Postal Services: Rural Areas

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Graham Stringer in the Chair]

14:30

[Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered postal services in rural areas.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. Residents of rural areas such as South Shropshire deserve access to good postal services, which keep families and friends connected, businesses alive and people informed. The cost of a first-class stamp has almost doubled since 2020, and is now £1.70 a stamp, but my constituents believe that they are paying more and getting less for their services. I will therefore approach the debate in two parts: post offices, which are vital to my towns and villages; and the delivery services of Royal Mail.

I will start with the Post Office, which is a vital part of the rural economy in South Shropshire. It provides a lifeline for many towns and villages. In some areas, the post office is the only shop for miles around and, increasingly, given banking closures, the only way to access cash. Post office services are available in branches such as Acton Burnell, Broseley, Alveley, Aston-on-Clun and Bishops Castle, as well as many more of my towns and villages. They play a central role in keeping rural communities connected.

Since the election, I am delighted to say that I have campaigned successfully against the planned closures of post office services in South Shropshire, including Clunton and Clunbury—beautiful areas.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman will know my constituency well, because he was previously the MP there, and that it is a largely urban area including a city centre. Even my constituents, however, have had serious problems with bills and birthday cards not arriving, and hospital appointments being missed because of the post being late, while one constituent confirmed that his business has been affected adversely. I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s speech and that rural areas have particular challenges, but does he agree that poor postal services are a nationwide issue affecting all communities, and that we need to address it as such?

[Stuart Anderson]

I look back fondly on the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, and I realise that this is a problem across the country. It is a nationwide issue, as he rightly pointed out.

I have also campaigned for the resumption of postal services in Cleobury Mortimer, which were closed in 2023, leaving the town without vital services. News on this front comes in no small part thanks to the efforts of a local resident, Ruth—I was delighted to meet her at an advice surgery recently. The efforts of Ruth and many others secured hundreds of signatures for a petition to keep the post office open in Cleobury. I am delighted to say that it was successful.

The post office network is relied on to fill the gaps left by bank closures. As many services shift online, the post office has served as a lifeline for residents in rural areas who are not able to use the internet to pay bills or to access cash. A post office is vital for our nation’s elderly, helping the 2.3 million without internet access to stay connected to their family and friends. I will also continue to campaign against bank closures, and I look for more banking hubs in areas such as Church Stretton, which has just lost its Yorkshire building society branch and could really do with a banking hub.

A few days ago, I was pleased to meet the residents group in Broseley. They wanted to discuss the changes that have happened to the post office on the High Street, which are concerning local residents. There have been a lot of changes, and the people of Broseley told me that they believe that the changes have had an impact not only on safety, in particular for elderly residents when withdrawing cash, but with a reduction in services, on the number of trained staff on the premises. I am asking the owners of Post Office to meet me and the Broseley residents to discuss that in more detail.

I want to point out to the Minister that I have concerns about the Government consultation on post offices, which could have unintended consequences. That open-ended consultation, which closed on 6 October 2025, could remove the minimum branch requirements and leave the size of the network up to the Post Office. The last Labour Government cut the number of post offices by 38%: 7,166 post offices were closed between 1997 and 2010—more than one every single day. I have already said that they are a lifeline for my constituency and many others. The Conservative-led Government then introduced a 11,500 minimum service requirement in 2010. Since then, the post office network has remained at roughly 11,500. Now that Labour is back, it looks like our post offices could be under threat again. The Government’s consultation could lead to half of Britain’s post offices closing, including 19 individual branches in South Shropshire. The proposed changes could remove the requirement for 95% of people in rural areas, such as South Shropshire, to live within three miles of a post office. The changes could also phase out part-time mobile outreach services, which are vital in my constituency. They typically make up 14% of the total network in the areas that they serve, although they are open on average only seven hours per week.

[Ben Lake (Ceredigion Preseli) (PC)]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for securing this very important debate. He mentions mobile services, from which my constituency benefits greatly. Does he share my concern that the Post Office tasks individual postmasters with an ever greater number of mobile spots? Although we are very grateful for their effort, that leaves the network vulnerable. If a postmaster falls ill or wants to retire, we lose significant coverage.

[Stuart Anderson]

The hon. Gentleman makes a brilliant point about an issue that affects rural areas, and I will come on to how Bishop’s Castle was impacted. There is no resilience in the system. If somebody is ill for a week, that area will not get those services.

Data published by the Financial Conduct Authority shows that 93.5% of people in rural parts of South Shropshire live within three miles of a post office, but that falls to 86.8% when the mobile outreach branches are excluded. If those services are cut even more in my 700 square mile constituency, that will leave a huge gap.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman is talking about mobile outreach services. One of the things that concerns me is that when the Post Office closes a bricks-and-mortar branch, it is required to carry out a six-week consultation with the community, but when it closes a mobile outreach service, there is no requirement for a consultation, even though that service may have been put in because of a branch closure. Does he agree that, regardless of whether we are talking about bricks and mortar or a temporary desk in a village hall, the Post Office should be under the same obligation to consult with the community?

[Stuart Anderson]

The hon. Lady makes a brilliant point, and I would like the Minister to feed back on the Government’s approach because these services are vital lifelines for our rural communities.

Despite last week’s sticking plaster U-turn, shops face a huge increase in their business rates bill, and next year alone many businesses in South Shropshire will be hurt. The Government have already taxed jobs with the increase to employers’ national insurance and have made it harder to hire through the Employment Rights Act 2025. That means that shops such as post offices are in grave danger.

I will give an example from my constituency. One of my post offices will see an increase in rateable value from £47,500 to £49,500. Its business liability will go from £14,221 to £18,909 in the first part of 2027, so in a little over 18 months it will see a 33% increase. That directly comes off its bottom line, and will make its very small bottom line even smaller or unprofitable.

The Government committed in their manifesto to strengthen the post office network, and I fully support that, but these changes could cut access to post offices for the elderly and rural communities, pushing thousands of postmasters who have served local communities for decades out of work. I will continue to support hard-working postmasters and their customers through my campaign to protect and enhance rural public services, given their importance to local communities.

I said that in the second part of the debate, I would move on to Royal Mail and the delivery service in South Shropshire, and I will do that now. The Royal Mail is a great establishment that was founded by King Henry VIII in 1516. It has heritage. I said I would come on to Bishop’s Castle, which is a great local town. When I was a candidate, I met a group of farmers—tenant farmers, landowners and everybody in the agricultural sector—just outside Bishop’s Castle. We were talking about connectivity, such as 5G and high-speed broadband. One of the farmers said, “I’ve got a problem with my letters.” Everybody said, “What do you mean?”. He said, “I’ve got a problem with post not getting through.” We were looking at connectivity for the digital space. He said, “This is of vital importance; this has kept me awake at night.” I said, “This sounds like a really serious issue.” He said, “Yes, I’ve bought thousands of pounds’ worth of goods off the man over there; I posted the cheque a few weeks ago, and I am sure he’s not had it yet.” He brought to light, and made a joke of, a very serious issue. From there, I found out that there was one person who was delivering in the area. Nobody else knew the route so, when they were away on holiday, the area could not have mail for a week. It was a big issue.

In the Christmas period, many MPs like to go to the sorting office and thank the postmen and postwomen for the great job that they do in and around our constituencies. I have done that over many years; for the last three years, I was in Bridgnorth, Craven Arms and, this year, Ludlow. But I have seen a huge change in public opinion on the posts that I have put out on social media. People are writing, “Where’s my letter?”. Before, people would write, “Great; they do a great job.” We have all delivered leaflets in bad weather. Postmen and postwomen do that day in, day out, all year round, and I want to thank them for their service. But people are upset. They are angry.

