Postal Services — Calls for details of Exceptions Service — rejected — 5 Jul 2004 at 18:50

Mr Dai Havard MP, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney voted with the majority (No).

The majority of MPs voted against the motion:[1]

  • This House
  • notes the failure of Royal Mail plc to deliver first and second class mail reliably and on time and regrets the damage this is doing to businesses and private customers alike;
  • notes with particular dismay the threatened closure in Leicester of the Knighton Church Road Post Office, Knighton, and the East Park Road Post Office, Spinney Hills;
  • calls on the Government to end the uncertainty facing the future of rural post offices as a result of the Government's refusal to announce further funding until after 2006;
  • deplores the inadequate consultation procedure of the Urban Reinvention Programme despite the Government's recent announcement to review urgently the arrangements for the consultation currently employed;
  • expresses continued concern about the Government's implementation of the different Direct Payment options which has caused significant problems particularly for elderly and disabled customers in Stechford, Shard End and Hodge Hill in Birmingham;
  • condemns the Government for its failure adequately to promote the take-up of Post Office Card Accounts; and
  • further calls on the Government to provide more details on the implementation of the Exceptions Service.[2]

The following alternative motion was proposed and passed without a vote:[3]

  • This House
  • supports the Government's strategy for a viable Post Office network;
  • welcomes the delivery by Royal Mail of 93 per cent. of first class letters the next day in the first half of 2003-04;
  • shares the Government's disappointment over the drop in performance since then, which rightly falls short of customers' expectations;
  • calls on Royal Mail and the unions to work together to improve the quality of service;
  • notes that the closure of any post office is regrettable but supports the Government's view that, without rationalisation, unplanned closures would continue, leaving damaging gaps in the network;
  • supports the Government's commitment to ensure that at least 95 per cent. of the urban population will live within one mile of their nearest post office;
  • supports the Government's commitment to ensure funding of rural post offices until at least 2006;
  • welcomes the changes to the urban reinvention consultation process and the extension of the consultation process from four to six weeks;
  • supports the Government's move to Direct Payment and welcomes the fact that already more than half of customers are getting their benefits, pensions and tax credits paid straight into accounts, of which 3.2 million are Post Office card accounts;
  • notes that the Opposition wasted millions of pounds of taxpayers' money on the Benefit Payment Card scheme;
  • supports the facility for those who cannot be paid through an account, particularly the most vulnerable older people, to receive a cheque payment; and
  • recognises that change was needed and congratulates the Government for its strong, decisive action.

which passed without a vote.

Debate in Parliament | Historical Hansard | Source |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con0 121 (+2 tell)075.5%
Ind0 1050.0%
Ind Con0 10100.0%
Lab253 (+2 tell) 0062.8%
LDem0 34063.0%
PC0 2050.0%
SNP0 2040.0%
UUP0 2040.0%
Total:253 163065.6%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

NameConstituencyPartyVote
no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive