BEIS0000342
BEIS0000342
To: ci: PS/Mr McCartney
PS/Sir M Scholar
MR SIBBICK Mr Macdonald
CGBPS Mr Baker CGBPS
Ms Brittén CGBPS
From: Mr Brebner CGBPS
Mr Corry SpA
CHRISTOPHER WOOLARD
PS/Secretary of State I-&
Room : /. aul .
1 Victoria Street 2. Ma & ull - I
[ Ww mle
3. ma oT
9 June 1999 4. Ms yy Loft)
MEETING WITH COLIN BAKER: 8 JUNE 199! yr
J
You were present along with Ms Anderson and Mr Corry when Colin Baker
and John Perberdy of the Sub-Postmasters Federation called on the Secretary
of State.
This was a long meeting, with frequently circular conversations where Mr
Baker pressed the Secretary of State. This is therefore a record of the key
points.
The Secretary of State opened the meeting by outlining the present position
on the Horizon project, and noted that Mr Baker was participating in the
working group led by Mr McCartney. He noted in particular that if
automation worked properly there was a chance to reap a sizeable proportion
of modernising government business.
Mr Baker said he was extremely grateful for the meeting with the Secretary
of State and praised the working group. He noted his members concerns
centred around the move to ACT and asked what the statement on Horizon
meant. You said that it was a move to ACT commencing in 2003 and DSS
aimed to complete this by 2005.
Mr Baker asked whether automation would help prevent loss of business
from 2003/5. You replied that there were opportunities, first, to tie-up with
the banks to provide banking services. This was already being done in part
BEIS0000342
BEIS0000342
without automation (Lloyds TSB, Co-Op). It also offered the opportunity to
retain Benefit customers who wished to withdraw money in cash at Post
Offices and the potential for increased footfall from non-benefit customers
using the banking facility. Second, automation offered the gateway to
modernising government services. The Secretary of State said modernising
government could in particular offer substantial business. Mr Baker tried to
get the Secretary of State to say that this would be sufficient to replace the
loss of BA business, but he demurred.
Mr Baker asked if the Secretary of State could commit HMG to staying with
the Post Office to pay benefits until contracts with the banks and automation
were in place. The Secretary of State said that achieving this clearly had to
be a goal in the forthcoming negotiations within government and there was a
commitment by BA to stay until 2003/5. There was an incentive for all
parties to work together to achieve automation and the banking contracts
within this timetable.
Mr Perberdy asked was there the possibility that if the roll-out of the bar
coded books system delivered sufficient BA savings, then they would
reconsider ACT. Mr Baker asked what percentage of BA work might be lost
under ACT. In terms of BA intentions and estimates, you suggested that Mr
Baker spoke to them direct.
Mr Baker asked what size of network, if any, the Government was
committed to. The Secretary of State replied that the forthcoming White
Paper would spell out our commitment. Clearly the number of Post Offices
would always be a dynamic question. But the Government was committed to
a national network. (Following the meeting the Secretary of State commented o
that the WP should make clear that the new POUNC should be able to
comment directly to the regulator on the size and make-up of the network). Vv
Mr Baker stressed that feeling was running high among his members that
this was another move to ACT. You pointed out this was not history
repeating itself. Real alternatives to sustain the network (banking,
automation) were possible here. The Secretary of State concluded by saying
he thought the breathing space could be used to find a solution all parties
were reasonably happy with.
CHRISTOPHER WOOLARD