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

I have had reports of my constituents receiving hospital appointment notices after the day of their appointment, so they have missed vital medical care, and people receiving bank cards and PINs at the same time, when they are supposed to be delivered separately for security reasons. An Evri driver dumped loads of parcels in a field because it was impossible for him to get around the route in the time given by his employer. People are using private delivery services because they do not trust Royal Mail, and we are seeing serious failings. Does the hon. Member agree that Royal Mail has questions to answer about the sustainability of its network in rural areas?

[Stuart Anderson]

The hon. Member raises a really important point. Out of respect for my constituents and what they have been through, I will come on to highlight some of their concerns. When using Evri or other delivery services, everybody has learned what the whole street’s doorsteps look like when they see the photos from the delivery service. What is happening at the moment is not acceptable.

A decade ago, Royal Mail was delivering about 20 billion letters per year. I talked about 1516, when it was first founded. It got to a point of 20 billion letters. That has fallen to about 6.7 billion, and is expected to drop to 4 billion in the next four years. Under the Postal Services Act 2011, Ofcom is responsible for ensuring that the firm carries out its functions under its universal service obligation. The latest results show that the company did not meet its delivery targets for first or second-class post from July to September 2025. In October, Royal Mail was fined £21 million for missing its annual delivery targets.

[Mark Garnier (Wyre Forest) (Con)]

I am grateful to my constituency next door neighbour for allowing me to intervene. Some of the post that goes to the southern part of his constituency may well be sorted through the Kidderminster postal sorting office. He mentioned that people are not getting their letters, and we have heard from other Members that urgent mail is not getting there. I too have raised this on Facebook and, independent from my residents in Stourport, Kidderminster and Bewdley—towns that should be well served—I have had 700 uninvited comments from people who are thoroughly fed up with the postal service in our part of the world. Does my hon. Friend agree that this Ofcom requirement is not being met in any way, shape or form?

[Stuart Anderson]

I do; my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour and I share the same concerns. Actually, I shamelessly looked at his Facebook post, thought it was a great idea and pushed it out to my constituents, among whom there is sheer anger about the lack of delivery.

In July 2025, Ofcom announced changes to the universal service obligation. Royal Mail now only needs to deliver second-class mail every other day, instead of six days a week. The changes also drop the requirement for Royal Mail to deliver second-class letters on Saturdays. The changes have not yet come into effect in the UK, with Royal Mail planning to roll them out nationwide by early 2026. From April—this is where it gets even harder—the target to deliver second-class mail within three days will be reduced from 98.5% to 95%. The target for the delivery of first-class mail within one working day will also drop, from 93% to 90%. Royal Mail is not even meeting the current targets.

On 28 January 2026, Citizens Advice revealed that 16 million people—or 29% of UK adults—had experienced postal delays over Christmas. That figure has doubled in a year and is at its highest in five years. As we have heard, 5.7 million people have missed letters about important matters like health appointments and benefit decisions, along with legal documents. Enhanced protections are needed for rural areas, where many people continue to depend on postal services.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

I conducted a survey in my constituency, to which over 700 people responded to raise a whole range of issues around health, finance, legal and other types of communication, but less than 20% of them had contacted Royal Mail itself to say they were having problems. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the Minister needs to put pressure on Royal Mail to be honest, investigate its own problems and demonstrate that to us as Members of Parliament?

[Stuart Anderson]

The hon. Member makes an interesting point. I have launched my own survey today—I will push it out later—to hear more details from residents. There is a need to be honest about this issue. More often than not, people will contact us as MPs; it is not always easy for someone to find out why they are not getting mail, or they believe they will not be told what they need to know, or will not receive an answer, and they believe MPs can follow up and get answers.

In recent weeks, mail has been delayed in 68 postcode areas in the west midlands. I know I have a big constituency, but there have been cases of missed mail in at least 30 postcode areas there. Let us consider what missed mail means: it is not just that a letter has not arrived; it has a serious impact on residents in South Shropshire. I have chosen examples of casework regarding people who have written to me about their issues. From what I have seen, the biggest area of missed mail in my constituency is around the WV15 and WV16 postcode areas, which cover Bridgnorth and Highley—which currently has a huge problem with receiving mail—and the surrounding areas.

The pain is being felt across the constituency, but let me highlight some specific areas. In Claverley, there was no mail for one constituent between 2 January and 16 January. When it eventually arrived it included car finance letters dated mid-December. Much Wenlock has been voted the happiest place to live, but there was no mail for a constituent there between 5 January and 7 January. Then, on 8 January, 15 items were delivered at the same time. A constituent in Church Stretton said they have been told that parcels are being prioritised over letters, and hospital letters are not being delivered on time.

At Linley, near Bishop’s Castle, post is not being delivered to a constituent’s address because it is too far down a lane, so she is having to collect it from a neighbour. That is not about delivery on time; it is just not an acceptable service. A birthday card posted on 16 January in Oreton, going second class to Ludlow, has still not arrived. In Bridgnorth, a constituent must generally wait between one and two weeks for post to arrive. More often than not they have to go to the sorting office to collect it. That is not a delivery service; that is a collection service, which is very different.

Let me highlight the cases of some individuals who feel strongly about this issue and who I have been helping to support. Maureen said:

“Not fair when you get taken off a waiting list for not turning up at a hospital appointment you haven’t received the appointment for.”

Mark believes that poor delivery is

“damaging business reputation for customers without email address”—

I will come to internet access in a moment—because they are getting certificates from his business three 3 weeks late. It does not look professional and there is nothing he can do about that.

Russell highlighted:

“Late hospital appointments, usually received a week or more after the appointment date.”

This case is very concerning. Sarah was on a waiting list, and the hospital admission letters for surgery, and other information, arrived 10 days after the operation date, causing her more issues than we would care to believe. Ian had had only two deliveries since Christmas until three days ago, when two deliveries then arrived in two days, which is inconsistent. Ada receives her doctor’s appointments a week late at the best of times.

Jill says:

“We have mail delivered once a week—Friday—if we lucky. However, Royal Mail delivers parcels to our postcode on a daily basis.”

I am hearing time and again that parcels are getting delivered but letters are not.

Lynn says it is dreadful that

“post has been taking 8 days to arrive that is posted…in this country. Cards I posted to America got there in 6 days.”

The system is failing if the post takes eight days here but is far quicker internationally.

Amanda posted an important parcel with medical cream for a relative and it took seven days, although she had paid for a 24-hour tracking service. She also posted a birthday card with a first-class stamp that took nine days to be delivered. Danil had mail come four weeks late, and Janet posted a card for her grandson, only to Staffordshire, which is the neighbouring county, and it took 15 days. She got mail to Australia more quickly than she got it to the neighbouring county.

Constituents in Highley repeatedly tell me that they are exceptionally lucky if they get service once a week. Dank’s elderly mum has waited since new year’s eve for a PIN code—the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) talked about bank cards and PIN codes not arriving at the same time—and she has still not received it. She is cut off from accessing cash.

[James Naish]

A gentleman in my constituency missed a couple of letters about a parking fine, and he has now had a county court judgment against him. He did not have the opportunity to contest the fine in the first place, which he wanted to do, and he now has to deal with the CCJ. This is having real-life consequences, and I am sure the hon. Gentleman agrees that that is not acceptable.

[Stuart Anderson]

I definitely agree: is not acceptable at all. As the Minister is listening, and I am pretty sure Royal Mail will be watching, let me say that we need the service to change. People are getting penalised through no fault of their own, and it is having a damaging and detrimental impact on many people.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Royal Mail staff in my area tell me that, apart from having to focus on first-class post, a big cause of the delays is poor recruitment, which leads to unachievable workloads. Does the hon. Member agree that it is no surprise that our rural post service is struggling when Royal Mail officers and postmen and women are paid only a little above the minimum wage?

