Official portrait of Chris Bloore
UK Parliament, CC BY 3.0

Chris Bloore

Labour Party MP for Redditch since (elected). An MP continuously since .

Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions

Entries on this tracker

232

Each filed under the party they sat for that day

Register entries

2

As currently published

Declared while sitting for Labour

£0

0 of 2 entries state an amount

Party affiliation

PartyOfficeAreaPeriodBeganEndedSource
LabourMPRedditch – presentelected—Party history

Parliament's party history for this member: Labour ( – present).

Register of interests

Every entry the member has in the Register of Members' Financial Interests, as Parliament currently publishes it. The wording and values are the member's own declarations; nothing here has been assessed by this site.

Totals add only the entries that declare an amount received: payments for work, donations, gifts, and funded visits (register categories 1.1, 2, 3, 4 and 5). Ongoing employment is listed but not added, because its figure is a rate rather than a sum received. Each entry is dated by when the benefit happened, not when it was registered, and placed under the party the member sat for on that date. A member who changed party therefore has a separate total for each.

DateCategoryEntryDeclared valueSitting forSource
date registered1. Employment and earningsSole director and shareholder - What'sNextCommunicationsLTD—LabourRegister record
date registered7. ShareholdingsShares in What'sNextCommunicationsLTD—LabourRegister record

Register on Parliament's site

Latest on this tracker 232

  1. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I beg to move, That this House is concerned about the performance of Royal Mail; and urges the Government to work with Royal Mail to improve its performance levels. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for selecting the debate and the more than 100 hon. Members from across the House who put their names to the application. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), who applied for the debate alongside me. May I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a member of the executive of the trade union group of Labour MPs? Today’s debate is not an attack on our posties, the men and women trying to deliver a quality service with their hands tied behind their backs; it is about holding Royal Mail and Ofcom to account until the service that my constituents receive is the one they pay for. I called for the debate because in Redditch and the villages, the post—or the lack of it—is now one of the most common reasons that people write to me as their Member of Parliament. My constituency is a mix of urban, suburban and rural, from Batchley and Church Hill in the town itself to Inkberrow, Feckenham and Wychbold in the villages. The difference between postcodes can be stark. Let me begin with the ordinary complaints from my casework, with the Radio Times arriving a week late, first-class birthday cards taking five days to cross Redditch, and Christmas cards arriving on 23 January. One Feckenham family always receives birthday cards due on 12 January five days late; it would be funny if it was not so sad. Some receive no post for days and then one bundle tied with the obligatory rubber band. One received nothing between 3 and 20 January. Another in Wychbold gets deliveries once every 12 days.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I completely agree with the hon. Member. I will get to the impact on businesses later in my speech. A letter from my own office sent on 11 June arrived on 25 August. Bills arrive overdue while people struggle to reach complaint lines or their local sorting office. The consequences can be far more serious: one constituent received a hospital letter on 6 October about an appointment on 17 September.

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I completely agree. Another resident of mine, whose husband has cancer, has had to wait anxiously for medical correspondence about a diagnosis.

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    Could I make a little progress? I am conscious that many hon. Members wish to speak, but I need to get through some of my speech. A council letter about a husband in a nursing home took from 14 November until 3 March to arrive. His family had six months to appeal and almost four months had already passed. A Department for Work and Pensions letter dated 5 January required a response by the 14th, but it arrived on the 20th. My constituent’s benefits were withheld. She had done nothing wrong; her letter was late. Benefits withheld, appointments missed and appeal deadlines lost—all because the post failed. If my office cannot trust Royal Mail to deliver a letter, how can I assure constituents that their hospital correspondence will arrive in time? One more thing struck me with this casework. Almost every constituent says that their parcels arrive on time; it is the letters that do not. Is that a coincidence, or is that what happens when a company chases the parcels market and treats letters as an afterthought while holding a monopoly on them?

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I will give way to the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) as she asked first.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    The hon. Lady is completely correct, and I will touch on that issue.

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I agree. The Government’s response to the Business and Trade Committee makes the point well: a lack of capacity that forces a company to prioritise some items over others is no justification for failing to deliver the expected service. Royal Mail must deliver 90% of its first-class letters the next working day. It is managing 85%. Against the target of completing 99.9% of delivery routes each day, it is completing just 70%. Those targets have been missed for five years running, while the price of a first-class stamp has risen by 137% to £1.80 and the price of a first-class medium parcel, where Royal Mail competes, has fallen by half. Where there is competition, prices fall; where there is monopoly, prices rise and services continue to fall. What has the regulator done, really? Since 2015, Ofcom has investigated Royal Mail seven times and fined it four times. Last year, Ofcom lowered the very targets Royal Mail was missing and cut second-class delivery days, saving the company up to £425 million—“rewarding failure”, as Citizens Advice put it. More fines will not fix this, yet Ofcom has never come to this House seeking the powers it needs to hold Royal Mail to account. A regulator that can punish failure but cannot compel improvement must answer a fundamental question: what is it for? If Ofcom cannot do its job, a new regulator, with real teeth, must be considered.

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    That is a cheeky question, and I might get back to it. In May, the Business and Trade Committee called the service unacceptable and called Ofcom’s regulation into question. It demanded a road map to improvement. We are still waiting. Meanwhile, last Christmas, 16 million people experienced delayed letters, 5.7 million missed a vital letter and 19 million received bundled deliveries. Behind every statistic is someone let down by a service they have paid for and have every right to expect. Royal Mail points to £500 million of investment and a promise to meet targets by April 2027. I welcome the investment, but a voluntary plan and relaxed targets are no substitute for accountability. No future promise can undo a missed hospital appointment or restore the time lost fighting for a loved one. That is why I joined my hon. Friends the Members for Lichfield and for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) in writing to Royal Mail’s chief executive, Alistair Cochrane, asking him to meet affected MPs in Parliament. Our constituents deserve more than a briefing from a distance. However, we must also confront uncomfortable questions. When Royal Mail was privatised, we were promised flexibility, investment and competition. Instead, the taxpayer lost hundreds of millions of pounds through an undervalued sale, and performance levels fell. If privatisation was supposed to secure Royal Mail’s future, why are we now facing these challenges, and what needs to change to put the service back on a sustainable footing?

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    Yes. We are not going there; they should be coming here. I understand that the world has changed. Letter volumes have fallen from around 20 billion at their peak to 5.6 billion, while Royal Mail must serve 4 million more addresses. The economics of the universal service do not shrink with the volumes. A postie still walks the same streets for 10 letters as they do for one. Around 1,000 delivery offices are changing how they operate in a compressed period. The answer cannot be another round of job cuts, which put more pressure on the very service we want improved. Other European countries subsidise their postal services. We must be prepared to have an open debate about whether further Government support is needed to protect the universal service and whether a new operational model is required

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentChris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I agree. That is incredibly frustrating and impacts so many different areas. I am going to make some progress and finish. Recognising the need for change does not mean accepting the unacceptable. Before I turn to what must change, let me deal with the tired old narrative that we must pick a side between consumers and workers—the customer who wants their post and the postie who wants decent pay. That is a false choice, and the evidence contradicts it. Citizens Advice, the statutory champion of postal consumers, and the Communication Workers Union, the voice of postal workers, have reached almost the same conclusions from opposite ends. Both want a regulator that protects the universal service, the same rules for competitors and an end to bogus self-employment. A fairly paid, properly employed postie is how a customer gets their letter.

    Hansard source

2024 General Election: Redditch

Held . Recorded result: Lab Gain. Majority 789. 42,375 votes cast from an electorate of 71,042. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.

CandidatePartyVotesShare
Chris BlooreLabour14,81034.9%
Rachel MacleanConservative14,02133.1%
Julie AllisonReform UK8,51620.1%
Andrew Fieldsend-RoxboroughLiberal Democrat2,1655.1%
David ThainGreen Party2,0985.0%
Mohammed AminWorkers Party of Britain7651.8%

Election result on Parliament's site

Parliamentary career

Seats held

SeatDates
RedditchElected 1 time – present
Committee memberships 7
CommitteeDates
Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee – present
Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Sub-Committee on Economic Security, Arms and Export Controls – present
Secure 16 to 19 Academies Bill –
Secure 16 to 19 Academies Bill – present
Unauthorised Entry to Football Matches Bill –
Mental Health Bill [HL] –
Northern Ireland Affairs Committee – present

Career on Parliament's site

Published contact details

Parliamentary office

House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA

[email protected]

Constituency office

Constituency Office

01527 362815

X (formerly Twitter)

x.com/chrisbloore

Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site

Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .