- Treasury must act on rural ATM charges
- UK facing worst slowdown since aftermath of financial crisis
Treasury must act on rural ATM charges
Jane Dodds has joined Kirsty Williams AM and Cllr James Gibson-Watt in calling for the UK Treasury to take action to abolish transaction charges at rural ATMs.
Transactional charges are becoming increasingly common across Wales as more and more banks cut back on support to ATM providers, meaning the running costs are being passed onto the customers. The ATM at Hay Post Office is the most recent local example of this, with customers now being charged 99p per transaction.
Jane Dodds, Leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrats, said:
Our rural communities are seeing vital local services cut back time and time again, and now they’re losing free access to cash too. While banks continue to cut back on support for ATM providers, it is the people in our towns and villages that are suffering.
Residents of Hay-on-Wye, including myself, now have no choice but to pay 99p per transaction if we want to withdraw cash when the Post Office is closed. This is so damaging to both the local economy and our important small businesses.
The UK Treasury must act now to work towards abolishing these unfair charges and ensuring everyone across rural Wales has free access to their own money.
Kirsty Williams, Welsh Liberal Democrat Assembly Member for Brecon and Radnorshire, also commented:
Easy and free access to cash remains vital for many people in rural communities. Both for our small businesses, but also the most vulnerable residents.
The UK Government and big banks must make sure that free ATM services are accessible to all.
UK facing worst slowdown since aftermath of financial crisis
Responding to GDP figures which show the UK has had the lowest 12 month growth for 7 years, Acting Leader of the Liberal Democrats Ed Davey said:
The UK’s economy is suffering from the worst slowdown since the aftermath of the financial crisis, yet Boris Johnson has no plan to turn this around.
Businesses looking for certainty about the Conservatives’ economic policies won’t find any with Boris Johnson who seems to make it up as he goes along.
Johnson’s insistence on a hard Brexit and his willingness to keep a no-deal Brexit is a major cause of this shockingly poor economic performance.
Liberal Democrats will challenge Johnson and the Conservatives on behalf of workers and business across the UK who know they are being let down badly.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Lib Dems beat Labour in a Liverpool by-election for first time since 1997
Little Wonders #dundeewestend
Will Labour kill off the landmark climate and nature bill?
Lib Dems will continue to back 50 per cent cap on faith-based admissions to schools
Geoffrey Payne
Gwyn Williams
Alex Macfie
Toby Keynes
Peter Davies
7 Comments
Isn’t this statement saying effectively “Let’s get customers in the cities to subsidise the lifestyle choices of those who live in rural Britain. Let’s get predominantly younger and ethnic minority groups subsidise the choices of wealthier white British people.”?
Clearly, the costs of stocking ATMs with cash in rural areas are significantly greater than in cities. Why should we have yet another case of poorer groups cross-subsidising the comparatively wealthy, many retirees who have moved to rural Wales as a lifestyle choice?
Is this really the right approach for the LibDems to be taking, either as a matter of principle or in terms of electoral considerations?
In cities there are many third party ATM providers such as Raphael’s Bank that not only provide charge free access to sterling but also allow for euro to be withdrawn at a competitive rate. That’s because those providers can make money doing so. There’s a level of naivity that underlies the statement that “UK Treasury must act now to work towards abolishing these unfair charges”. Why should cost-based charges imposed in a competitive market necessitate state intervention?
@ Tobias,
Average incomes in places like mid-Wales are significantly lower than those in urban areas, and it’s the poorest who tend to be users of cash – the “comparatively wealthy, many retirees” as you describe them, tend to be able to use cards for payment, thus, like electricity meters and the like, it’s the poorest who tend to suffer most from ATM charges, especially as their withdrawals are smaller on average, making the cost proportionately greater.
And, I have to say, suggesting that rural dwellers generally are wealthier is a sweeping generalisation that suggests you know little of rural communities and care even less. A small town like Hay on Wye doesn’t just serve its own population, but a hinterland of villages, virtually none of which would have an ATM of any kind.
