Employee-owned Post Office model ‘unlikely to be considered until 2030'
This sets out its views on how the Post Office should be run in the future, including possible changes to its ownership structure.
The DBT said turning the organisation into a 'mutual', whereby it is collectively owned by its members, was a possible long-term option.One version of this structure could see membership limited to postmasters and franchisees, or it could also include customers, employees and communities.
But the Government said the Post Office 'should be financially and operationally stable before mutualisation can be considered', meaning it would need to be profitable and cash-generative.
It is also in the process of working to replace its Horizon IT system following the scandal, in which about 1,000 people are thought to have been wrongly prosecuted and convicted over shortfalls in their branches caused by faulty software.
This means the earliest date to consider mutualisation is thought to be around 2030, the DBT said.
It could then take a further three years to implement, with it being a 'complex, time consuming and potentially expensive process', the Green Paper read.
The Government said another long-term option for the ownership structure is a charter model, similar to the BBC and universities, which sets out an organisation's public purpose and rules for how it operates.
Meanwhile, the paper found that the Post Office's requirement to run at least 11,500 branches across the UK had become 'more challenging and costly' due to rising labour costs against declining visitors across the network.
This has resulted in it requiring more subsidies from the Government in recent years, it said.
The DBT said one option for the future of the Post Office network was to scrap the minimum branch requirement, meaning it could address loss-making branches and focus on bigger, full-service sites.
But it would still have to ensure that at least 99% of the population stay within three miles of a full-service branch under this option.
The Government stressed that its current level of funding to the Post Office is 'unsustainable' in the long-term and that the organisation should be able to self-fund investment in its network and postmasters.
The Post Office made a trading profit of £22 million in the 2023-24 financial year, according to its latest annual report.
But it is estimated to swing to a trading loss of £24 million for the latest year and £60 million over the 2025-26 financial year.
However, the Government plans to award a new subsidy package worth £118 million to fund a transformation plan and further investment that could improve its services and its financial position.
Alongside the Green Paper, the DBT said it had launched a three-month consultation period, giving customers and postmasters the opportunity to have a say in how the service is run.
Post Office minister Gareth Thomas said: 'Post Offices continue to be a central part of our high streets and communities across the country.
'However, after 15 years without a proper review, and in the aftermath of the Horizon scandal, it's clear we need a fresh vision for its future.
'This Green Paper marks the start of an honest conversation about what people want and need from their Post Office in the years ahead.'
Neil Brocklehurst, Post Office's chief executive, said: 'We now have a once-in-a-decade opportunity to have a national conversation about the future of our post offices and their role in supporting communities across the UK.
'This Government consultation is a vital part of shaping what the future of Post Office could, and should, look like.'
Dave Ward, general secretary of the Communication Workers Union (CWU), criticised the Green Paper for 'prioritising further cost-cutting and offering no vision for its future'.
'Successive governments have failed the Post Office, its workers and customers – choosing to use government subsidies for planned redundancies, closures and so-called transformation plans that are nothing more than managed decline,' he said.