[Stuart Anderson]

Recruitment is a serious issue for Royal Mail at the moment. Some people have worked there for years, and when I go to sorting offices they tell me how they delivered far less five years ago and how it was a completely different service 20 years ago. We certainly need to ensure that they are looked after, and that we have the right packages to retain people at Royal Mail.

It is clear from the stories I have outlined that postal services in rural areas are an absolute mess. Cards, serious medical appointments, fines, invoices and legal letters are being missed because the bare minimum standards are not being met in South Shropshire. I am not asking for anything new; I am asking that the minimum standard is met for my constituents.

It is all well and good saying that we are moving into the digital age, but only 40% of South Shropshire residents are on 5G, and 43% of homes do not have high-speed broadband. I can guarantee that those among the 40% and 43% are in the same areas, which are the remotest parts of the constituency that do not have connectivity, so they cannot get on the internet or on their phones to access services, and they are not getting their mail. They are completely excluded from the modern-day way of life, and that is not acceptable.

Physical letters do still matter, and many of my constituents are rightly angry, and actually livid, that Royal Mail has prioritised parcels over letters—I have documented evidence in many cases—to the detriment of my constituents. I look forward to hearing from the Minister what can be done to improve the delivery of letters in South Shropshire as urgently as possible.

Postal services in rural areas matter, and the residents of South Shropshire are rightly angry at the lack of good and functioning services in some of my area’s towns and villages. Rural areas are sick and tired of being ignored while urban areas are, at times, prioritised. The chipping away at rural areas is starting to hurt my constituents. We need to protect the post office network and hold Royal Mail to the standards that my constituents expect. Right now, it is just not good enough.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Graham Stringer (in the Chair)]

I remind Members that they need to bob at the end of every contribution if they wish to be called to speak. There are 12 people standing; I intend to call the closing speeches at 3.30 pm, so I will impose a time limit of three minutes, which does not leave very much time for interventions.

14:55

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer.

My constituency is part of the rural county of Nottinghamshire. Many of my communities are feeling the impact of poor service by Royal Mail and facing unacceptable inconsistencies with delivery. I have received correspondence from constituents across Mansfield who say that their post and letters are going undelivered, and they are rightly angry about that. My constituent Jim says that his grandson missed out on an invitation to a job interview because the letter did not arrive. Another constituent, Gail, said that several pieces of her mail have gone missing, including letters for local hospital appointments. It is becoming all too familiar, and I think many Members will recount similar issues.

Whether it is a birthday card from a loved one or a bill, everyone needs their mail. Government agencies such as the Department for Work and Pensions, banks, hospitals, the police, courts and many other organisations communicate only by post. The consequence of getting one of those letters late can be hugely damaging in many ways. Having spoken to postal staff in Mansfield, I know that they are under huge pressure. I pay tribute to them, because they all work incredibly hard in all weathers to deliver our mail. It saddens me that Royal Mail has, in correspondence to me, blamed the issues on staff sickness.

I am meeting Royal Mail bosses in the very near future, but postal workers have already told me, on the condition of anonymity, that they have been instructed to prioritise parcels over letters. They have also mentioned that staff retention is difficult because newer recruits are paid less than their colleagues, and that management are not hiring enough people to get the job done. That is the credible reason for the problems we are witnessing, and it is not good enough.

Royal Mail has to step up. If it does not, the regulator, Ofcom, should get involved to guarantee that Royal Mail meets the universal service obligation. Communities in Mansfield and across our country are sick and tired of the excuses. They just want their mail delivered on time. That is not too much to ask. My message to Royal Mail is therefore very clear: get this mess sorted out, get your house in order and get your act together, or we will make you do so.

14:58

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Stringer. I congratulate the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on his excellent speech. He described many circumstances similar to those in my constituency, so I will try to keep my comments brief.

Rural services—whether that is transport links, mobile phone coverage or access to banking—are not good enough across the piece, and postal services are now going in the same direction. Last year’s Post Office Green Paper consultation caused particular concern for rural areas. There was a suggestion that the statutory minimum network size of 11,500 branches, which protects communities, could be removed. That would compound an already acute access problem. Villagers in Trefonen in my constituency were devastated when their post office shut, while across North Shropshire outreach services have been withdrawn in Cockshutt, Clive, Weston Rhyn, Knockin, West Felton and Ruyton-XI-Towns.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

In November last year, Henstridge post office closed, leaving a rural village without a vital service. Luckily, local resident Barry is working with the Post Office to reopen the facility as soon as possible. Does my hon. Friend agree that, following last year’s Green Paper, the Government must now commit to rural-proofing the Post Office?

[Helen Morgan]

I could not agree more. If someone living in Cockshutt takes the bus to the post office in Ellesmere, they would have to wait three hours to get the next bus home. We can imagine how difficult it is for people in nearby villages who have no bus service at all. Jean, who lives in Weston Rhyn, said:

“I now live in a village where there is nowhere to buy stamps and no access to an ATM. I am 88 and can no longer drive. I am completely isolated.”

These cuts have a grave impact on people’s lives and wellbeing. How can we justify leaving vulnerable people isolated in that way in 2026? Post offices and outreach services act as more than a postal service. Communities rely on them for access to cash and banking, Government services and parcel collection. That is crucial, given that 73% of North Shropshire bank branches have closed since 2015, with Oswestry the only remaining market town in the constituency with a functioning bank branch.

Many constituents, particularly older people and small businesses, depend on post offices to access cash and banking. It is no good pointing to online banking as a solution for those living in Welshampton where there is no mobile signal and no full fibre. We need to save our local post offices to prevent financial exclusion and to support the small businesses that will deliver the growth our economy needs.

Not only is access to the vital services provided by the Post Office limited, but the delivery of post, as we have heard, has become extremely unreliable. First and second-class post are meaningless categories in my area. My post comes in two bulk deliveries each week. Constituents have reported going three weeks with no delivery. Meanwhile, post box collection times have been changed without notice. It is very frustrating at the best of times. As we have heard, for those relying on Royal Mail for their NHS correspondence or time-sensitive post, such as legal documents or parking fines, it can be extremely costly to their health, time and finances.

Several constituents have told me that they missed NHS appointments because letters took a week to reach them. Last month, a constituent who is diabetic missed correspondence about an appointment for 22 January and now needs to wait until March. I have received reports of people being charged with contempt of court for not returning papers in time, even though the papers did not arrive until after the due date.

In my latest meeting with Royal Mail, representatives explained the challenges they are facing with recruitment and retention. Addressing those issues requires investment in rural services across the board.

Given the reliance of so many people on the post for vital services, I am sure everyone here appreciates the need to protect and support our rural services. I would be grateful if the Minister would outline what the Government are doing to hold the Post Office to account for meeting its universal service obligation, and what steps the Government are taking to protect not only postal services but banking and public transport in rural areas, as people are desperately badly isolated.

15:02

[Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to be part of this debate, Mr Stringer. I will begin by declaring my interest. I started at Royal Mail in 1986 on an apprenticeship. I have walked the rounds, sorted the frames and stood up for postal workers, prior to coming to Parliament, but I have never seen postal services in such a crisis as today. Some of that is structural, but apart from that, it is to do with the workforce. I have been to see them on many occasions and morale is down. They want to deliver the service that the customer demands, but they are being prevented due to cost-cutting exercises throughout Royal Mail. That is what needs to stop.

