NFSP says mutualisation could bankrupt PO

The National Federation of Subpostmasters (NFSP) has suggested that transferring ownership of the Post Office (PO) to branch owners before it is in a “positive financial position” could bankrupt the corporation in two months.

Plans were allegedly discussed for the move at a meeting in parliament on Wednesday 7 February.

The government PO minister is said to have requested Co-operatives UK to put together a plan for exploring handing ownership of the PO to branch owners at the meeting, which also included the Communication Workers Union (CWU) and pressure group Voice of the Postmaster (VOTP).

The NFSP responded to the alleged announcement with a letter, stating: “Mutualisation is the right answer at the right time and has been the policy of the NFSP since 2010.

“However, PO has £800m of liabilities and requires hundreds of millions of pounds of government funding per year to stay afloat.”

The letter went on to add that legal costs and current compensation schemes means is not the time for “the financial responsibility of the PO to be passed away from government”.

“Successive governments …should not be allowed to abdicate their responsibility until the PO is in a positive financial position and able to fund a viable network that is beneficial to postmasters.

To be clear, as things stand, if the PO was mutualised on March 31, 2024, it could be bankrupt on April 1, 2024.”

Speaking to Better Retailing on the risk of bankruptcy, Sean Hudson, branch secretary of CWU, said this is a “simplistic” view.

He added: “The funding model needs to be discussed, I think it’s [about] calling for radical change and radical solutions.”

Doubts of fair representation of postmasters

NFSP also questioned the “legitimacy” of the representation of postmasters at the meeting, and claimed they were not invited.

“Collectively, [CWU and VOTP] do not represent the majority view of postmasters and have not engaged with postmasters en masse to determine what their view of the future of the PO network should be,” the letter said.

The NFSP went on to question whether “those involved” set out to “undermine the role of the NFSP”, and cause “further worry, concern and division within the network”.

Hudson said: “We’ve certainly got the right to open a dialogue, it might be we get a sense people do or don’t want to take this forward. We just need a proper model to put to people when the time is right, we’re just exploring the options.”

The NFSP is promoting an Oversight Committee as an alternative to mutualisation, which would ensure ownership remains with the government, as it is currently “clear the PO’s only intent is to control and obfuscate any proper change to the governance structure”.

Hudson commented: “The Oversight Committee is another layer and I’ve not necessarily any faith in [it]. The PO had, in effect, an oversight committee for their remuneration – the RemCo. RemCo still managed to award Nick Read [CEO of PO] bonuses for apparently cooperating with the inquiry.”

He added: “Something like mutualisation where subpostmasters are at the front and center of everything that’s being done has got to benefit to the communities we serve. At the moment the model is broken.”