A ROSE is a ROSE is a ROSE (Gertrude Stein, 1935) Part II
This is the second part of three articles about ROSE (Retain Our Services in Evington).
In part one I gave a short account of why ROSE was conceived and its purpose and aims. In this article I will give a ‘potted history’ of some of the events and behind the scenes machinations that dogged the closure of the post office. In part III I will cover the pharmacy and the GP branch surgery.
The Post Office
In effect the proposal to close the post office, located within J&A Pharmacy, was a commercial one taken by the owners of R Glenton and Son, Pravin and Preeti Pattni. They were renting J&A Pharmacy premises in Evington but own 49 Welland Vale Road. We were led to believe that the rental increase proposed by their landlord forced a business reappraisal and their decision to close the Evington store effectively also led to a review of the postal service. Despite an offer from the then owners of the Nisa store on Main Street to host the post office, and despite a very unsatisfactory consultation conducted by the post office, it was decided to move the post office to the Glenton store.
It seems the decision to move the Evington Post Office was taken without examining the context of that move and its effect upon the local community and traders. Firstly, there has been a post office in Evington Village for decades as Evington Village is a recognisable community with its own unique identity. That post office has had several reincarnations and has been in different outlets over the decades, but it has remained part of Evington Village.
The Post Office official stance that “there will always be some customers who are more inconvenienced than others” with such moves does not hold water as the people of Evington Village have had this service for decades, whereas those in the vicinity of the relocated outlet are used to not having one and therefore have adapted accordingly over those decades.
Guidance on consultation does not allow the Post Office to simply let the service be moved without regard to local needs and wishes. The published ‘Response to Local Public Consultation’ on the matter was painfully thin on detail and swamped with The Post Offices’ biased opinion about the suitability of the alternative venue, which are painted in glowing terms. The same benefits are true for the Evington Post Office. It appears that there has been little or no analysis or weighing of alternative options or of the detriment to Evington Village of this move. In addition, the ‘Decision Report’ on the consultation which ran between 2nd May to 13th June 2024, simply lists the responses • 101 responses from customers • 01 Petition consisting of 1257 signatures • 01 Postmaster petition consisting of 440 signatures and goes on to list the issues raised as Distance and Transport • Internal Space and Queuing • Parking. There is no reference made to what each person signing either petition was agreeing to. One can surmise the 1257 were against the closure and the 440 were in favour. However, the postmaster run petition will have been signed by many people travelling from the other side of Evington as at that point they did not have a post office. The rest of the report concentrates on discussion of the issues raised without analysis or debate about the responses.
As such it is likely there has been a breach of the Gunning Principles[1] and, in the context of the consequences of three essential services being removed from the village and the failure of all of our attempts by way of letters of complaint and freedom of Information requests, the only other option was to pursue a judicial review, which after exploration we discounted as it costs hundreds of thousands of pounds. So, in effect a judicial review is not something available to ‘Joe Public’. However, it is one of the options mentioned in government posts no matter how unrealistic it is.
Unlike the closure of the GP surgery there is no straight forward higher authority to appeal to in the case of the post office, however we are still exploring a referral to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.
Loss of the post office has meant that businesses in Evington Village that utilised it as a bank no longer have that facility. In addition, closure also meant losing the cash machine operated from the J&A Pharmacy premises. Thus, there is no access to cash for Evington Village residents.
[1] (Sedley, S, 1985) a consultation is only legitimate when these four principles are met: 1. proposals are still at a formative stage A final decision has not yet been made, or predetermined, by the decision makers 2. there is sufficient information to give ‘intelligent consideration’ The information provided must relate to the consultation and must be available, accessible, and easily interpretable for consultees to provide an informed response 3. there is adequate time for consideration and response There must be sufficient opportunity for consultees to participate in the consultation. There is no set timeframe for consultation,1 despite the widely accepted twelve-week consultation period, as the length of time given for consultee to respond can vary depending on the subject and extent of impact of the consultation 4. ‘Conscientious consideration’ must be given to the consultation responses before a decision is made Decision-makers should be able to provide evidence that they took consultation responses into account.
[1] (Sedley, S, 1985) a consultation is only legitimate when these four principles are met: 1. proposals are still at a formative stage A final decision has not yet been made, or predetermined, by the decision makers 2. there is sufficient information to give ‘intelligent consideration’ The information provided must relate to the consultation and must be available, accessible, and easily interpretable for consultees to provide an informed response 3. there is adequate time for consideration and response There must be sufficient opportunity for consultees to participate in the consultation. There is no set timeframe for consultation,1 despite the widely accepted twelve-week consultation period, as the length of time given for consultee to respond can vary depending on the subject and extent of impact of the consultation 4. ‘Conscientious consideration’ must be given to the consultation responses before a decision is made Decision-makers should be able to provide evidence that they took consultation responses into account.
