Following the Prime Minister's promise to talk to me about appeals against the post office closure decisions at last weeks session of Prime Minister's Questions, realising how busy he is and how long it would take to get an appointment with him, I spoke to his Parliamentary Private Secretary and put my questions in writing about the questionable fairness of the consultation being concluded after the merger of Postwatch into Consumer Focus and thus our loss of an effective people's advocate to review the proposed closures.

On Tuesday I received a long and apologetic reply from Howard Webber, Chief Executive of Consumer Focus, of which Postwatch is now a part. 

He apologised for several letters that should have been sent to me but that I never received informing me that even though Postwatch had been merged, the same staff were in place to review the consultation responses. 

He enclosed a copy of one letter I should have received being the Postwatch comments on our submissions to the consultation. 
The comment on Comberton Hill makes no mention of the importance of the branch to the local business community and the comment on The Walshes instructed the Post Office to explain in detail how they had taken into account the higher than average number of elderly and retired residents and low level of car ownership but there was no mention of the greater distances these people will have to travel to their nearest remaining branch.

My final question to the PM was: 

"Is there actually any route of appeal after closure of the consultation on behalf of two of my branches? 
One of these is vital to a thriving local business community and the other for local elderly and disabled people. 
Both branches, I understand, make profits." 

I have received no answer to this and I shall pursue ministers on this question if I receive no reply to it very soon.
________

Also on Tuesday we had Health Questions when I was faced with a dilemma. 

My allocated question was number 11. 
If I stood and caught the Speaker's eye to put in a supplementary to an earlier question I would automatically lose my booked question so I stayed seated in the hope of reaching my question. We only got to number 10 so I failed to ask my supplementary question but I will at least receive a written answer to the original words.

I did better following the Secretary of State for Health's statement on top up fees which I found confused and inconsistent and I fail to see how his plans are workable and do not lead to a two tier health system. 
However in his answer to me he suggested a meeting and I will hold him to this as I can see no way of making any system of extra payments for NHS care fair. But I believe there are ways of increasing the availability of effective drugs for all without the need for extra payments. I shall work on this so that all, regardless of wealth, can.