, private and community information and advisory role, and a move away from indirect subsidy through the Post Office to more direct subsidies for this essential service which, to date, has not had a financial value placed on it.

I look forward to a stimulating debate, and I hope that those who have the future of the Post Office in their hands will listen and take what is being said seriously, because it is not simply a matter of post offices closing - the future of entire communities is at stake. We, and the Government Departments for which we now have responsibility, have a part to play. It would be unfortunate if all the efforts made to regenerate rural and socially disadvantaged urban communities were harmed in such a damaging way by the closure of sub-post offices on a grand scale.

TOP

I thank Mr Dallat for highlighting the plight of the existing post office network. While the closure plans of Consignia are reported to apply solely to England, Scotland and Wales, there should be no doubt that similar financial pressures exist in Northern Ireland and will apply to our sub-post office network. Consignia, whose postal services cover the entire United Kingdom, is reported to have lost £281 million during the first six months of the current financial year. It is clear that there are significant financial forces afoot, which are dictating the change to our existing post office network. It is not just a matter of making a report - there are real financial pressures at work here, which are forcing, and continuing to force, the closure of many sub-post offices against communities' wishes.

I am concerned at the vagueness of some of the recent reports and comments from Consignia spokespersons. For instance, they have said that some of the 17,500 post offices are not viable. They say that they have no intention of closing 1,000 post offices, and then add the word "soon" - maybe not this week, but what about next week?

Finally, the network is making a loss, and something has to be done to make as many of these post offices as viable as possible. What is being done? I have not heard of any concrete work being done by the Post Office itself. We have heard hints about things that are going to happen and things that they are investigating. We have heard suggestions by the Labour Government for introducing alternative means of funding, but no concrete proposals as yet.

With particular reference to Northern Ireland, the 'News Letter' in a report on Consignia only last week said that Consignia had said that it was "too early to say" how many urban post offices would be affected by the restructuring programme and that

Clearly there are moves afoot that will affect not only the largely rural population in Northern Ireland, but also much of the urban population, and it is the deprived urban population that is likely to suffer most.

There was a sustained decline in the post office network throughout the United Kingdom during the last decade. It has been reported that approximately 200 post offices closed each year, but 384 closed during 1999. According to the Postal Service Commission's report in December 2001, the number of sub-postmasters who are resigning has not increased substantially over the last couple of years, but there is evidence of a reduction in the number of people showing an interest in replacing those who do resign, particularly in small rural communities. So, while existing postmasters are hanging on, replacing them is not an attractive option at present. Financial pressures are largely responsible for the closures, so taking a sub-postmaster's job is not an attractive proposition at present.

In a House of Commons Hansard report of 12 April 2000, the Prime Minister indicated another pressure:

That was said nearly two years ago, and I have not heard of any new services or new financial streams to keep our post offices sustainable.

The Post Office's largest contract is with the Benefits Agency, and that is shrinking because people are choosing to take direct payments. The contract for paying benefits is up for renewal and this, in itself, creates huge doubt within the post office network. For the record, my preference is for the Post Office to get another contract, because, as well as providing a good social security benefit delivery service, there are many other benefits for the community.

At European level there is additional pressure, with the Directive on postal liberalisation, which is making postal deliveries increasingly more competitive. The Directive is also reducing the Post Office's ability to transfer money and support sub-post offices. There is a range of financial pressures afoot.

I welcomed the announcement last year that shops and post offices in rural villages and hamlets would get a rate rebate of 50% to 100%. That has been a positive benefit, but is it enough? It appears not. The decline is continuing, and the Assembly must assess which particular services it would find beneficial to contract to post offices. This could take the form of providing access to Government information. Their existing telecommunications network provides them with an existing infrastructure, and I urge that serious consideration be given to a proposal that would make it possible to give financial assistance to sub-post offices.

I have some criticism of the Post Office itself. Its senior management is slow to react to market forces. The power card scheme, for example, which was operated by NIE, was subsequently replaced by a keypad system. The Post Office originally tendered for the business but was not successful. No subsequent tenders were submitted, and, as a result, that aspect of business was lost to other competitors.

