Well, it looks as if the time has come once again to replace the horse and buggy with the horseless carriage. Yes, what we’re talking about is the ongoing debate over the viability of postal services in Canada and the U.S. Both postal services are loosing significant amounts of money with so-called ‘snail mail’, and need to reduce their costs and increase revenue sources. They are billions of dollars in the red, and the federal governments apparently are not interested in intervening to save their butts. Governments claim that they have enough on their plates with current deficits and the ubiquitous desire to balance their books.
In Canada, over the next five years Canada Post is planning to cut door-to-door delivery where it currently exists in favour of the use of more community postal boxes. In addition, there will be about 8,000 fewer postal positions by the end of this period. In the U.S., talks have evolved around discontinuing Saturday postal deliveries and reducing the number of outlets in communities. Of course, the cost of postage stamps keeps climbing in both countries!
The removal of direct postal delivery has raised the ire of some citizens, although community postal boxes have been around for some time now. It is argued that seniors and persons with disabilities will find it especially difficult to get to such boxes to pick up their mail. Indeed, for many seniors and persons with disabilities the loss of mail delivery is a major concern, particularly as these persons most likely rely heavily on this service. Given this winter’s severe weather, I can certainly understand their reluctance or inability to leave their homes. Some kind of alternative ways of picking up their mail will have to be worked out, either through volunteers or other subsidized means.
Let’s face it, in some communities the postal service is the most direct way in which the federal government communicates with its citizens. Not everyone has access to the Internet, can afford it or wishes to have access to it. For this reason, politicians are going to have to deal with these issues. Already, municipalities, local community bodies, businesses and charities are expressing their concerns over what impact the reduction in regular door-to-door mail delivery will have on them. Up until now, the debate has narrowly centered on the bottom line of the postal service and how to improve competition with private delivery services.
However, now is the time for a much broader and in-depth discussion as to the consequences of such policies for our citizens, especially at the community level. Such decisions are far too important as to not include much more debate at the federal political level. As an essential national service, there still is a need to explore all possible alternatives. In turn, the rationale for any resulting policies must then be clearly explained to everyone’s satisfaction. Otherwise, there could be the danger of a citizen revolt and countless actions against the postal services. It may be snail mail, but its delivery is still important to many individuals and communities through rain, snow, wind or hail.
FROLITICKS 