Mr Ward said the CWU was advocating a 'joint venture ownership model' that would bring the Post Office and Royal Mail back together and give postmasters greater say over the governance and direction of the company.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
42 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Court reforms vital to tackle ‘scandalous disgrace' of backlog, says Ken Clarke
Given the mounting trial logjam, the Government has 'no choice' but to swiftly accept proposed reforms, which would see less cases heard by juries, according to the Conservative peer. Last week, plans to reduce the number of jury trials and create a new type of crown court where cases are heard by judges were unveiled by Sir Brian Leveson. The review commissioned by the Government seeks to 'reduce the risk of total system collapse' amid a record-high backlog where some cases are listed for 2029. It comes after the crown court backlog in England and Wales passed 75,000 cases for the first time, rising to 76,957 at the end of March. Sir Brian's recommendations are expected to save approximately 9,000 sitting days in the crown court each year from some of the main changes, such as by diverting cases to magistrates' courts or to the proposed Crown Court Bench Division for trials to be heard by judges. Juries would be reserved to hear the most serious cases. Ministers are now considering the recommendations and will respond in the early autumn with a view to legislation. The Government has already accepted a raft of reforms proposed in a separate independent sentencing review by former justice secretary David Gauke to tackle jail overcrowding. Speaking in Parliament, Lord Clarke of Nottingham, who also previously served as justice secretary, said: 'Does the minister accept that it is a scandalous disgrace that in this country some victims and people charged with offences have to wait months and sometimes years before a trial can take place? 'Does he therefore agree that, in those circumstances, the Government have no choice but to accept as quickly as possible the excellent recommendations made by Sir Brian Leveson, because I hear of no alternatives? 'Will he undertake that they will not take too long reviewing and considering these matters? 'This should proceed as rapidly as possible with the full support of everybody who has the interests of the rule of law and justice in this country at heart.' Welcoming his support, justice minister Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, who is also a sitting magistrate, said: 'Data published last month showed the backlog stood at nearly 77,000 cases. That is an increase of 2,300 cases over the previous quarter. 'If we were not to take any action, it is projected that the outstanding caseload would be 100,000 in 2028. Clearly, that is unacceptable, and I absolutely take the point he made.' Leading lawyer and independent crossbencher Lord Pannick said: 'Does the minister agree that, in addressing the very serious problems faced by the criminal justice system, it is important not to romanticise the jury, given that 90% of all criminal trials in this country are heard without a jury and relatively speedily – not as speedily as perhaps they could be, but relatively so – and they are heard effectively and with justice.' Lord Ponsonby said: 'Of course I would agree because, as a magistrate, I was among those who hear 90% of all criminal cases. 'There is no right to a jury trial. However, there is a right to a fair trial. 'For a fair trial, it must be heard in a timely manner. That is where we are failing. 'We need these systemic changes to address that fundamental problem, so that people – both victims and defendants – can get a fair trial in a timely way.'
South Wales Argus
an hour ago
- South Wales Argus
Court reforms vital to tackle ‘scandalous disgrace' of backlog, says Ken Clarke
Given the mounting trial logjam, the Government has 'no choice' but to swiftly accept proposed reforms, which would see less cases heard by juries, according to the Conservative peer. Last week, plans to reduce the number of jury trials and create a new type of crown court where cases are heard by judges were unveiled by Sir Brian Leveson. The review commissioned by the Government seeks to 'reduce the risk of total system collapse' amid a record-high backlog where some cases are listed for 2029. It comes after the crown court backlog in England and Wales passed 75,000 cases for the first time, rising to 76,957 at the end of March. Lord Clarke said there is 'no choice' but to implement Sir Brian Leveson's recommendations (Stefan Rousseau/PA) Sir Brian's recommendations are expected to save approximately 9,000 sitting days in the crown court each year from some of the main changes, such as by diverting cases to magistrates' courts or to the proposed Crown Court Bench Division for trials to be heard by judges. Juries would be reserved to hear the most serious cases. Ministers are now considering the recommendations and will respond in the early autumn with a view to legislation. The Government has already accepted a raft of reforms proposed in a separate independent sentencing review by former justice secretary David Gauke to tackle jail overcrowding. Speaking in Parliament, Lord Clarke of Nottingham, who also previously served as justice secretary, said: 'Does the minister accept that it is a scandalous disgrace that in this country some victims and people charged with offences have to wait months and sometimes years before a trial can take place? 'Does he therefore agree that, in those circumstances, the Government have no choice but to accept as quickly as possible the excellent recommendations made by Sir Brian Leveson, because I hear of no alternatives? 'Will he undertake that they will not take too long reviewing and considering these matters? 'This should proceed as rapidly as possible with the full support of everybody who has the interests of the rule of law and justice in this country at heart.' Welcoming his support, justice minister Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, who is also a sitting magistrate, said: 'Data published last month showed the backlog stood at nearly 77,000 cases. That is an increase of 2,300 cases over the previous quarter. 'If we were not to take any action, it is projected that the outstanding caseload would be 100,000 in 2028. Clearly, that is unacceptable, and I absolutely take the point he made.' Leading lawyer and independent crossbencher Lord Pannick said: 'Does the minister agree that, in addressing the very serious problems faced by the criminal justice system, it is important not to romanticise the jury, given that 90% of all criminal trials in this country are heard without a jury and relatively speedily – not as speedily as perhaps they could be, but relatively so – and they are heard effectively and with justice.' Lord Ponsonby said: 'Of course I would agree because, as a magistrate, I was among those who hear 90% of all criminal cases. 'There is no right to a jury trial. However, there is a right to a fair trial. 'For a fair trial, it must be heard in a timely manner. That is where we are failing. 'We need these systemic changes to address that fundamental problem, so that people – both victims and defendants – can get a fair trial in a timely way.'
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
MPs slam ‘disgraceful' rollback of Northern Ireland veterans legislation
A debate over withdrawing the legal protections established by the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act, which shield veterans from being prosecuted for historic actions between 1969 and 2007 during Operation Banner, took place at Westminster Hall on Monday. MPs critical of the move suggested it would open a 'witch-hunt' against veterans who served to protect citizens across communities in Northern Ireland. The debate followed a public petition against repealing the legislation which attracted more than 170,000 signatures. Conservative MP John Lamont, who opened the parliamentary session, said the rollback could lead to 'two-tier' payouts for figures such as former Republican politician Gerry Adams. Mr Lamont said: '[The change] could result in a six-figure payout for Mr Adams, simply because his interim custody order was not considered by the secretary of state, but rather a junior minister. 'That is simply outrageous. 'We have seen a lot of examples of two-tier justice since the Labour government came to power, but this may simply be the worst of all. 'Is the Government really contemplating creating a system to drag northern Irish veterans through the courts, whilst potentially paying millions to terrorists? 'We should also be clear about the differences between the actions of soldiers and terrorists. When terrorists get up in the morning, they go out with murderous intent to use violence to attack our democracy. Soldiers do not. 'The Legacy Act is by no means perfect, but it is better than the disgraceful spectacle of veterans being dragged through the courts. 'Doing so is not sustainable – legally or morally.' Others echoed Mr Lamont's comments, highlighting the implications the rollback could have on the armed forces in future conflicts. Conservative MP Sir David Davis argued the change would mean that British soldiers would be abandoned by the country they served. He said: 'Getting this right is not just a matter of historical justice. 'The legal witch-hunt won't end in Northern Ireland. 'It'll cast a shadow over every future conflict that our armed forces engage in, and undermine their abilities to defend us.' He added: 'Those who freely talk about human rights would do well to remember that our rights, our law, our democracy and our nation were protected by the very veterans that are at risk today. 'So let us all make one promise, that no British soldier will ever again be abandoned by the nation they have so bravely protected.' Other MPs voiced their support in favour of the Government's proposals, arguing that the current act is not fit for purpose. Labour MP Louise Jones suggested that the lack of support for the legislation among victims, politicians across parties in Northern Ireland, and veterans themselves meant it ought to be repealed. She said: 'This Legacy Act has been found to be unlawful. It gives immunity to terrorists, and it denies justice to the families of the 200 service personnel that were murdered by terrorists during the Troubles. 'It is not supported in its current form by victims, it's not supported by a Northern Irish party, and many veterans are troubled by it. It must go and be replaced, and I call on the minister to outline how we can protect veterans from malicious lawfare of any conflict.' 'We have a huge duty here in Westminster to work with those communities not against them, and I hope everyone here will reflect on that important undertaking.' Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn pointed to statistics from the Centre for Military Justice that show that only one British soldier has been convicted since the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. He suggested that this was the case over the 27 years, despite immunity for British military personnel not being enshrined in law for the majority of this time. Mr Benn also argued that the changes would allow incomplete investigations into the deaths of soldiers to reopen. He said: 'Legacy is hard. This is the unfinished business of the Good Friday agreement. 'And that is why we need to listen to the many families who lost loved ones, including the families of British service personnel, who served so bravely. 'There are more than 200 families of UK military personnel who are still searching for answers 30, 40, 50 years ago about the murder of their loved ones. 'The Police Service of Northern Ireland recently confirmed they had 202 live investigations into Troubles-related killings of members of our armed forces, and a further 23 into the killings of veterans. 'Each and every one of those investigations was forced to close by the Legacy Act, and we will bring forward legislation to deal with that. 'The other challenge is the lack of confidence in the act on the part of communities in Northern Ireland, which we are going to seek to reform. 'We owe it to all these families.'