In addition, the Post Office has been preventing sub-post offices from introducing other systems that would enable it to retain that aspect of the business. It is unhelpful that the Post Office - having lost contracts - still insists on developing its own wonderful system, which will come too late. Unless it reacts to market forces, that aspect of the business will be lost to competitors. There are enormous pressures from a variety of sources, and senior Post Office management must become more proactive.

Another aspect that is putting off potential new sub- postmasters is the large number of robberies that have occurred at post offices. One sub-post office in my constituency was robbed three times in the past year. This activity is putting additional cost burdens on sub-post offices; it puts a community facility at risk and must be deplored. If offices eventually close, there will be a huge public outcry. Can we not be more proactive? Are there any procedures whereby additional support can be given to those sub-post offices to assist them with security and ensure that they will remain in business and that their staff will feel safe?

Post offices, which are still a reserved matter, are not being handled well. The Assembly should apply pressure on the Government in London to ensure that the issue will be addressed, because no proposals have come forward about this in almost two years. It is time for concrete proposals, so that our existing post-office network can grow confident that it will have a future and will be able to see that investment will secure, in the long term, not only its existence, but benefits for the wider community too, because people rely on access to a post office.

The news that Consignia is to dump around 30,000 employees to address spiralling company debts has sent a shock wave through the company from top to bottom and into every sector of its current operations. It is therefore inevitable that the repercussions of such a huge number of redundancies will be felt in every constituency, borough and town throughout Northern Ireland. The loss of 30,000 jobs represents an overall figure of one in six of the current workforce, which is absolutely staggering.

I have already contacted the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. Its representatives are unable to make any comment on the crisis, as they claim that it is a reserved matter and that the Northern Ireland Office has responsibility. Neither that Department nor the NIO know the extent of the impact that these job losses will have in Northern Ireland - they simply know that job losses are inevitable. If the job losses are spread equally around the United Kingdom, as many as 850 people in Northern Ireland could find themselves without work. It is therefore impossible to imagine how services are to be maintained across the Province, and to assess the impact that the job losses will have, especially on rural life.

This is not just a straightforward case of a privately owned company being priced out of the market, but this is a publicly owned company that provides a service, which is in deep financial crisis. There is an obligation on the Government to maintain the level of services. The power to act is there; only the commitment and determination are needed to shore up this essential public service.

There are currently approximately 170 Post Office branches in Northern Ireland, employing around 4,500 people. Every employee of the Post Office not only provides a postal service for the citizens of the United Kingdom but fulfils a much greater social duty, especially in rural areas. Most post offices represent an integral part of local society, and they act as a focal point for many local communities. They act as a reassurance to many elderly citizens and are somewhere for people to meet and interact. In principle, they provide access to many services other than letters and parcels. That public service is currently being allowed to fade out and disappear in many areas.

Ever since Consignia took over the running of the Post Office, the company has never looked strong, and its operating costs increased by 500% to £100 million in the first six months to September last year, while losses at Parcelforce Worldwide were in the region of £200 million for the year 2001. The shocking reality is that the Post Office has, in the past, been a profitable business. In the past 10 years the Post Office made a profit of approximately £350 million every year, except for the last two.

Several factors, including the growth in e-mail, changes in competition rules and the freeze in stamp price, have contributed to the crisis. However, the company management must share a huge degree of the blame. It is estimated that the financial investment made by sub-postmasters across the country is around £1·5 billion, yet, even with that huge personal commitment, post offices are continuing to close on a weekly basis. The wage received by sub-postmasters is, in effect, the gross profit of their business - the transactions carried out on behalf of the Post Office, minus all their overheads such as salaries, rent, rates, electricity, et cetera. Over the past number of years the finance generated through the post office has either remained static or has decreased, while the cost of living and overheads have continued to increase. That has led to a question mark being placed over the viability of many post offices, and an ever-increasing number are no longer able to survive.

