A DEBATE called in the House of Lords last week by the Bishop of Newcastle, Dr Helen-Ann Hartley, asked the Government how much it understood about the community impact of bank closures.
Noting the recent announcement by the Lloyds Banking Group of the closure of 136 bank branches, she referred to “a decade of decline in the number of high-street banks”: “63 per cent of branches open at the start of 2015” had now closed. “At the heart of this issue . . . is the stripping away of essential services without adequate alternative provision,” the Bishop said.
“Online banking is indeed far more convenient for many, but where does that leave those who rely on the services that in-person banking provides, those living in rural areas whose broadband is unreliable, those who struggle to understand online systems and fear the risk of fraud, those on low incomes who rely on cash to manage their budget, and those in need of advice to set up a mortgage or business, for whom a phone call cannot compare?”
It was particularly an issue for the elderly. “An Age UK survey reveals that the use of online banking is as low as 14 per cent among the 85-plus age group,” and “also reflects the wider issue of declining high street services”, Dr Hartley said. Although she welcomed the Government’s introduction of “banking hubs with access to “the fundamental function of banks from a range of providers”, she was “concerned that 350 hubs will not be enough to fill the gap in services that the rapidly closing bank branches are leaving”.
Lord Arbuthnot (Conservative) said that “despite the mayhem and trauma that it has inflicted on sub-postmasters throughout the country, and despite the appalling scandal of the Horizon saga, the Post Office is essential to communities up and down the country.” He declared his interest “as a member of the Horizon compensation advisory board”, and that “as banks close their branches, we need more post offices, not fewer . . . bigger post offices, with the wonderful sub-postmasters getting back to their rightful role as leaders and enablers of their strong communities.”
Lord Holmes (Conservative) said that it was a matter of “connectivity. What happens if you have no bank branch, and the broadband and mobile coverage isn’t all that in your area?”
The Liberal Democrat Baroness Kramer’s concern was for the “increasing number of people and communities — especially people with disabilities, older people, and particularly people in rural areas — who are being left behind because their basic banking needs are barely being met by the system as it is today”.
Lord Altrincham (Conservative) referred to “cost pressure on the banks, partly as a result of regulation, which made it hard to maintain buildings and branches”.
Responding on behalf of the Government, Baroness Blake framed the “important thread running through all of this . . . the rural economy and how it is going to survive . . . communities, vulnerability, and making sure that we are inclusive in all the work we have done”. Reassurance was offered, she said, through the 2024 Autumn Budget’s announcement of “funding of over £500 million next year to deliver digital infrastructure upgrades through Project Gigabit and the shared rural network”.
Link, the operator of the UK’s largest ATM network, carries reviews “communities’ access to cash needs”, and recommends a banking hub where required, she explained; a closure can happen only once “recommended services have been installed”. She was equally enthusiastic about “post offices’ . . . being at the heart of the community . . . offering banking services”.
The Minister closed by thanking Dr Hartley “for her timely debate, and for her continued championing of rural banking access. I was struck that she broadened this out. . . inclusion is an issue right across the country for many of our different communities.”
Bank branch closures have been investigated by the Church Times as an issue for parish treasurers (Features, 6 September 2024).
