My Lords, I do not want to intrude in the debate on this amendment, but unfortunately the noble Lords, Lord Touhig and Lord Low of Dalston, were not in their places when I made this point earlier. If we are to preserve the reputation of this House for knowing the facts and having expertise, we really must not say things that are not true. As I said earlier, the issue of the Royal Mail is not about whether it can deliver to rural Wales or rural Scotland. As I said earlier, it is more expensive for the Royal Mail to deliver to Norwood Green or Hampstead than to maintain the service to the Orkneys and Shetland.
If we are to debate this issue, the concern should not be about whether or not the universal service can be maintained to outer Wales or northern Scotland. It is about whether we can maintain it to Hampstead or Norwood Green. If we are to debate this issue, we should not fall into the trap of thinking that this is about how we preserve the service to the outer islands or parts of the UK. All the other issues that noble Lords have raised are worthy of debate, but if we are to be the serious House that knows the facts, we should take that on board.
Postal Services Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Razzall
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 March 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Postal Services Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
726 c113-4 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:22:31 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_724767
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_724767
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_724767