Last week, nationally, Royal Mail delivered just 76% of first-class quality and 86% of second-class quality. Those are not abstract numbers, as has been said. They are missed hospital appointments, missed legal deadlines and missed chances to pay bills on time. Workers are telling me that they will have a scheduled day off during the week, say a Wednesday, but when they walk back into work on Thursday, all their Wednesday work is still there and they now have to deliver it with their Thursday work. They are then told, “You’re not getting any extra time to do it.” That leads to delay after delay, which is impacting our communities.

I have had representations from Oundle, Thrapston, Raunds, Stanwick and Corby telling me about the problems that people are having. I have to say: the quickest way to get a letter delivered is to put it inside a parcel. That is the fact of the matter, because Royal Mail is prioritising parcels for delivery, which also has to stop. People deserve a service. This is a service—a unique service. It keeps our communities connected, and it has a legal obligation, under the universal service obligation, to make sure that is done.

Another problem is cherry-picking from the competition. Final-mile delivery is the most expensive part. Competitors will go in, pick up the bulk mail, spread it and sort it, and then give it back to Royal Mail and say, “You deliver it, because we can’t afford to do that—there ain’t no money in it.” In addition, they take parcels, give them to Royal Mail and say, “You deliver the final mile,” because they cannot afford to do that in rural areas. Either that has to stop, or those private companies can start paying towards the universal service obligation, so that we can protect services for people and make sure that all those accessing that service do so on the basis that they are paying towards it.

Postal workers want to deliver the service that customers want. They want to serve their neighbours and their communities. But they can do that only with fair and honest discussion and with harmonised conditions, working together as one organisation, and with workers treated with dignity. That is how we are going to deliver and take Royal Mail into the future.

15:09

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on securing this timely and much-needed debate. I had a 10-minute speech, but I think that has gone by the wayside with the three-minute limit.

What we have heard today is the strength of our constituency parliamentary system: Members across this House listening to their constituents—through emails, telephone calls or the occasional letter, when it arrives—and being told from the ground up about the catastrophic failure of the current Royal Mail delivery service. Why is that happening? We have heard already that Royal Mail is prioritising parcels, and I have heard that, too. Clearly that is because it makes more money from parcel deliveries. We heard from the hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron)—again, it shows the strength of Parliament, for all its flaws and faults, that we all come from different backgrounds and draw on those experiences—that, in his experience, this is the worst it has been.

In my 21 years in this House, I have never had to raise a point of order, ask an oral departmental question, attend a debate like this or meet with the Minister, as I will next week, to talk about Royal Mail and postal delivery services—never. By the way, that is high praise for Royal Mail and all the fantastic posties we know in our communities. We can all agree that this is not about posties; it is about the senior management of Royal Mail and corporate decision making at the very highest level, which I believe is perhaps a deliberate strategy to upset the Government and Ofcom so that Royal Mail can be in a position to discard the letter delivery service, because it is not profitable enough.

As we have heard from hon. Members, there are real-life consequences. I do not have time to mention all my examples, but I will mention the following, relating to health: “Your letter”—my letter—

“informing us of what steps you have taken took nine days to arrive from the date on the letterhead. We appear to only receive three or four deliveries”

a month. Another reads as follows:

“A hospital letter has not been received although being sent second week in January—from the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital.”

Another reads:

“I am still missing a Test Results letter from the NHS posted on 13th January. They confirmed it was posted by the department when I called after 2 weeks.”

My constituents in Muxton, Newport, Wellington, Shifnal and Albrighton are affected, and there are real-life consequences—important legal documentation, health documentation, cancer results. Time matters. That is why this is a very serious issue. It needs to be investigated, and I hope that the Minister and Ofcom will investigate it urgently.

15:09

[Mr Bayo Alaba (Southend East and Rochford) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) for securing this important debate. I have heard from many constituents about the challenges they face in receiving reliable and consistent postal services, so I am grateful to him.

Far too often, those living in rural and semi-rural areas feel that they are expected to simply accept a less efficient service than more urban communities, and the consequences of that disparity are clear. To be clear, I salute the staff of our postal service, who work unbelievably hard, but are sadly being let down by management—I say that as the son of a postie and mum who worked for Royal Mail.

The modern challenge is very real. In Shoebury, for example, a small town bordering Southend, my constituents have long endured a postal service that feels disjointed and dysfunctional. I have spoken to residents who have had Christmas presents arrive months late and legal letters lost, and who have missed vital medical appointments due to letters arriving after their allotted date.

That is just not good enough. Being located at the end of a railway line or beyond the boundaries of a busy city cannot be a justification for substandard service. Residents of Shoebury and across the UK feel that they are being punished on the basis of their geographical location. We also know that, in many cases, the most rural parts of this country have older populations, for whom a reliable postal service is even more crucial. Although many people are moving away from paper communications, that is not the case for everybody. We cannot allow those who rely on traditional post to be neglected.

I welcome the Government’s decision to launch the first comprehensive review of the Post Office in 15 years, and I look forward to seeing how investment will improve services across the country.

15:11

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) for allowing us the opportunity to speak in this debate. I say well done to him for setting the scene incredibly well, although it does not give us any joy to highlight Royal Mail’s failings in communities, particularly rural communities.

I wish to preface my remarks by highlighting that my own Royal Mail workers are great. I spent some time with them at Christmas, and I know most of them—I probably grew up with most of them. I know where the problems lie, and it is not in the staff, but in the surroundings. The building is not fit for purpose; there are parking spaces for 30 vans, but there are 50 vans that need to park; and there is not enough space for sorting, so it is little wonder that the post in some of my areas is taking up to a month to get through. There is a priority for parcels, which Royal Mail does not try to hide. I understand that it puts them first and the delivery of letters is downgraded as a result.

On staffing levels, which the hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) spoke about in his intervention, when I spoke to the Royal Mail guys, they told me that one of the problems is maintaining and holding on to staff. If Royal Mail gives staff members the minimum wage and no more, it is not going to keep them, because they will always be looking for a different job that will give them better payment. That has to be addressed as well, and I know that the Minister does his best whenever it comes to addressing these things.

In my constituency of Strangford, all the villages have problems. To give one example, in Portavogie, one gentleman had no mail at his house for a month, and then got 29 letters the next day, which included three about hospital appointments—he missed them all. His health has unfortunately been poor, and that had a detrimental effect on his health. It is not just a matter of not getting a monthly bank statement; in some cases, health is at stake. I believe that it is necessary that Royal Mail makes an investment in sorting offices to be able to get facilities in place and once again facilitate a routine post service that is fit for purpose.

To give another example, the heater in my office broke over Christmas, and it amazed me to see that one of my staff had ordered a heater and it was delivered the next day. I did not pay one penny for that delivery. I do pay £7.99 a month for unlimited free delivery, but it astounds me that I pay more than £1 for one letter, and it takes weeks to make it, but other things can be delivered in a short time. It cannot just be the facilities in Newtownards that are not up to scratch, because I have listened to every other Member present saying the same thing. We need root-and-branch changes, and we need the Minister to stand firmly with us as we press for those changes.

Officially, the Royal Mail website says that it is reducing second-class delivery to alternate days—Monday, Wednesday and Friday one week, and Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday the next week—and that first-class letters will continue to be delivered six days a week. The service we are seeing is nowhere near that, and Royal Mail must be held accountable. It is not easy to answer all these questions, but I look forward to what the Minister has to say in his response.

15:14

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I commend the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on securing this debate, and on his excellent speech.

Last year, postal services became a source of real frustration, anxiety and, frankly, anger in Radnorshire. Across Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, and right across rural Wales, we saw serious problems in the run-up to Christmas. Parcels were marked as delivered but never arrived, items were left at farm gates, on main roads or in full view of passers-by, Christmas presents went missing, and essential items were delayed for days or even weeks, and then marked as lost. When things went wrong, people found it almost impossible to speak to a real human being to sort it out.

I want to be clear that, in my opinion, those problems stem from the corporate leadership of Evri. The problem is a systemic one within their business model, and rural areas are feeling the consequences first and hardest. Constituents of mine in the Teme valley tell me that their experience with Evri was awful. One constituent told me that they

“have never received a single Evri parcel on time, most never ever arrive, and those that do are weeks or months late.”

My constituents tell me that they often pay extra for faster shipping, but they then have to spend significant time processing refunds and working with credit card companies to recover some of the lost money.

A frustration for customers is that they often cannot choose their delivery company. It is chosen for them by the retailer they are buying from. When a parcel company performs badly, consumers are simply stuck with the consequences. Consumer bodies back that up, and companies like Evri consistently rank bottom for customer satisfaction, yet too often nothing seems to change. That is where regulation matters. There must be clear, enforceable service standards for parcel deliveries, including in rural areas, on safe delivery practices, accurate tracking and proper access to customer support when things go wrong.

Consumers who have no choice over their courier should not be left navigating automated systems or vague updates when a parcel is lost or delayed. If companies repeatedly fail customers, especially in rural and hard-to-serve areas, there must be consequences—not just guidance or warm words, but real accountability.

For many of my constituents, Evri’s failures have meant money lost, ruined Christmases, wasted time and a growing sense that rural communities are once again expected to put up with worse service. Rural Wales deserves reliability, respect and accountability, not excuses. I urge Ministers to take this issue seriously, and ensure that parcel delivery works for every part of the country, not just the easiest ones to serve.

15:17

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson), and to the hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) for a useful tip; perhaps if I had put my grandson Theo’s birthday card in a parcel, it might not—even though posted first class from Moffat to Troon—have taken three weeks to arrive. Fortunately he is only two, so he has not held it against me, but my constituents have had similar experiences.

First, we have to pay tribute to our posties, because what is happening is not their fault. It is the direction that is coming from above that is at fault, and the obsession with parcels. Royal Mail is meant to deliver mail, not just parcels. It is not a parcel delivery company. I hope the Minister can reinforce that message. In my constituency, Royal Mail has taken many steps to make it less attractive for people to post mail, particularly, as the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) mentioned, the surreptitious introduction of early collection times. If someone wants to post a first-class letter, in many parts of my constituency they have to do it before 9 am, otherwise they have to travel an inordinate distance.

In rural communities in particular, people still often suffer from poor broadband and mobile reception, and are generally older. That is the group of the population for whom the Royal Mail and its services is most important. I pay particular tribute to Barry Knock, the chair of the Quothquan and Thankerton community council in the Clydesdale part of my constituency, who has constantly held Royal Mail to account for its failures. As we have already heard, if someone is off or sick, the mail is not delivered.

The Minister is an experienced campaigner, and he knows that it is quite different sending somebody out into a modern housing estate to deliver something than sending them into a vast rural area. We need people who know those localities to do that job. I want the Minister to take away a specific issue: we are heading into elections for the Scottish Parliament and other elections, and a large number of people in these rural communities have a postal vote. I want the Minister to be able to tell me that he is satisfied that Royal Mail has the capacity to deliver the postal votes and return them to the election officers, because that is a very significant issue. Those deliveries did not go well, certainly in my constituency, during the 2024 general election. When Members raise issues with Royal Mail, they just get excuses; hopefully the Minister can put a rocket up the company.

15:20

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I congratulate the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on securing this important debate. As every postie and every Liberal Democrat deliverer knows, rural delivery is hard. Homes are harder to find, walks between addresses are longer and journeys to sorting offices take more time. That reality means that our posties work incredibly hard, particularly during peak periods, and they deserve better support to deliver their services.

Royal Mail’s performance shows the scale of the challenge. In the Dorchester postcode area, performance was 79.2%, and in the Taunton area, 74.4% of first-class mail was delivered the next working day, against a target of 93%. Ofcom has fined Royal Mail more than £37 million over the last three years and has demanded a credible improvement plan, but rural customers are still waiting to feel the change.

Alongside delivery issues, post offices themselves are under pressure. Post offices are the heart of rural communities, providing access to cash, banking, and Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency services. They are often small village shops and offer foreign exchange services. Nationally, nearly 2,000 bank branches have closed in the past three years, so post offices are often the last remaining place for in-person banking, especially for older residents and those without reliable digital access. In Halstock, my constituents are deeply concerned that Lloyds Bank will soon stop allowing cheque deposits at their local post office. With the nearest Lloyds branch miles away and others closing, that change risks undermining both the community and the long-term viability of rural post offices.

Parcel delivery companies such as Evri present a huge problem for many. Ofcom research shows that 68% of customers in the south-west experienced delivery issues in the last six months. Say what you want about Evri, it is consistent: consistently bad and consistently among the worst performers. It is also very egalitarian, in that I get no more response from my parliamentary email address than the public do from any other one. In Sherborne, a café owner described repeated contradictory tracking messages, parcels failing to arrive and no meaningful customer support. Residents of Cattistock and Maiden Newton have contacted me about parcels being delivered to the wrong village altogether, or simply disappearing.

One constituent put it plainly: rural areas appear to be outside Evri’s business model, yet customers are never told this up front. Most people would happily pay more for a reliable service, but instead they are left guessing which courier will be used, and powerless when things go wrong. That points to a clear imbalance: Royal Mail is tightly regulated and fined for failure while private parcel firms face far weaker oversight.

The Government could make two changes: first, they should strengthen Ofcom’s powers over parcel delivery firms to bring them much closer to the standard applied to Royal Mail; secondly, vendors should be required to clearly state, before purchase, which courier will deliver an item. Transparency would allow consumers to make informed choices and would protect rural customers from the repeated failures that they are experiencing.

15:23

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) for bringing attention to this important issue. Pressure has been building on postal services for decades. In my former career in advertising, I worked on behalf of the Irish post office, An Post, to try to at least slow the decline in volumes. That was 20 years ago, and of course the challenge is much greater now. Royal Mail is in danger of turning into a parcel delivery service with the occasional letter attached.

I visited my local delivery office in Horsham just before Christmas. The team there seemed to be doing a great job and I want to support them in every way that I can. Fundamentally, postmen are expected to cover wider areas than they ever were in the past. The problem is obviously more acute in rural areas because, just like our bus services, mail deliveries do not come as often as they used to. One couple contacted me to say that they never received my postal invitation to my MP surgery in their village. Now, one might say that missing the chance to talk to me face to face is not the end of the world, but it did leave them unsure about what else they might be missing through lack of notice.

More seriously, my constituent Alison, who lives in Horsham, lost her job, income and driving licence because critical court correspondence did not arrive. She works in domiciliary care, driving between patients’ homes carrying out time-critical visits involving medication, catheter care and support for bedridden clients. She also cares for her 93-year-old disabled mother and is the next of kin for her 96-year-old aunt. In late December, she received a letter from the magistrates court, dated weeks earlier, warning of a proposed driving disqualification. It was the first correspondence that she had received on the matter and she responded immediately. Despite that, a court summons, which was also delayed, arrived too late for her to attend. She was disqualified in her absence. Her attempts to reverse the decision—swearing on oath that she had not received the letters—made no difference and she lost her job. That is unacceptable.

