John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the final report of the Environment and Communication Legislation Committee's report on the performance, importance and role of Australia Post in Australian communities and its operations in relation to licensed post offices. I chaired a lot of this inquiry and this is a very, very important issue. We have some 2,900 licensed post offices, where people have bought the post offices, paid some big money for some of them, and they should get a fair return for the hard work they do. We know Australia Post is doing it tough. In fact, from 1 January to 30 June this year—the second half of the 2013-14 financial year—Australia Post made a loss. One billion letters fewer were handled last year than five years ago. One billion letters at 70c is $700 million.

These post offices are, I think, being treated unfairly. They are not paid enough for the storage and handling of parcels. Even in the case of unwanted stamps, they cannot return them and get a credit back from Australia Post. They have to throw them in the bin and suffer the loss. There are many issues and, of course, if the licensed post offices do fall over financially, under the community service obligation Australia Post has to re-establish them. We have that community service obligation right around Australia. They are selling products of Australia Post but I believe, and the report says this, the profit margins are too low. There should be a good commercial value margin in what they sell. Even with the handling of the letter boxes—where you get the key and roll up to the post office—they should get proper compensation for the time and effort they put into sorting the mail and putting it in those post boxes.

I want to make some comments in relation to POAAL. POAAL is the organisation that supposedly represents the licensed post offices. Now another group has broken out—the LPOGroup, the licensed post offices group. I will quote from the committee's report:

While the committee considers that POAAL appears to have a somewhat difficult negotiating position, there are other matters which raise questions in the committee's mind as to its competence. The committee notes that, in some instances, the evidence provided by POAAL was less than satisfactory. Mr Kerr, CEO of POAAL, appeared to lack an in depth knowledge of POAAL's membership, the structure of its subsidiary company, POAAL Services Ltd, and was less than helpful to the committee in relation to some matters it wished to pursue.

We are talking about Mr Kerr, the CEO. He is probably paid a lot of money. It continues:

In its dealings with licensees, POAAL also showed a lack of sound administrative practices. For example, the committee received evidence that letters addressed to POAAL at its post office box were returned to the sender as they had remained uncollected. Indeed, one of the committee's letters sent to POAAL suffered this fate.

So here we have POAAL and Mr Kerr, running this office and being paid money by the licensed post offices to represent them, and they do not even accept the mail but return it to the sender. The report continues:

The committee also sought information in relation to POAAL's financial statements. The committee considered that this information was important to its inquiry as POAAL represents LPOs not only in direct negotiations with Australia Post but also during meetings with the responsible Minister.

In relation to the information sought by the committee, POAAL had four opportunities to provide the information the committee requested following the March 2014 hearing. While the committee eventually received a response in relation to POAAL's 2012–13 financial statements, no other information was forthcoming. The committee considered the use of its powers to call for documents and persons. Ultimately, the committee agreed not to use these powers as it considered that it already had sufficient evidence that called into question the effectiveness of POAAL as an organisation advocating on behalf of licensees.

Those are pretty damning words. I think Mr Kerr was probably one of the worst witnesses I have ever seen in a Senate hearing in the six years that I have been here. I thought his arrogance was terrible. I thought he had no understanding of the people he represented, and consequently those licensed post offices have been going downhill financially for many years—probably as a direct result of Mr Kerr and his failure to represent them properly and fight their case to get a fair deal for the licensed post offices.

I am not going to speak for much longer. I would just like to say: the best thing Mr Kerr could do for POAAL would be to resign his position; put someone in there who is competent, who will represent the licensed post offices properly. This is a big and important issue. It is also a very difficult issue when we know that Australia Post, which is owned by every Australian, has to pay these licensed post offices more money. That may lead to a worse bottom line for Australia Post. But we have to have our post offices remain financially afloat. They are the heart of our country towns, especially where some 1,600 licensed post offices are based in rural and remote areas. Mr Kerr, you did yourself no favours. You certainly did not gain any credibility with the committee, in my opinion, when I chaired your presence. As I said: the best thing you could do would be to find yourself another job.

I thank Christine McDonald and her staff. As always with these reports, each and every senator in this place knows how hard the secretaries work. They spend an enormous amount of time reading the submissions, preparing everything, putting everything in place for the public hearings. They do a magnificent job. I thank Christine McDonald and her very capable staff for a job well done.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise tonight to speak on the Environment and Communication Legislation Committee's report on its inquiry into the performance, importance and role of Australia Post in Australian communities and its operation in relation to licensed post offices.

