The Post Office Closures that Don't Save Money

We have just heard that our village Post Office is to close. We will then be 2.9 miles from the nearest Post Office, just within the government target of three miles.

Our Post Office will be replaced by an "outreach service" which will be open for the same number of hours, and which will provide essentially the same services. It will, however, be based at one of the village pubs instead of the village shop. The village shop is willing to host the outreach service, but the Post Office doesn't seem to favour that option, perhaps because it would then look as though nothing had changed.

Given that this new service will be a Post Office in all but name, what exactly is the point? There will be a big upheaval moving the Post Office from the building it occupies now, which will cost money and harm the village shop. Once the move is complete, the outreach service will need to be staffed just like the Post Office, so presumably it will cost a similar amount of money.

The Post Office consultation document doesn't seem to be available on line, though they accept responses by email. I suppose it makes a kind of stupid sense that the Post Office uses its own product—the letter—when it communicates with you. However, at the end of the document, it says that they are particularly interested in "local demographics (such as age, sex, disability, race, religion and ethnicity)."

I can understand that elderly people or the disabled might be affected disproportionately by the closure of a Post Office. That makes sense. However, what is the relevance of other factors? Are ethnic minorities more in need of a Post Office than white people? Is there a religion that worships letters? And sex? What can I say? Yes please? Are there actually any villages where the sex ratio isn't approximately 50/50?

If the Post Office sacked all their diversity consultants, would they be able to afford to keep our branch open?