In the end, this is about people’s lives, responsibility to family and ability to earn. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for rural business and the rural powerhouse, I feel a responsibility to speak up when rural villages and businesses in Horsham and across the UK are not being treated fairly. The universal service obligation exists for a reason, and it must work not just in theory but in practice, for the people who depend on it most. Rural Britain does not ask for special treatment, but it does demand a postal service that is reliable and fit for the realities of rural life. That is the standard that our constituents deserve and that the Government must insist on.

15:26

[Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)]

It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. Representing the biggest and most remote mainland British constituency, I know that my constituents understand the challenges faced by Royal Mail, including inclement weather and huge distances. I want to give one example of an issue that infuriates my constituents: a pot of paint from the Scottish Borders was ordered by one of my wonderful constituents. It cost £40 to deliver it. That seems absolutely shocking for one pot of paint. I do not lay that necessarily at the door of the Royal Mail.

My next example is my wife’s flowery dress. In the last months of last year, she ordered a special flowery dress for Christmas, and it was the same old story: it did not come, it did not come and it did not come. My erstwhile colleague from Holyrood, the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell), spoke of the two-year-old who did not really mind a delay; I promise him that my better half minded the delay hugely. I have experienced at first hand the irritation that constituents feel at the standard of delivery. Of course, in the end, it never came. I was instructed to go out in the snowy weather and check all the neighbours’ garden sheds. If an MP knocks on the door and asks, “May I look in your garden shed?” they get a very interesting reply. Then we had to wait for the refund, which did eventually come. I see it as a punishment for my constituents simply because of their postcode. It makes life very difficult for them. For those trying to run a small business, it is a real old slap in the face.

Royal Mail is going green. We understand the necessity for that—net zero and so on—but now it is not going to take the mail up to the highlands by aeroplane. It is going to take the mail in a diesel lorry on a very long journey on the A9. Anyone who has seen 007 go up the A9 in “Skyfall” knows what a long way that is. Is it really green to use all that diesel going up the road? I do not know. I ask for that to be passed on. Can we please think again?

Finally, I am so glad that other Members have given the posties praise. They are wonderful people. I will end on a light note, as the last Back Bencher to speak in this debate. Some years ago, a letter was sent from a religious organisation in the United States. It simply said on the big envelope: “To the personal representative of the Lord Jesus Christ, Highlands, Scotland.” Someone in the Royal Mail wrote on it: “Try Jamie Stone.” I wish I had kept it. On that light note, I hope word will be passed back to our posties that they do a smashing job, and I thank them.

15:30

[Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) for securing the debate and for his excellent opening speech, which highlighted so many of the everyday frustrations and difficulties experienced by people who are not getting their post. I thank all hon. Members who have shared examples of their own.

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

I am very proud to represent some fantastic small businesses in my rural constituency. Mr Barclay, the owner of CardByMeLove in Tiverton, has been left to shoulder an administrative burden that is not of his own making, chasing missing parcels and placating disgruntled customers. To make matters worse, he has faced an unresponsive Royal Mail. Does my hon. Friend agree that such instances of abject failure actively undermine the ability of small businesses to operate, and cause serious reputational damage in already trying circumstances?

[Sarah Olney]

My hon. Friend is right. We have talked a lot today about the implications for individuals and I particularly want to highlight the example from my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne). That was really appalling and I send my best wishes to his constituent who suffered that unacceptable incident. My hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) is absolutely right to point out the impact on businesses, too.

Post offices across the UK play a vital role in our local communities, with millions of people depending on them. They provide critical services on our local high streets, such as community banking, foreign exchange and the provision of DVLA services. Often those services act as a lifeline, especially for the elderly, as we have heard so many times today, and for those with limited transport options or in areas without reliable access to online services.

Currently, 99.7% of the population live within three miles of a post office and 4,000 branches are open seven days a week. Last July, the Government launched their consultation on the future of the Post Office and the Liberal Democrats welcome the steps to put post offices on a more sustainable footing. However, it is essential that the reforms protect local services and post office jobs and that no post office is closed without proper consultation with the local community.

Digitisation can improve access for some users and increase efficiency, but the Government must ensure that post offices remain financially viable and continue to offer face-to-face services for those who need them, particularly in rural areas with limited broadband or internet access, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) pointed out. Rural communities face compounded challenges, including poor digital connectivity, cuts to public transport and the loss of local services, all of which make access to alternatives more difficult when post offices or banks close.

The decline of high street services in rural areas has been an ongoing issue in the UK, with banks and other essential services disappearing at an increasing rate. Just last week, Santander announced the closure of 44 of its branches. That has significant consequences for residents, particularly older people, those with limited digital access, and small businesses. That pattern places increased importance on the role of a local post office. In the past three years, nearly 2,000 bank branches have closed across the UK, including hundreds of rural branches, due to declining in-person transactions and the rise of online banking. Many villages and small towns now lack a single bank, forcing residents to travel long distances for financial services. Those challenges are often compounded by limited broadband or access to the internet, leading to swathes of people in rural communities being excluded from online services and digital banking.

The Liberal Democrats are concerned about the inequality of provision as the 5G network is rolled out. We believe it is wrong that people should be disadvantaged simply because of where they live. I urge the Government to prioritise major investment in broadband for underserved communities. Alternative solutions, such as banking hubs, are emerging, but there are not enough of them; the Government should facilitate more to ensure that people across the country can access vital services when they need them and to prevent digital exclusion for people in rural areas.

Royal Mail provides the universal postal service: it must deliver letters to every address in the UK six days a week at a uniform price and deliver parcels five days a week. Royal Mail’s performance is measured against quality-of-service targets, which are set out by Ofcom. The vast majority of those targets are not being achieved; in 2024-25 Royal Mail delivered only 76.5% of first-class mail within one working day of collection against a target of 93%. It also missed its target for second-class mail to be delivered within three working days of collection, as well as its targets for daily delivery routes. Last July, Ofcom announced that Royal Mail will start to deliver second-class letters on every other weekday and not on Saturdays to help cut costs. That is a deeply worrying decision and it could leave countless people who rely on those deliveries in the lurch. People need to know that their post will arrive on time so that they can go about their lives; the move flies right in the face of that.

The sorry saga of Royal Mail delays has been going on for far too long, despite the tireless work of staff members. I wish to add my comments to those of other hon. Members about the excellent work that posties do. I was privileged to visit Mortlake and Barnes delivery office just before Christmas. Its staff work incredibly hard, and I am happy to say that they are doing really well on their targets, but that is obviously not the case across the country, so more need to be done. People are rightly disappointed with the service provided. Instead of giving Royal Mail a free pass, Ofcom needs to step in and act by fully holding this failing service to account. Ofcom needs to think again and not let Royal Mail off the hook at the expense of people who expect, as a bare minimum, for their post to arrive on time.

For many rural communities, the pattern of the closure of services has been compounded by rural public transport being cut, making it even harder for residents to reach alternative services. Bus route reductions leave some villages with little to no public transport, worsening isolation. Bus services are the backbone of economic activity in communities across our country, and they are particularly crucial in rural areas, where accessibility is an issue and local amenities and services are greater distances apart. If the Government are serious about growth, they will invest in services that will boost our struggling town centres and high streets. The increase in the fare cap to £3 is a bus tax that will hit working people, rural communities and people on low incomes the most.

Rural areas of the UK face a distinct set of challenges compared with their urban counterparts. Although Government support exists through various grants, loans and initiatives, several issues, including infrastructure challenges, the phasing out of EU funding and higher costs related to transport, energy and supply chains can disadvantage rural businesses more severely.

I thank the hon. Member for South Shropshire for securing this debate. I look forward to hearing what steps the Minister is taking to ensure that communities in rural areas will be able to benefit from the vital service that post offices provide.