While I am no longer a member of this committee, Australia Post and this inquiry in particular are issues that I still have a strong interest in. In recent months, licensed post office licensees have contacted me with their concerns about the future of their post office businesses in Tasmania. Post office businesses are the heart of the communities. They are a vital piece of infrastructure for our nation and are an extremely important part of the Australian social fabric. Apart from the obvious letter and parcel services they provide, they also provide important banking and bill-paying services and act as a focal point for their communities. You know a community has died when it no longer has a post office. Licensed post offices are under considerable financial stress and serious changes are needed in the way they interact with Australia Post.

I am pleased to see that the committee has addressed a large number of the issues that post office licensees have raised with me—in particular through recommendations 12 to 15. Australia Post licensees have been particularly concerned about the additional costs caused by the rapid rise in the number of parcels and the need to store them when a delivery is unsuccessful. Recommendation 13 recommends that 'Australia Post review parcel storage requirements in licensed post offices with a view to providing payments for those licensees who incur additional storage costs.'

One of the issues that I was quite stunned to learn about is the issue of returning out-of-date stamps. Senator Williams mentioned this issue, and I would like to concur with his comments. Last night, when this report was first spoken on, a number of senators mentioned the issue as well. So I think through this place there is great agreement about the concerns regarding this issue. As Senator Williams said, current practice does not allow for post office licensees to return stamps that they have purchased that useable because the postal rate has changed. I found this to be quite despicable. It is a case of the corporate division profiteering at the expense of post office licensees. I am extremely pleased that recommendation 15 recommends that 'Australia Post allow for the return of unsold and out-of-date stamps by licensees and franchisees'. Licensees should not be unfairly punished simply for keeping in stock Australian Post products.

Licensees—particularly in southern Tasmania but some in other areas of Tasmania—have also expressed concern to me on the very small margins for postal products they sell on behalf of Australia Post and the limited payments they receive for post office boxes. One licensee spoke to me about the price of selling a ream of paper that Australia Post supplies. It was actually cheaper for them to go to the local Woolworths and buy the paper there than it was for them to sell it in their own post office at the recommended retail price. Recommendation 14 recommends that 'Australia Post review the margins on postal products it sells to licensees with a view to ensure that margins are in line with commercial practice'. Recommendation 12 recommends that 'Australia Post, as a matter of urgency, reassess post office box payments to licensees to ensure that they reflect the true costs borne by licensees in providing this service'. The government must now have the courage to adopt these unanimous recommendations to give post office licensees a fair go and ensure that regional licensed post offices remain viable. I would also like to note the Labor senators' additional comments in this report, and I quote:

Labor Senators are concerned that the Government is irresponsibly seeking to use the prospect of increased remuneration and post office visits from additional trusted services as a financial lifeline for Licensed Post Offices.

They noted that:

… all the submitters who support the outsourcing of services provided by Centrelink and Medicare to Australia Post rely on the prospect of additional revenue for Australia Post and LPO operators as justification for the measure.

The Labor senators recommended that:

The Government not outsource any functions of the Department of Human Services to Australia Post.

Post offices are not Centrelink offices. Australia Post office licensees and their staff should not be used by this government to shift work and costs away from the Department of Human Services. It is just not right.

There is great concern in the community about the viability of the 3,200 licensed post offices in regional Australia. Next week I hope to table a petition that has been signed by around 1,000 customers of licensed post offices around Australia. The development of this petition came out of concerns from the licensed post offices in Tasmania talking to me. I would like to thank the Licensed Post Office Group for their efforts in distributing this petition and the time that they have taken to keep me informed on the issues of concern for their members.

I am extremely pleased that recommendation 11 recommends that the definition of 'association' in the LPO agreement be amended to include the LPO Group. Senator Williams referred to the organisation that allegedly is representing the licensed post offices and the concerns that everyone on the committee had with regard to that. And, once again, I would endorse his comments in that regard. The Licensed Post Office Group have done an excellent job in informing the committee and advocating on behalf of their members, and I hope this recommendation, along with the other recommendations of the committee, is adopted with alacrity. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted.