Dear Editor, I was interested to read about the comments of Lorely Burt, the MP for Solihull in your paper recently.

For generations the Post Office has been part of the backbone of the British way of life especially in country districts.

In December 1997, the EU set out detailed rules regarding British postal services known as “notice from the commission on the application of the competition rules to the postal sector and on the assessment of certain state measures relating to postal services”.

EU directive 97/67/EC “privatisation of postal services” established the universal postal service within the EU and began restricting the Royal Mail monopoly in Britain to mail weighing less than 350 grams. Heavier mail was increasingly delivered by private companies.

Directive 2002/E39/EC further reduced the Royal Mail monopoly to 50 grams. In 2009 the monopoly will cease.

These directives allowed private sector companies, mainly the Dutch TNT and German Deutsche Post trading as DHL to cherry pick profitable mail. But the Royal Mail is called “the universal service provider” and must accept all mail even if it is unprofitable. The private companies can therefore collect unprofitable mail and pass it on to the Royal Mail for delivery at a cost to them of 9p less than second class postage charges.

The EU has forced the Royal Mail to operate at a loss.

In 2007 we found the EU had implemented a “transformation programme”. On November 28, 2007, a letter was sent to Mr Miliband, the minister responsible for our relationship with the EU, telling him to close around 2,500 post offices. On November 29, the EU announced that our permitted subsidy had been increased for three years starting in April 2008. Presumably this was a pay-off for closing the 2,500 post offices?

Our “network change programme” is subject to strict conditions whereby sub-postmasters who do not comply with their instructions will lose any compensation if their branch closes.

No mention of the EU appears in any of the Royal Mail literature on this subject.

So the British way of life is further undermined. Perhaps all the petitions on this subject should go direct to Brussels rather than Westminster which has let itself become the lapdog of the EU.

Coun P Hollingworth,

Harborne, Birmingham.

-----

No final decision over homes

Dear Editor, This is in response to the piece by Paul Dale, ‘Government ‘vandals’ set higher target for new homes’(July 12).

No final decisions about the overall level and distribution of new housing for the West Midlands Region have been made.

The Government Office for the West Midlands (GOWM) has commissioned Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners (NLP) to undertake a study to look at potential locations for accommodating new housing in the region to meet the levels of proposed by the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit (NHPAU). This study will form part of the evidence base for the Government’s response to the Regional Spatial Strategy Phase 2. The Examination in Public into the revision will take place in Spring 2009.

NLP presented their initial options to regional partners and stakeholders at a seminar held last week in central Birmingham. The options were prepared independently by NLP and provide a range of potential ways in which additional housing growth could be delivered in the West Midlands.

Housing projections and NHPAU’s advice suggest that more homes are needed in West Midlands. There is a concern is the current spatial strategy may be unnecessarily constraining longer-term development .

The strategic options are not site specific and the broad locations shown for additional growth under each option are strategic ‘areas of search’. Ultimately, it would be for local authorities, through their Local Development Frameworks, to determine the most appropriate location and way to deliver housing requirements set by RSS.

The study will not be pre-empting the statutory planning process. Evidence will be put to the public examination where it will be tested by an independent panel. No decisions about the overall level and distribution of new housing for the West Midlands Region have been made. The Government Office has simply commissioned more information to put to the independent review panel.

David Marr,

Head of Planning and Housing,

Government Office for West Midlands.

-----

The day Life looked good

Dear Editor, I have never forgotten the day, when we lived in Aylesbury, Bucks, that my wife and I toured the Equitable Life HQ in the town, a week before they went bankrupt. It was one Saturday afternoon and the company were coming to the end of a week’s recruitment drive. I was out of work at the time and we had seen the company advertising this recruitment day in our local newspaper.

Of course we didn’t know the company was on the verge of collapse and nobody in the company gave any hint of this and infact it was all upbeat at the time and the attitude was as if the company was on the up and up and doing really well.

I cannot deny that when I heard about the company collapsing it annoyed me greatly, especially that my time had been wasted that Saturday afternoon.

Not a very nice memory for somebody who was unemployed at the time.

We still scratch our heads about the above to this day, especially when we read about Equitable Life in the news.

Ian Payne,

By Email.

-----

Building the future for eco-town

Dear Editor, There is no such thing as a free lunch! Wheeling and dealing and pedalling guile in order to saddle us with an unwanted eco-town. Too many people with vested interests are putting their spokes in. To these people I would say one proverbial phrase: “Get on your bikes.”

The facilities outlined by St Modwen and the Bird Group are very impressive, but I am sure the district could do with all of these now and why do they depend on the building of a new town? Who will pay for all of this and the 6,000 free bikes?

With all of this money available it seems that there is more to building an eco town for the developers than meets the eye; it is not all philanthropic gestures after all. Life has its disappointments and human kindness and nature is not always what it seems to be.

One can be infatuated by St Modwen-Bird Group master plan and one can only conjecture as to what the inhabitants of such a town will be like in character and personality. Will the womenfolk be similar to that of the Stepford wives?

Such a town is too good, surely, for the area; having already turned down one wheel, more free wheelers are not allowed as the roads are not suitable for them.

But how does St Modwen-Bird Group afford to pay for all these freebies (or are they really a form of bribe?)

Probably from the profits of building the town for which the inhabitants will ultimately pay, or am I just being cynical?

Douglas J Wathen,

Salford Priors.