15:36

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer, and to respond on behalf of the Opposition. I sincerely congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on securing this debate and on the incredible persistence with which he has fought for his constituents.

As my hon. Friend made clear, a functioning postal service is not a nice-to-have in rural Britain; rather, it is part of the vital infrastructure of daily life. The post is how people receive medical letters, time-sensitive official correspondence and the things they cannot simply pick up on the high street. For small businesses, farms and sole traders, it is how goods, invoices and documents move. We should not underestimate the harms when this important service fails.

I want to cover two linked issues: the resilience of the post office network; and the reliability of deliveries and the way that failures fall hardest on rural areas. As of October 2025, there were about 11,638 post office branches in the UK, and the company is committed to maintaining about 11,500 branches. The Post Office is publicly owned, but the vast majority of branches are run by independent postmasters inside local shops. In my experience, that is why they are so deeply woven into rural life, and why, when a branch closes, the town or village feels it immediately and deeply.

The network is supposed to be underpinned by access criteria, including a requirement that 95% of the rural population should be within three miles of a post office, and that 95% of the population of every postcode district should be within six miles of one. Even remote communities have a minimum level of access. Those are sensible measures of access, and it is therefore deeply concerning that the Department for Business and Trade Green Paper on the future of the Post Office explicitly asks whether to keep the existing requirement, remove the minimum 11,500 branch requirement or replace it with a different framework altogether. Rural Britain has heard that language before: “a different way of meeting obligations” is often a Whitehall euphemism for a quiet downgrade under which the network looks stable on paper but becomes thinner in practice, with reduced hours, reduced services and longer journeys for those without cars.

Although the Government appear to be drifting, the Conservative party is clear about what the Post Office is for. It is more than a business; it is part of the UK’s social and economic fabric, especially in rural areas, and especially as bank branches continue to vanish from our high streets. For many communities, the post office is now the most realistic place to do basic banking, withdraw cash or deposit takings.

There is also a straightforward point about support. The nationwide network, especially in rural areas, will not always be commercially viable based on pure retail footfall alone. That is why public funding has played a role. The Conservative Government provided more than £2.5 billion in funding in the past decade to sustain the nationwide network, including support for branches in uncommercial areas. That turned out to be money well spent, in the light of the ongoing use of the post office network. Post office data shows record levels of cash deposits at branches and significant use by both personal and business customers, alongside the roll-out of banking hubs operated in partnership with Cash Access UK.

When the Minister responds, I hope we will hear some reassurance about the support for the post office network. Can we have a commitment today to retaining a minimum network size of at least 11,500 branches? Will we keep the rural and postcode district access criteria and will sub-postmasters be properly supported so that rural branches do not become financially untenable?

I now turn to deliveries, which is where constituents, including my own, are impacted when the service breaks down. The universal postal service is a promise that has been repeatedly broken. In October 2025, Ofcom fined Royal Mail £21 million for missing its 2024-25 delivery targets, finding that only 77% of first-class mail and 92.5% of second-class mail was delivered on time, far below the long-standing universal service targets. Ofcom has since moved to reform parts of the universal service obligation, including allowing second-class letters to be delivered on alternate weekdays Monday to Friday and adjusting headline targets while introducing new backstop measures designed to prevent extreme delays. There is a legitimate discussion to be had about sustainability and falling letter volumes, but reform must not become cover for a two-tier Britain where rural residents simply wait longer as a matter of course.

The focus must now be on delivery offices, staffing and day-to-day operational reality. In my own Reigate constituency we face ongoing concerns about the standard of postal services in the village of Banstead. Constituents have raised this with me repeatedly since the general election, and with good reason. A key issue appears to be staffing. Royal Mail has admitted to higher than normal levels of sickness and vacancies, and when I visited the delivery office that serves Banstead it was clear that morale there was extremely low. Meanwhile there is an operational inefficiency built in. Banstead is served by a delivery office based in Epsom, meaning staff travel before rounds even begin. I think we can all guess what that leads to. One constituent received 10 items of post on 30 January after receiving none in the preceding 10 days. Others report the same pattern of long gaps followed by sudden floods. If that is the experience of a well-connected part of Surrey, it should shock no one that deeply rural areas are hit even harder.

My hon. Friend the Member for South Shropshire highlighted severe delays in his constituency. The frustration felt by his constituents is wholly understandable. So what should happen next? First, the Minister should make it clear that regulatory fines are not the end of the story. Ofcom’s enforcement action was accompanied by requirements for Royal Mail to take corrective steps. The Government should press for transparent reporting at delivery office level with a particular focus on rural performance so that communities can see whether their service is improving and where the problems sit.

Secondly, Ministers must ensure that any future changes to the universal service protect rural users. If second class is delivered less often, that should not translate into worse outcomes for rural areas. Backstop measures are welcome, but they must be enforced and felt in places that have been left behind. People do not care about clever statistics if their letters still arrive late, in clumps, or not at all. Thirdly, the Government should recognise the interdependence of the system. The post office is not a shop counter; it is part of the national postal infrastructure, so any reform must be judged by a simple test: does it improve the lived experience of rural users?

I will end by returning to my hon. Friend the Member for South Shropshire, who has done what good MPs should do: listened locally, engaged with the operators and brought the issue to Parliament for debate. To be clear, neither he nor rural Britain are asking for special treatment. They are asking for fairness and competence. A letter posted in this country should arrive when the sender is told it will arrive. A rural post office branch should not be quietly allowed to wither. I look forward to the Minister’s response and hope we will hear some meaningful commitments on the issues today.

[Graham Stringer (in the Chair)]

Minister, I would be grateful if you could leave a couple of minutes at the end for a wind-up speech from the mover of the debate.

15:43

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I congratulate the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) on securing the debate and on making such a passionate case on behalf of his constituents. As the Minister with responsibility for postal services, I was interested to hear him talk about how that dates back to the time of Henry VIII—a political figure who was hated in Scotland, who was dangerously overweight and who had trouble with his wife, so postal services are in much different and safer hands today.

As so many Members have said, postal services in rural areas and, for that matter, across the country are not simply an administrative matter. If it was simply a case of a bank statement coming late, few of us would be so passionate about it. The hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne) set out how devastating the consequences of the postal service not working can be. Postal services are a lifeline, a point of connection and a cornerstone of communities.

I know from my relatives in highland areas in Scotland just how essential that connection is—to reassure the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), I will raise the issue of his wife’s missing dress and the diesel lorry with Royal Mail—and that is as true in the south of Scotland and rural areas as it is all over the United Kingdom. I say to the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) that I am sorry that his grandson’s card did not arrive, and perhaps I can put a belated happy birthday in Hansard for him to in some way make up for that.

All our constituents place immense value on reliable postal deliveries, accessible post offices and the assurance that even the most remote households remain firmly connected to the rest of the country. I pay tribute, as others have, to the posties and the postmasters and postmistresses across the UK who serve their communities well over and above the level of compensation that they get. My hon. Friend the Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) put it best in reminding us that whatever criticisms and complaints hon. Members have, they are in no way directed at those extraordinary staff members who work so hard.

[Helen Morgan]

I think we all agree that our posties work really hard, but one of the problems that has been described to me in Shropshire is recruitment and retention of posties, because their conditions are poor. Royal Mail promised me that it would put in extra rounds in North Shropshire to alleviate the problem. As far as I know, that only happened last week. Why is it acting so slowly, and what pressure can the Minister bring to bear on it to improve the conditions for our posties?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Member makes a really important point. Being a postie is a good job and we need to make sure that it is an attractive job. I will come to my discussions with Royal Mail on those and other matters shortly.

