AMONG our disintegrating public services, the Post Office is one of few that still enjoys public esteem.

Of course, its new name, Consignia, does not enjoy public esteem. Rightly, it is ridiculed. But, despite that crass name change, the sometimes maddening queues at the counter, and the occasional (for it still is only occasional) late delivery of a First Class item, most of us still admire the Post Office.

But that is about to change. On the one hand, the Government intends to close 3,000 post offices, a sixth of the network. Since this involves a complex compensation programme, it is fair to assume it has been in the Government's mind for some time. Why didn't we hear it at the General Election? Daft question. After every General Election it isn't five minutes before well-concealed nasties emerge from that central plank of our democracy - deception of the people.

Back at the Post Office, Consignia itself plans to switch household deliveries to the afternoon. Since most recipients, including people working at home, will not be able to deal with this post that day, the change efffectively means a two-day delivery.

Defending this, a Consignia boss says that in most western European countries, mail is delivered later than in Britain. So, for once, we have a superior service. You'd think the aim would be to keep it that way.

The Consignia boss also remarks: "Our competition in other countries has fewer delivery times to adhere to. We need to make changes to stay competitive.'' Why mail-delivery abroad should have any bearing on what our Post Office does here beats me. I suppose the catch-all word "globalisation" covers it somehow.

But a third, almost surreal, attack on the Post Office comes from the regulator Postcomm. Announcing the opening-up of the entire service to competition by 2006, the chairman, Graham Corbett, emphasised that the Post Office was not "containing its costs''.

And yet, it is because Postcomm ruled out an increase in charges that the Post Office is losing a penny on every First Class item.

Clearly, in prospect is a Post Office of fewer offices (and postboxes incidentally) and later deliveries. And, in all the guff from those responsible - the Government, Postcomm, Consignia, whom we might topically bracket as the Wreckers - there is no hint of how a decent postal service might be maintained in rural Britain, whose much-urged "diversification'' will be undermined without it.

Having come to power on a tide of promises to improve public services, the Government is now distancing itself from the continuing failures. Home Secretary David Blunkett remarked the other day: "Ministers are presented as having responsibility for aspects of our life over which they do not have direct control.'' Applying this to rising crime, he said that while the Government was blamed, "the police, quite rightly, have operational independence''.

Well, in his famous "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'' speech back in 1994, Tony Blair said: "Labour will make our communities safer for people to live in.'' No ambiguity there. Labour would do it. But haven't. So Blunkett makes the police the fall guys.

Published: 06/02/02