There is then the question of the support being given to the creation of the universal bank by the high street banking institutions. In mainland UK, all the banks have signed up, yet here in Northern Ireland only the Ulster Bank Ltd and the Northern Bank Ltd have signed up - the First Trust Bank and the Bank of Ireland have not signed up.

Unfortunately, to date, all that the Post Office has witnessed has been a decline in business, with the loss of the Northern Ireland Electricity Powercard contract alone costing Northern Ireland sub-postmasters between 4% and 12% of their annual salaries.

If the Government genuinely value the services of the Post Office as currently provided, why do they appear to remain acquiescent to the continued closures of offices across the country? It appears that offices are being allowed to deteriorate and disappear, and many feel that it is in an effort to minimise compensation payouts.

In all of this, Tony Blair's Government appear very reluctant to act in order to protect this valuable service. The announcement from Consignia that 17% of its workforce is to be laid off has done nothing to provoke the Government into any kind of meaningful response. It only serves to reinforce the opinion that they are more than happy to watch the postal service crumble.

The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment does not have responsibility for this matter, so I have written to, and am awaiting a response from, Patricia Hewitt MP, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, on this urgent matter. I urge the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to use what influence he has to gain a satisfactory response from his Westminster counterpart.

If action is not taken promptly the situation looks predictably sure to deteriorate even further. We, as publicly elected representatives, have responsibility to those who put us here to do all in our power to maintain the levels and quality of the postal service in Northern Ireland.

TOP

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I am taking a different approach to this debate. While I agree with other Members, I want to look at this matter from the Committee for Social Development's perspective.

The National Federation of SubPostmasters wrote to the Committee on 11 September 2001 requesting a meeting to discuss the impact on local communities, both urban and rural, of the changes proposed by the Government and the Post Office. The federation identified three main areas of concern: the changes to the method of benefit payments; the network reinvention; and the treatment of the Six Counties as a region.

The Committee recognised the need to tread carefully in relation to improper interference in a commercial operation but saw merit in exploring the issue of changes to the method of benefit payments. The Committee was also mindful that the Post Office is a reserved matter, which falls within the responsibility of the Department of Trade and Industry. However, we agreed that it would be useful to meet a delegation from the federation, and an invitation to attend a future meeting of the Committee was extended. Subsequently the federation said that it wished to consider developments in England, Scotland and Wales before appearing before the Social Development Committee. It also referred to changes in personnel in the regional offices as a further reason for postponing its appearance before the Committee. The latest indication from the federation suggests that it will not be in a position to appear before the Committee until the end of February at the earliest.

The Social Development Committee is aware that automated credit transfer will be the normal method of payment after 2003. The Department for Social Development has informed the Committee that, in keeping with a public commitment given by British Ministers, benefit recipients will be able, if they wish, to continue to collect their benefits in full, in cash, at post offices.

The network of post offices in the Six Counties provides services to rural and urban customers. The elderly, and people who rely on local services because they have poor or no access to public or private transport, make use of many of those services. According to the National Federation of SubPostmasters, about one third of our post offices provide services to rural communities. The Committee understands that the Minister for Social Development is committed to using existing methods of payments from post offices until March 2003. However, given that we are all singing from the one hymn sheet, and that we have all agreed with the context of the debate, I am disappointed that the Minister is not here to listen to the contributions of Members. He would have benefited greatly from it. Post offices, especially those in rural areas, provide invaluable services for local communities. While commercial viability cannot be ignored, neither can the fact that post offices provide an absolutely critical lifeline for rural areas where there may be no public transport or any other public services.

In the light of the Social Development Committee's interest in ensuring the timely and accurate payment of benefits to those who are entitled to them, we look forward to hearing from the National Federation of SubPostmasters. I intend to ensure that nobody is disadvantaged, regardless of who they are or where they live. I hope that the Minister for Social Development will join me in ensuring that everything possible will be done to ensure that people have easy access and freedom of choice when cashing their benefits cheques. Go raibh míle maith agat.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>