Mind you, finding a rural bank branch is increasingly unlikely. My nearest town, Needham Market (population 5,000), lost its bank nearly five years ago, and Stowmarket (population 20,000) has lost its Nat West and Santander in recent years, leaving Barclays, TSB and HSBC as the only banks still standing.
So, rejoice in the opportunities that urban life offers – choice of services, for example – but don’t tell those of us who, for whatever reason, live beyond the city limits that we should meekly accept worse services than you.
@ Tobias Sedlmeier Look up the item below on google. Read, digest and learn……. and for goodness sake, whatever else you do, remember not to become old, ill, disabled, in a low paid job or unemployed……….. that way you’ll be OK in your own little bubble.
Rural poverty: the case of Powys | WCPP – Wales Centre for …
https://www.wcpp.org.uk › commentary › rural-poverty-the-case-of-powys
26 Jun 2018 – As part of our Rural Poverty series, Dr Greg Thomas (Powys County Council) uses Powys as a case study to explore the issues surrounding rural poverty. … There are five main types of poverty affecting Powys residents: financial poverty, fuel poverty, health poverty, digital poverty …
Tobias seems to me someone who has never experienced real rural isolation – carrying your water into the house in a bucket (and the night soil out), cooking on solid fuel and lighting with candles or paraffin. Local Post Office closed. Nearest shop and bus stop were half a mile away, but the shop’s closed and nearest is now a mile and a half away. No car and twenty-first century roads are bicycle-surly. His view of the country seems to be derived from TV programmes like ‘Escape to the Country’ in which people who done well in the city (better than me) seek a rural idyll.
So Mark & David have got it right.
And aren’t Welsh speaking rural people an ‘ethnic minority’?
“suggesting that rural dwellers generally are wealthier is a sweeping generalisation that suggests you know little of rural communities and care even less.”
No Mark, it suggests that I’m somebody who bases my views on statistical evidence rather than self-interest. Here are the statistics as of 2014/25:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/597383/DefraRuralPovertyStats_March_2017.pdf
For every group of people, poverty levels are higher in urban areas than in rural areas, both before and after housing costs, with the exception of pensioners before housing costs where the level is 17% in rural areas and 16% in urban areas. In many cases the level of poverty in urban areas is much higher than rural areas.
And Ian, no, “Welsh speaking rural people” are not classified as an ethnic minority in the UK under current census classifications. I prefer to have discussions based on what the current ethnic minority classifications are rather than what random people may think they should be.
It’s disappointing to see so many posters who continue to believe that urban dwellers should subsidise the expense of their lifestyle choices.
Tobias. I have lived in cities since 1958 and am well aware the many advantages that gives me over country towns (where I lived before) and the real country where I spent summers on a family farm.
However for most people living in country they didn’t make ‘lifestyle choices’. They are there because they were born there and learnt jobs that are carried out there. Some are tied to family businesses (farms) that happen to be there.
As a city dweller, I am happy to subsidise them to continue to live there. The cities I’ve lived in have pressure on housing, which them leads to large-scale commuting. It seems sensible policy to keep those who have to be or want to continue to be in the country by improving infrastructure in rural areas to somewhere near what even the poorest in cities have.
I am also well aware that poverty exists in all cities, even London. The city dwellers who should be supporting the country should not be the poor, but the comfortably off.
“However for most people living in country they didn’t make ‘lifestyle choices’. They are there because they were born there and learnt jobs that are carried out there.”
I’m still not seeing anyone give reasons why urban dwellers should subsidise others the additional costs of a rural lifestyle. In my original comment I said that what LibDem reps are advocating would involve predominantly younger and ethnic minority groups wealthier white British people. The statistics show that the level of poverty is significantly higher in urban areas and of course ethnic minorities are concentrated in urban areas.
Furthermore, we need to think about green considerations. The CO2 footprint of urban dwellers is significantly lower than rural dwellers. (www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49639003) Obviously, there are people who live in rural areas because that is where their livelihood is, e.g. the family farmers you mention. However, in England and Wales there are very large numbers of people living in rural areas who are commuting to work in urban areas or who could do their job just as well in an urban area or who are not working. Is that really something that we should be encouraging with subsidisation?