Tim Allen’s Postmaster Ponderings: Have a good think about what you want to say

This article is the individual ponderings of a postmaster and does not necessarily reflect the views of the NFSP but is the sort of communication we receive or hear that in turn is reflected in our future policies/actions.

Change is coming.

I’m talking about really big change like the government deciding it is no longer going to be the single shareholder or perhaps even, a shareholder at all. Worst of all Post Office Ltd (PO), or government, might decide that a post office closures programme is necessary.

I think we can compare being a postmaster to being a supporter of a football team. A passenger, as chairmen and managers come and go whilst we, regardless of how bad it gets, hang on in there supporting the team. Hang on a minute though, we’re suddenly one of the players and there’s someone out there who wants to know what we think and he’s someone who is going to listen.

The first confirmed sight of the coming change was in May at the NFSP Conference where Nick Read and the Postal Affairs Minister, Kevin Hollinrake, spoke as one and talked openly about the need for a Strategic Review. Fast forward less than three months and not only has the Minister changed but Nick Read has also left his desk temporarily while he is preparing his evidence for Phase 7 of the Horizon Inquiry.  If anything, their replacement makes the review even more certain.

Second sign is all the board changes coming in short order after the appointment of our new chairman, Nigel Railton, also in May. Al Cameron, CFO and one of the few who came out of the Inquiry with his head held reasonably high, has gone. Owen Woodley, acting CEO for Nick Read announced that the familiar name of Martin Roberts will be no more from 2 August whilst we also learnt that Owen himself is leaving the company at the end of August. People at these levels join a company to make changes. It’s a dangerous time when highflyers mix pure business and career development with the societal function of post offices.

Third we have a new government a.k.a. single shareholder. Do you think they are going to leave PO alone?

Fourth. The Inquiry Phase 7, coming to a YouTube Channel near you, is substantially about the post office that you run. This is happening in the Autumn and will be concluded by Christmas.  

I take the view that this fourth point is the most important one of them all.  The Inquiry has gone into enormous detail to try to understand the Horizon miscarriage of justice, and this has led Sir Wyn, Jason   Beer and their team to pick apart PO to a level of detail that will be forever unique in the history of the organisation. What Sir Wyn concludes next year is important and will be read carefully by government.  Whilst it would be foolish to say it won’t happen, to pre-empt the Inquiry conclusions with major change will undermine any change PO make if the Inquiry comes to a set of different answers.

All of the above is a long way of saying that each of us, if we care about our post offices and the customers we serve, really do need to complete the Inquiry questionnaire.

Firstly, I hope you have managed to find your questionnaire. It comes from YouGov, and I had to fish mine out of my junk mail folder which I only found after emailing the Horizon Inquiry and I was then referred to YouGov who, to their credit, answered me very quickly. 

The link code in the email that has been sent to you is unique. When you have completed the Q&A form the system knows that the link has been used as it proceeds to lock away your answers. Any attempt to open the link again will result in a rejection and a note to say the link has been used. Apparently, you can leave it for hours or days and take as long as you need to get to the end, but I did it in one session that took me about 30 minutes as I had a good deal of typing I wanted to get off my chest. I think it could be completed in about 15 minutes if you stick to the yes/no and agree/disagree questions.

There are just two questions where you have an opportunity to express an opinion. The first is about Horizon. Surely the answer is that we a fully tested NBIT as soon as possible. The length of time it takes to train new staff on Horizon, entirely at the postmaster’s expense, only for the certainty that they are going to spend at least a month or three making mistakes using it is surely reason enough to look forward to the demise of this archaic system.

The second, and final opportunity to tell the Inquiry what you think, comes at the very end.  Have a good think about what you want to say. After I’d finished, I sent an email to the Associate Director of YouGov thanking them for the work they and the Inquiry are doing and the response I got was a promise that every word we send we will be collated and given to Sir Wyn.