Others have mentioned the broader technological changes in society that have reshaped how people live and work and created challenges for Royal Mail and the Post Office. It is important to remember that these institutions create a sense of continuity in a time of change. We are committed to the universal postal service—the guarantee that letters and parcels will be delivered at a uniform price to every address, however remote.

[Mark Pritchard]

I am glad that the Government are committed to that, but I am not sure that Royal Mail is, and that is the problem. Ofcom fines are clearly not working, because Royal Mails keeps repeating the same mistakes. I hope the Minister will note this moment in time—this debate—because I am very concerned by a situation in which Royal Mail is making the same mistakes and just paying the fines, and baking that into their business plan, and the Minister is saying, as he no doubt will later on, that he has limited powers because it is now a private company. If that is the case, then it is likely that all our constituents will see a further decline in letter delivery services. Will the Minister at least commit that, in those circumstances, the Government will apply for a judicial review on the grounds of failure to disclose necessary documents at the point of sale and failure to deliver the universal service obligation—a legal obligation? If the Government do not intervene, I believe that we will see a complete collapse of the letter delivery service.

[Blair McDougall]

I will come to my discussions with Royal Mail shortly. I know that the right hon. Member and I are due to discuss this issue face to face in a few days’ time. I share the deep frustration that has been voiced today and agree that Royal Mail has not just a legal obligation, but an obligation and a responsibility in our democracy. There are special measures in place around postal votes. Royal Mail has traditionally taken on additional staff and done sweeps of post boxes during elections, and we would absolutely insist and expect that that happens in the elections that the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale raised.

I met Royal Mail’s chief executive and senior management yesterday, specifically to raise concerns that Members across the House have shared with me in recent weeks. Royal Mail knows that it has not always delivered, and I was given an absolute commitment that it will work to deliver the best possible service to customers, while accepting that there have been service challenges.

The hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish), the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan), the right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard), my hon. Friend the Member for Southend East and Rochford (Mr Alaba) and the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) all mentioned concerns about NHS appointment letters not getting through. That is a particular issue that I am pursuing in conjunction with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care, because there is an ability to make sure that those get through.

I know that South Shropshire suffered widespread disruption in early January after storms, and as a result there were times when the rotation of mail processes could not be followed and deliveries were affected. The hon. Member for South Shropshire engaged with Royal Mail, and it told me that it welcomes such engagement; it thinks that it is important for hon. Members to continue to engage with it. I know that hundreds of hon. Members will have visited their local sorting offices over Christmas.

I will personally ensure that every single issue that has been raised by hon. Members here today is communicated back to Royal Mail at a senior level, because customers, particularly those in rural areas, must see visible and sustained improvements in reliability, timeliness and delivery office performance. The discussions that we have had today will inform every engagement I have with Royal Mail. As I have said, yesterday I made it clear that people not getting their mail is simply not good enough.

[David Mundell]

The hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) made a very important point about the last mile. Something that really concerns me and my constituents is the sustainability of the Royal Mail in that context, because delivery companies are taking on deliveries, but they leave the hard bit—going up the track, or the miles into the valley—for Royal Mail to do. I cannot see how that can be sustainable.

[Blair McDougall]

I will come to that point on other parcel delivery providers shortly.

Before the takeover of Royal Mail, we secured commitments from its new owners, EP Group. In addition to retaining a golden share in Royal Mail, we secured a commitment to prevent further value from being taken out of it until the quality of service improves.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the Minister for responding to all the questions that we posed. One of mine was about the minimum wage. If a business wants to retain staff, it has to pay them a decent wage. The problem in Newtownards is that some of the staff who have been there for many years are not getting the minimum wage, so if something better comes up, they are away. We cannot blame them; if someone has to pay bills, they have to do that. Instead of Royal Mail paying a fine, which could be used to pay wages, would it not be better and more sensible for it to give workers a decent wage, retain them and improve the service from the bottom up? Is the Minister in any way able to encourage it to do that?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Member makes a really important point about staff retention. Obviously, management and the workforce are working on implementing not only reforms but the pay deal. Hopefully, that will play an important role in helping to tackle what he has just spoken about.

In addition to my discussions with Royal Mail, I have had detailed discussions with Ofcom, which has an essential role in improving standards. As the hon. Member for Strangford has just pointed out, Ofcom has told Royal Mail that it must publish a credible improvement plan that delivers significant and continuous improvement, and made it clear that, without such a plan, it is likely that fines will continue to be imposed.

The hon. Member for South Shropshire mentioned the context for this debate, which is the change in consumer behaviour and communication. The average household now receives only four letters per week, down from 14, yet the number of addresses in the country has risen by 4 million. To protect the USO for the long term, Ofcom has introduced reforms that are projected to deliver up to £450 million in annual savings, helping to get Royal Mail on to a more financially sustainable basis. We now need Royal Mail to work with its workforce and unions to deliver the service that we all expect.

Several hon. Members raised concerns about now slightly notorious parcel providers other than Royal Mail. Ministers and Ofcom have made it clear that the way they are operating is not good enough and that they are on notice.

[Mark Pritchard]

I am grateful to the Minister for being so generous. On the point about the golden share and Royal Mail having been put on notice, what powers of intervention or sanction does the Minister have? Can he provide to my constituents who are listening to this debate the solution they are hoping for? We have not heard it yet.

[Blair McDougall]

As I mentioned a moment ago, when Royal Mail was taken over, the deed included all sorts of assurances about making sure that the owners cannot take value out of the company until they improve service. Their financial interests are deeply tied to the service that our constituents receive.

Turning briefly to the rural post office network, we currently have a network of 11,500 post office branches around the country and most people live within 3 miles of one. However, as Members have pointed out, those averages do not paint the full picture. The Government have invested significantly in the post office network precisely because it provides essential services. Although it is publicly owned, Post Office operates as a commercial business with its own board of directors. It must have the commercial freedom to deliver the branch network within the parameters that we set.

Several Members raised concerns about the Green Paper process and whether we would continue with the current level of service. Our starting assumption was that we would, but we thought it was right to have a debate given how long it has been since we had that conversation. Just finally, we absolutely recognise the importance of banking services and the Post Office, which the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) spoke about. That is why I and the Economic Secretary to the Treasury held a roundtable last month to talk about continuing that relationship.

15:57

[Stuart Anderson]

Thank you for your excellent time management, Mr Stringer. It is great to be able to wind up the debate. I thank every Member who attended, particularly those from Shropshire and the surrounding area: the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan), my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier), and my right hon. Friend the Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard), with whom I have really enjoyed working. He has run a tenacious campaign on this issue and is now following up with the Minister.

We have heard today that most of us are asked about this issue in our constituencies, so why don’t we all work together to find a solution? There is cross-party support. Everyone has identified that there is a major failing and a problem. The Minister would do very well to follow up with the hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) and look at how his huge experience in this area could be brought into Government. We are not asking for anything new; we are asking for a minimum service level to be delivered to rural constituents. Across every constituency, our constituents are suffering from not getting their mail. We have seen the detriment from missed cancer appointments and screening, missed bank or legal letters, and isolation. This is causing problems for all our constituents, so I thank everyone for coming together today.

I say to my constituents that I will continue to follow up with Royal Mail, as the Minister outlined—I thank him for summing up today. I will raise every single case. Even if a constituent has missed just one letter, they should get in touch with me—my survey opened today—because I will follow it up. I want Royal Mail to know that I am an exceptionally tenacious person who goes after everything and will not accept no for an answer. I will campaign with many hon. Members here so that every one of our constituents gets the service they are promised and every single letter is delivered on time. I will not stop until that happens.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered postal services in rural areas.