16/12/09 - Stewart Jackson battles to save land registry jobs in commons speech

City MP Stewart Jackson has lobbied the Government in a bid to reverse a decision to axe 302 jobs at the Land Registry in the city.

At the House of Commons Christmas recess debate yesterday, MP for Peterborough Stewart Jackson voiced hisr concerns over proposals to close the Peterborough branch of the Land Registry in September 2011.

The comments have now been passed to the Lord Chancellor Jack Straw and an investigation is expected to take place in the New Year.

During the House of Commons debate, he raised a number of issues to the deputy leader of the House of Commons, Barbara Keeley, including the possibility of finding alternatives to closing the Peterborough branch.

He also believes there is enough space to bring additional civil service jobs to Peterborough and raised concerns that, with the lease not up for expiry until 2013, the Land Registry would be paying for empty space for two years.

He added: "We are going to lose 302 people who are long-serving, dedicated staff with professional skills, when, with a bit of effort we could keep them.''

"There is also no point in nationally sacking 1,500 people and employing 594 brand new members of staff who are untrained and inexperienced.''

The boss of Land Registry chief executive Peter Collis, made the controversial proposal to the Peterborough office with the loss of 302 jobs, while other centres will remain open.

The closure move has outraged staff at Peterborough Land Registry, in Touthill Close, who were left reeling after being told the base could close as part of a nationwide cost-cutting drive.

The closure plan is part of a five-year reorganisation programme that will see total staff numbers cut by 1,500 people, from about 6,500 to 5,000 by September 2011. The financial savings are expected to total £92 million a year.

Stewart Jackson added:

Speaking after the debate, Mr Jackson said: "The Land Registry does have and can have a future in Peterborough.

"This decision is short sighted and it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. It is damaging to our local economy and if we look at the business case, it is flawed and needs to be radically altered.

"This would have a very significant impact on the local economy. We have already seen large scale job losses in Peterborough.''