Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Nia Griffith (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 27 October 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Postal Services Bill.


Postal Services Bill

No, I will not give way; I wish to return to discussing today's announcement about the money, because it is important. Of course new investment is to be made and it will build on the investment that the Labour Government put in, but with no guarantee that the Royal Mail will continue to use the post office network, that could be good money wasted. Furthermore, will the Minister please clarify whether this is new money for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills that was not in last week's comprehensive spending review—or will it lead to cuts in other business spending? The Secretary of State gave us little insight into when the mutualisation of the post office network might take place, and no detail at all about the nature of the scheme envisaged. Most notably, he completely failed to make a convincing case for the wholesale privatisation of the Royal Mail; nor has any other speaker done so. Labour Members recognise the crucial role that public ownership has in safeguarding the public interest, and in making sure that taxpayers' money is invested for public benefit and not for private profit. For that reason, we oppose the Bill.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
517 c422 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Closures Cooperatives Privatisation Workplace pensions Redundancy Post offices Pension funds Postal services Post Office Standards Regulation Subsidies Royal Mail
Legislation
Postal Services Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk