Australia Post has confirmed that it is planning a ten cent concession on the cost of stamps. What nonsense, writes Peter Coleman.

The kneejerk reaction to the political hot potato of asking for an increase – while operating costs increase ahead of the CPI – needs to be balanced by reason. And a realisation that the real money in postal deliveries is not in little old ladies writing lovingly to their nearest and dearest.

“Mindful of the potential cost-of-living impact” of an increase in the cost of a few stamps, Australia Post managing director and chef executive Ahmed Fahour will propose the concession rate stamp in its “notification” to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission tomorrow of an increase from 60p to 70p for a standard letter.

People with government concession card will have to register with Australia Post for another card to be able to buy the stamps. There’s speculation the arrangement will provide a new purpose in life for the 5.7 million expected to qualify… buying stamps for their family and friends. Post hasn’t made clear yet how it will police abuse; maybe you’ll have to hand in your letter and show your card, requiring more administration and cost, something it is already good at.

There’s no mention of any increase to business postage costs; usually PrintPost and mailbox price increases sneak up regularly without any embarrassing gap between announcements. For publishers, it is an ongoing impost in a market in which printing costs – like advertising revenue – have mostly remained relatively static, but for many the solution has been to both print and mail overseas.

And while catalogue deliverers use available technology to make the best use of their labour resources, Australia Post seems stuck in a time warp: Despite the introduction of delivery point IDs a few years back, the four-digit postcode of a suburb is the only mailing aid used by most private letter writers (including those who will be getting subsidised concession stamps). Not for Australia the walk-based codes used in other countries.

Printing Industries chief executive Bill Healey describes Australia Post as “a classic example of how a monopoly is able to avoid the implementation of more efficient systems and processes that are demanded under market competition”.

And of misrepresenting its trading performance to avoid having to change its business model. He quotes a 2012 Post consumer survey which found that 85 per cent of people read their mail on the day received, and 98 per cent actually open their mail, compared to the “20-25 per cent” of emails opened.

You’d think the rise of internet retailing – and the consequent increase in the number of parcels to deliver – would have been the great opportunity for Australia Post, but it hasn’t been, for one simple reason… competition. Healey says he hopes findings of an audit commission and proposed review of the ACCC and consumer law will recommend opening up competition in the printed mail market.

And for the fact that most post offices are ill-equipped to deal efficiently with the business. Try to collect a parcel promptly and you’ll frequently find counter staff swimming in an ocean of parcels with little idea how to identify the one they’re looking for. Visit Australia Post’s Facebook page and you’ll find it equally awash with complaints from people who want to know why it takes longer for a parcel to cross Australia than it does to circle the globe.

Post provides a formatted response to these queries on the social media site, starting with, “I’m really sorry to hear that you are having problems…” and saying that the writer can “understand (their) frustration”.

So can I, Australia Post; so can I.

Peter Coleman