So please write what you truly think about PO or what you hope the future might look like. Feel free to cut, paste, slash, adapt or ignore any of the following. Either way I hope it helps you to think about what you feel is important for your and our future:

“I think the biggest problem faced by post offices is that I genuinely believe that government departments (as opposed to MPs) would like to see the end of any relationship with the post office network.

Our reality is that they have not only removed almost all government services from us but actively wish to pursue this policy so that they can, when the focus dies down, point to evidence that will show PO derive little or no income from providing the public with government services and that the logical next step is remove government support for post offices. These are the services that we used to be able to offer but now cannot. 

• TV Licenses
• Bus Passes
• HMRC Personal Tax payments
• Transcash Payments inc HMRC
• DWP Pension & Benefits
• NS&I services inc Premium Bonds
• The Health Lottery
• Fishing Licenses
• International driving licenses (from April 2024)

The government should be required to say why, for example, they think the public should not have the option of paying small personal tax bills at a post office. It's true that most people prefer online, it’s efficient and fast, but the option for the public to use post offices should exist for all of the services that have been taken away as there remains a sizable and important proportion of the population who are not IT literate or IT enabled and need the face-to-face contact experienced post office staff, who are compassionate and community minded, deliver.

If proof is needed remember that Baroness Neville-Rolfe briefly mentioned her unsuccessful visit to the treasury minister regarding NS&I Premium Bonds withdrawal and Alice Perkins mentioned her unsuccessful attempts to get government services to re-engage with PO as a “Front Office”. The last Postal Affairs Minister at the 2024 NFSP Conference said that “The way we live our lives has markedly changed”.  This is true but the internet was only invented in 1994 and there will always be some people unable to engage digitally. To ignore the people that need us or pretend that all the population can ultimately use the internet is a fallacy.

PO is doing a decent job expanding the number of carriers beyond Royal Mail (who have seemed hell bent on doing as much to damage post offices as they can) in the mails market and also in the world of banking where they are doing a genuinely great job with Banking Hubs that have a real synergy with post offices.

Government services however is where the public really need us. Post offices have to be relevant to people’s everyday lives, but we are being progressively destroyed by service withdrawal and low remuneration.

The irony of this service withdrawal situation is that a serious look at what can be restored could solve some of the financial problems for PO. Imagine government departments actually paying us for services delivered to their customers rather than them simply having to subsidise us, so long as they continue to accept the society benefit post offices deliver.

The NFSP have proposed an Oversight Committee is part of any new governance structure and this is important as it allows the needs of different aspects of British Society to be heard and incorporated into the purpose and mission PO.

Postmaster Remuneration - PO income to postmasters is truly atrocious. We receive 47% of their total income. Why is this proportion so low? The remuneration model is based on the necessity for a post office to be a successful retail shop first and a post office second. The postmaster has to subsidise the cost of running a post office or it goes bust. This is a particular problem in rural areas where footfall is small, and pay is not automatically weighted to where need is greatest. Standard postmaster pay is made up only of fees for selling mail, banking, travel and government services products. There is no fee for the responsibility of being a postmaster. The fee for selling a Second-Class stamp is 3% i.e. 85p x 3% = 2.5p. You have to do the impossible and sell a stamp in less than seven seconds if you want to recover minimum wage from this transaction. Not all fees are this bad, but it serves to illustrate.

We have been told a Strategic Review is coming our way and that more post offices are likely to close. This should be the outcome only after all other options have been considered. Why do PO have to retain 53% of the income they receive to cover their costs? Does every part of the PO organisation add more value than the cost it incurs? Much of what PO do, including Bank Hubs growth, is necessary but the Strategic Review should start with an inward rather than outward look. PO remuneration to well over 50% of the post offices in the network will be less than £3,000 per month. How many would have to be cut to make a noticeable impact of cost versus revenues?

Thank you for this questionnaire. I hope these views are reflected upon and appropriate questions asked of Phase 7 participants.

 Tim Allen

Kington Main

August 2024

Are you interested in writing a blog about your experiences as a postmaster, or about the issues and challenges you face? Get in touch with us at communications@nfsp.org.uk