My Lords, I listened to the noble Lord, Lord Young, but there are anxieties that the protection of the universal service and the amendments he has moved may, to some extent, weaken the determination of the management of Royal Mail to make the maximum effort to achieve the efficiencies that are now widely recognised as being an essential part of the whole programme. The Bill contains measures which would enable the Government, on the advice of Ofcom, to take other measures, for instance going for procurement, to which the noble Lord referred, if somebody else is prepared to offer the service at a lower cost because they are more efficient. It would be difficult to preclude that happening by legislation. Similarly, on the question of the fund, if other providers are to contribute to a fund, is there not a danger that they will find themselves contributing to reinforcing the inefficiencies of Royal Mail? I have said in previous debates that the chief executive of Royal Mail is making a tremendous, herculean effort as a manager to secure the efficiency savings that can be made. She is the first to admit that there is more to do. Royal Mail recognises that it has made a start and that she has the apparent support of the workforce. There needs to be greater efficiency.
I read these amendments, tabled by the Opposition, as removing some of the pressure on Royal Mail to get ahead with that. The noble Lord shakes his head but that is the fear. I therefore hope that that amendment will not be accepted. The amendments proposed by my noble friend on the Front Bench seem to be an admirable way of giving the appropriate protection to ensure that the services have the opportunity to become as efficient as possible, so perhaps not surprisingly, I find myself supporting the government amendments. I hope that they will not be used so that competitors, who could offer other services, find themselves subsidising the inefficiencies of Royal Mail. I know that that is not my noble friend’s intention but nevertheless there are fears among some of the competitors that that might be the unintended consequence. If my noble friend can reassure me on that I will be very grateful.
Postal Services Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Jenkin of Roding
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 17 May 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Postal Services Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
727 c1323-4 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:17:23 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743453
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743453
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743453