Through more than 850 Federal Government owned and operated retail Post Offices the government’s commitment to a sustainable small business economy is mocked. Successive Federal Governments have sat on their hands and allowed the bosses at Australia Post stray further beyond offering the services permitted under the Act. Indeed, they had the Act drafted in such a way as to make it hard to prosecute a case against Australia Post for selling books, CDs, DVDs, general stationery, ink, cameras, BBQ sets – all manner of items already available from thousands of stores across
The Australia Post Christmas catalogue is a perfect example of how Government ownership is being abused.
Australia Post, thanks to its monopoly protection around postal services, lands people in its shops for a fraction of what a newsagent costs. A look inside the door of a Government owned outlet shows this stamp and service business looking more and more like a newsagency and other retail outlets. I took the photo of the entrance to the Government owned outlet at Forest Hill (VIC) earlier this week.
I don’t blame Australia Post. They have successfully manipulated the process to get politicians and policy on their side.
The politicians have been convinced into thinking that Australia Post needed these other products to make their retail network viable. This is what the former Minister responsible, Senator Helen Coonan, told me when I met to discuss this issue (without success).
If the current Federal Government is serious about small business it will research how the retail Post network operates overseas and research the impact of Australia Post’s retail expansion has hurt businesses like newsagencies over the last ten years. Overseas they will see that best practice is considered to be retail outlets that focus on postal services. Back home they will find that small business retailers like newsagents have lost, I’d estimate, more than $100 million to the Government retail network.
The Howard Government failed to engage on this issue for its entire tenure. This is an opportunity for the Rudd Government to show if they are serious about small business.
If the Govenmnet was fair dinkum about helping small business, why don’t they force the banks to reduce the rates on business loans that still have small business drowning in debt. While home loans are coming down and the poor are given thousands of dollars in hand outs business interest rates are still massive.
If the Government had not protected Australia Post, and let people pay there Telstra bills with Bill Express, I am sure Bill Express would have still been alive today, and many jobs saved. The Government wants competition in the market place, so customers can get better deals ( Tatts/Intralot) but they dont want it against themselves.
I have written to several Ministers on this topic. ALL of them obfuscate and avoid. They trot out the same tired old line that the Retail side of Australia Post is not subsidised by the protected monopoly side of postal.
By saying this however, thay admit that the monopoly held postal side IS sufficiently profitable. All the rest of the sales in retail are just cream.
Mark….as the licensee of a small post office, i think this is an unfair criticism and while i understand your anger, you seem to have a vendetta against AP….what about all the supermarkets who ‘should’ specialise in food but sell newspapers/magazines/pens/ink etc etc. And while I also understand that AP is Government owned, many of the outlets, (except for the corporate post shops) are owned by independent licensees who also need to earn money to live off. I know that newsagents are doing the same thing, but please don’t tar all PO’s with the same brush….mine is a small business and I too want the Federal Government to help small business – and my small community relies on its post office and store for the things it would normally need to fight the hustle and bustle of the city for….keep us in mind when you criticise AP for its techniques.
Daniel,
Thanks for commenting here. I do make a clear distinction between government owned shops and licenced post offices. My concern is with the 865 government owned stores.
Mark
Luke,
Forcing banks to reduce interest rates is only going to result in unstable fincncial instituations. The system we have (like it or not) is in part designed to see our banks prosper and stay strong. Force banks to lower interest rates and you run the risk of making them less profitable and even collapsing – a situation that is far worse than higher interest rates.
Daniel,
I to own a small LPO and understand what you are saying, however Mark will just go on about AP and say it’s only the Government owned ones he’s is interested in however the constant attack on AP is attacking us by association but he doesn’t see this he just sees the PO across from him. The only protection that AP has is the standard letter and that’s it, all other products that AP have are unprocted as you know.
Daniel Mark can request to become a Post Point to sell stamps if he wants.
AP does bring foot traffic to his end of the mall and maybe he shouldn’t look like a Post office to confuse the customers 🙂
On the other hand I do get some good ideas from this site and it reminds me to keep on improving the asset that I have.
Clem
Clem,
Australia Post delivers customers to its government owned stores for a fraction of the cost of other retailers. They are not treated with the same rules nor do they have the same operational costs.
There is a huge difference between these stores and LPOs.
Mark
I support Mark’s stance on AP and likewise respect the distinction between corporate outlets and a LPO.
I reject the view about being able to stock the same items that AP does if I feel so strongly about it. I have been told several times by AP employees that we are unable to purchase stamps at other than full retail price because of the distance from our Newsagency to the Post Office or in other words to become a Post Point. When I asked about being able to provide the various envelopes, satchels & boxes to mail items in I was met with an increduluos stare. I am apparently a stirrer in our town because I dared to sell mobile phones and give away a bar of Darrell Lea chocolate with every sale. I have met with similar criticism when I put a big A frame sign out the front of my newsagency with an AP flyer stuck in the middle and point out how much cheaper we are for ink cartridges than they are. Not by several cents but by several dollars.
But wait a minute I am supposedly competing against a Federal Government owned mail service. I am told that in order for it be viable it must therefore need to be able to sell Andrew Rieu DVD’s, stationery, gifts, Greeting Cards, Diaries, colouring in books & pens, mobile phones, iPods, phone recharge, calling cards, Gift Cards etc etc. What a crock!!
Show me how many Government owned Post Offices outside this country compete against their own small businesses. I can accept the LPO concept. I can’t for the life of me accept the corporate owned offering as being anything other than disgraceful. The simple fact is that they are using their mail product & service privilege to make inroads into non postal service revenue streams. When the shoe is on the other foot however their so called “regulations” stop us from selling “Post Office Products”. Give me a break!
Sorry for the harsh attitude but I am over this rubbish about financial viability of the mail service. What about the viability of the Newsagency service that has been denigrated by a Federal Government of all people?
Congratulations Angelo, Their should be more posts about this, and more concern. A Federal Government business that has evolved into competing with small business’s including Newsagents is ludicrous.
Keep competing with them, sounds like you are doing it with openness and honesty.
How can we expect any sort of fair treatment when politicians on both sides of the fence refuse to even acknowledge receiving emails on this topic, let alone any sort of resonse.
I sent emails to both the Liberal and Labour candidates before the last federal election and got zero response. Post-election I followed up with more emails to the successful Liberal candidate who retained her seat but obviously working from the opposition benches made her a lot busier as she failed to acknowledge or respond to them either.
To add insult to injury, when a local bank opened a branch IN MY SHOP and invited her to the opening (much to my disgust) she was so quick to respond that I doubt the spit on the stamp had time to dry – but then I suppose having your photo taken has a lot higher priority than supporting and assisting small business.
The contempt shown by federal politicians (of all colours) towards small business is astonishing particularly when a lot of them have SME backgrounds, even those imported from elsewhere to “contest” safe seats.
Methinks “jobs for the boys/girls” is a lot more attractive tothese people than “jobs for hard working small business owners”.
Daniel – this blog and previous blogs on the same issue are not about attacking small business like yours – they are about level playing fields, (sticking to) core business, providing a cost-efficient essential service – concepts which protected species like politicians and government funded/subsidised agencies grapple with.