Letter to Rob Merrifield, Minister of State (Transport) from Mario Laframboise, soll., M.P., Argenteuil-Papineau-Mirabel, and Vice-President of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities |
 |
 |
|
January 27, 2010 - 17:00 Strategic Review of Canada Post / Letter CUPW Translation
Rob Merrifield Dear Mr. Merrifield: Subject: Moratorium on closure of rural post offices – maintenance of postal services (Strategic Review of the Canada Post Corporation) To begin with, I wish to remind you that the Bloc Québécois has always rejected any attempt to reduce, close or transfer postal services that could seriously impact postal delivery services as we presently know them. We are well aware that such changes in services would have grave consequences on our communities. In light of this, I am writing you to request clarification on several concerns of ours that remain unanswered. First, with respect to the moratorium on the closure of rural post offices, Canada Post does not seem to appreciate that the moratorium serves to protect the public nature of the postal service. Under the Canadian Postal Service Charter, communities facing a post office closure would have to chose, for example, between a private postal outlet or nothing at all. Consequently, I would appreciate your providing me with the government’s interpretation on maintaining the moratorium, since it is up to the government, and not Canada Post, to clarify government policy. More specifically, could you please provide me with confirmation that the government still intends to fully maintain the 1994 moratorium on the closure of public post offices located in rural areas and in single-post office towns? As part of the consultation process provided for under the Canadian Postal Service Charter, it appears that Canada Post is supposed to give the public at least one month’s advance notice of closing, moving or consolidating post offices or changing mail delivery modes. Nevertheless, this period is not enough to allow an entire community to consider its options with respect to the closure of a post office, nor even to determine the location of a rural mail box. Moreover, it seems the public was never consulted on the contents of the Canadian Postal Service Charter. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to suggest that such a charter should at least try to reflect the views of those who use the postal service? The government should canvass public opinion and amend its charter accordingly. In regards to the Canada Post Corporation Strategic Review, the Bloc Québécois has of course read the recommendations made by the Advisory Committee appointed by the federal government to carry out this review. As you know, the Bloc Québécois has concerns over several of the recommendations in the report, notably the one suggesting that Canada Post open its international mail service to competition. We have clearly expressed our opposition to this approach. In following through with the recommendations to establish a Canadian Postal Service Charter and liberalize outbound international mail, the government has demonstrated that it is prepared to fully deregulate Canada Post. And yet, the CPC Strategic Review “recommends neither a general deregulation of the postal market nor a reduction in the existing level of Canada Post's exclusive privilege […].” Therefore, could you confirm to me that the government does not intend to liberalize, privatize or deregulate the postal service? Sincerely yours, Mario Laframboise, soll.
|
||
 |
||
|