Post Office closures - how bad electorally?

My local, very busy, city suburb sub Post Office is down for closure as part of the Post Office "Network Change Programme". Already the anti-closure petition has been signed by 750, probably more people than usually vote in local elections in the post-office's locality. The LibDems are making the most of this. Surely electorally this is a bad news nationally?

If this busy sub post-office, where you usually need to queue even with two counter staff, is not profitable, very few can be. Closures must have gone beyond obviously non-profitable post offices, to pushing extra business and profit onto fewer post offices to "increase network efficiency". This will regularly annoy a lot of people who will have to walk/drive/bus about 1 mile instead.

To my mind, if anyone politically gave this the nod, they should be taking some serious flak. There must be more innovative solutions than this. Surely more time should have been given for local authorities to explore options, such as moving the sub Post Offices into local libraries or pubs etc as Essex wants to explore - which seems a very good idea.

 Post Office



Display: Sort:

Re: Post Office closures - how bad electorally? (#1)

So, government's majority was cut to 20 on this, with 19 Labour MPs voting against the government. All so predictable. Dumb I think.