Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Clarke of Hampstead (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 20 April 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Postal Services Bill [HL].


Postal Services Bill [HL]

This has been an interesting and long debate on a group of amendments and I apologise if I take a few minutes more in reply because we have so many more amendments to deal with this evening. I start by thanking my noble friend Lord Hoyle. I am grateful for his support not just for the group of amendments that he spoke so eloquently to, but for the encouragement that he has given me. It has been a bit lonely looking around the Benches of the socialist pioneers of change. There is so little interest at this time of night. I can understand the timing, but it is nice to have Doug, my noble friend Lord Hoyle. Just looking at him makes me feel that I am not entirely alone in trying to do something to save the Post Office that has given me so much. I am sorry that my noble friend Lord O'Neill has left his place. Of all the places in politics that could be described as talking shops, without the authority to make changes, you would have to go a long way to find somewhere better than this. Every week we have debates where we beg leave to withdraw at the end, but the important thing is that debates take place. In Scotland, Wales and Ireland and whatever Boris's group is called—the Greater London Authority—it is necessary to debate things because they can have influence—sometimes people listen. Unfortunately, the Government I support and have worked for all my life have not listened very much on Post Office matters over the past 10 years. My noble friend said that it was time for change and that the Government have seen the folly of downstream access charging—he did not use those words but that is what he meant—and that they were going to change the role so that a proper pricing policy can be looked at by Ofcom. That is good, but why has it taken 10 years? Why has it taken all these years when some of us actually said it at the time, and have said it repeatedly? The Library is very good in this place; staff there gave me a whole bunch of the things that I have been saying on a couple of subjects. I get no pleasure out of it because this is my Government. I was so proud when we got power and then I find that in an essential area like the Post Office somebody wanted to give it away, as they did with Girobank. Now we have this privatisation. If it was the other side of this House I could understand it, as I said before—that is their policy. Our policy and manifesto commitment, underpinned by the Warwick agreement, is that we would not do certain things. I am grateful to my noble friend the Minister: I thought that his response was constructive and accommodating and I am not being patronising because it is good to hear such clear terms, but when you talk about Europe, that is why we are in this state. People have forgotten that the postal services directive actually told us to liberalise our Post Office. We did it. The noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, said that we had to be at the cutting edge and the forefront of this liberalisation so that we could be ahead of the market. Again, when will the French start the process of liberalisation? When will some of the other countries accept the conditions that we have run into? All right, we were playing cricket and the others wanted to play rugby: that is fair enough. We are nice people in this country, but what has it cost us? It has almost cost us our Post Office and that is why I am determined to get as much out of this Bill as we can. I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, found that the amendments have been helpful in starting the debate, because it will not end here. Ofcom will be an important part of our discussions in the future. All that I ask the Minister about Ofcom is, please let it be fair. Let it treat us fairly. I say "us" in the context of a Post Office worker, because we have been treated unfairly for the best part of the decade. It has to stop. We do not want any favours. The Post Office does not deserve any favours from Ofcom, but it deserves fairness. I hope that Ofcom approaches its job in that light. What do they call it in Europe—an even playing field?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c1356-8 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Devolved matters Consumers Bus services Assets Bank services Closures Fees and charges EU law Investment Low incomes Northern Ireland Workplace pensions Public sector Public consultation Older people Staff Post offices Pension funds Postal services Parcels Ofcom Postal Services Commission Post Office Scotland Small businesses Regulation Shares Working hours Wales Tax allowances Taxation Trusts Rural areas Royal Mail Universal service obligation Girobank
Legislation
Postal Services Bill (HL) 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk