I wish to speak to amendments 23 to 26, which we have tabled. Amendments 23 and 24 are similar to those tabled in Committee and are intended to ensure that no review of the universal service obligation can take place for at least five years after the date of clause 33 being enacted. I note that the hon. Member for Northampton South (Mr Binley) tabled a similar amendment that was not selected, and I commend him for doing so. I trust that he will be able to support us in our aspirations tonight.
The minimum service requirements laid out in clause 30 are exactly the same as those set out in the Postal Services Act 2000. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Nia Griffith) said in Committee, clause 33 will allow them to be eroded. The Bill sets in train a range of processes to reduce the universal service obligation, and I imagine that many Members fear that we cannot even be sure to which Secretary of State the powers in clause 33 will fall. Perhaps it will not be the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, and who knows, it may even be the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. Perhaps, if time allows, the Minister will be able to tell us which Secretary of State will inherit those powers if the Bill is passed, and then I will leave it to my hon. Friends to determine whether that is a good thing.
Postal Services Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Gordon Banks
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 12 January 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Postal Services Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
521 c371-2 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:20:51 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_699726
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_699726
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_699726