Proceeding contribution from Lord Carter of Barnes (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 April 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Postal Services Bill [HL].
Postal Services Bill [HL]
As the noble Lord says, the amendment would reduce or limit Ofcom’s ability to impose access conditions on certain types of postal operators by removing the reference to postal operators’ infrastructure from the general access conditions. In the Government's view, the amendment is not necessary and could be contrary to our obligations under Article 11a of the postal services directive, which deals with access conditions to the infrastructure of the universal service provider. Clause 44 sets out general access conditions that apply equally to all postal operators, including the Royal Mail. The amendment would allow Ofcom to impose access conditions on postal operators only for services that they are providing within the scope of the universal postal service. As the market develops, it is important that Ofcom, as the industry regulator, can intervene when it considers it appropriate, allowing access between other postal operators as well as Royal Mail. Confining the clause to services within the scope of the universal postal service risks limiting appropriate and sensible regulation and setting it in one particular moment. Article 11a of the postal services directive requires that, whenever necessary to protect the interest of users and/or to promote effective competition, member states are required to ensure that access conditions are available to elements of postal infrastructure. Clause 44 gives effect to our obligations under that part of the article. Noble Lords may be reassured by the fact that the clause provides the power to Ofcom for appropriate general access regulation in future. Although the condition of necessity is a stringent test—far more stringent than it often appears on reading—it is one that I hope will provide comfort that the appropriate checks and balances are in place, however remote the possibility of it being used. In the light of that clarification, I hope that the noble Lord will consider withdrawing his amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 710 c75
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Compensation Consumers Appeals Disadvantaged Audit Costs Bank services Business Closures Competition Correspondence Borrowing Finance Fees and charges EU law Investment Private sector Low incomes Protection Public sector Post offices Prices Postal services Parcels Ofcom Postal Services Commission Post Office Standards Regulation Royal Mail Universal service obligation
- Legislation
- Postal Services Bill (HL) 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:28:18 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_550403
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_550403
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_550403