Government is delivering fairy tales about the Post Office

WEDNESDAY, DEC. 7: Every now and again, I feel that Lewis Carroll, Dr Seuss, and the Brothers Grimm are still around. What’s more, I think they’re writing Ministerial Statements. Worse still, some Government Ministers actually stand up in Parliament and read these ministerial statements as if they are men or women of great wisdom proclaiming some great truth.

On Friday, December 2, it happened — again — with the ministerial statement about the Post Office.

The minister told us 50,000 Bermudians that: “The savings to the taxpayer have been... almost half a million dollars a year.”

I did a ‘Roadrunner’ stop when I heard that. A whole $500,000 saved? Chingas!

Looking at the Post Office accounts, I saw that in 2006/07 the Post Office took in $5,858,000 in stamp sales and post box rentals. But the Post Office lost $5,800,000 on its overall operations.

This happened primarily because the Post Office spent $11,022,000 on salaries ($8.9m) and wages ($2.1m).

Four years later in 2009/10 the Post Office took in $4,740,000 in stamp sales and post box rentals. But the Post Office lost $8,036,000 on its overall operations. Again, this happened because stamp sales and so on... went down by more than $1,000,000 but salaries and wages went up over $2,000,000 to reach $13,233,000 with salaries getting $10.7m and wages getting $2.5m.

In 2011/12, the minister responsible for the Post Office anticipates revenue from stamp sales and post box rentals of just $4,514,000. So even lower sales than ever. But the minister budgeted $13,383,000 for salaries and wages. That’s higher than in 2009/10.

To recap: Revenue from stamp sales is declining. The decline is from $5.6m in 2006/07 to $4.5m in 2011/12. Stamp sales are down 20 per cent. That’s an audited and reported fact.

Salaries and wages are rising. Against falling sales, salaries and wages have gone up 21 per cent, rising from $11.0m in 2006/07 to $13.4m in 2011/12.

Crazily, losses for the Post Office have risen from $5.8m actual losses in 2006/07 to $9.5m in planned losses for 2011/12. In just six years, known losses are expected to be up 64 per cent! So when the minister said: “The savings to the taxpayer have been… almost half a million dollars year” I thought — like any sane man would — what the heck does she mean? Does she mean that us lot will lose $0.5m less than planned? And what earthly difference does that and will that make? What difference?

It’s then that I had my inspirational flash. I suddenly realized that Lewis Carroll, Dr Seuss, and the Brothers Grimm have not died. They live! They are writing ministerial statements! Even Bootsie might be writing ministerial statements!

I shall listen to all future ministerial statements more carefully. I now know that some are comedy, farce, and whimsy.

Perhaps Mr Speaker should rename that period ‘Story Time’.

For the record, and from published public accounts, Post Office actual and planned losses from March 31, 2003 to March 31, 2012 are:

• 2003 — $2,823,000 actual loss

• ‘04 — $3,211,000 actual loss

• ‘05 — $3,255,000 actual loss

• ‘06 — $4,059,000 actual loss

• ‘07 — $5,800,000 actual loss

• ‘08 — $7,657,000 actual loss

• ‘09 — $8,644,000 actual loss

• ‘10 — $8,036,000 actual loss

• 2011 — $7,887,000 planned loss (eight months after year end, this account is still not reported)

• 2012 — $9,529,000 planned loss

Your homework: In the ten years from March 2003 to March 2012, what is the grand total of the actual and planned losses incurred by the Bermuda Post Office? Compare that total to the 2011/12 greatly reduced police budget of $58.2m and find out how much of that budget could have been covered by the Post Office’s ten-year loss.

Considering the Post Office’s ten year total loss, at an average debt service cost of 8.0 per cent per annum (5.5 per cent annual interest plus 2.5 per cent Sinking Fund contribution); what is the annual price that Bermuda taxpayers pay, today, for the foreign dollars that Government has already borrowed in order to keep ‘floating’ the overstaffed Post Office? (You might want to carry that calculation down to the daily cost). Answers welcome.

E-mail: [email protected]