Future of Royal Mail and the Hooper Review

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 16 Dec 2008, 13:59

LTB 984/08 - Future of Royal Mail and the Hooper Review

No. 984/08
Ref GS/TO/11.0
Date: 15th December 2008

Dear Colleagues,

Future of Royal Mail and the Hooper Review

Over the past week there has been an increase in media stories about the outcome of the review of Royal Mail led by Richard Hooper.

The CWU has stepped up its campaign. On Tuesday 9th December, the national Union organised a briefing meeting in the House of Commons for Labour MPs. The meeting was addressed by the General Secretary, Billy Hayes, and the Deputy General Secretary (Post), Dave Ward. In addition, Tony Lloyd MP, Chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party spoke in support, as did Frank Doran MP, Chair of the Trade Union Group of MPs. The General Secretary's presentation to this meeting can be seen at www.billyhayes.co.uk

The Union case for opposing the privatisation of Royal Mail, resolving the pensions deficit, negotiating changes in the industry, and for the establishment of a Peoples' Bank, were all well received by the assembled MPs.

Later that day, the GS and the DGSP met with BERR Minister Pat McFadden. The major item discussed was the unagreed proposed closure of Mail Centres. The CWU explained why the Minister should press Royal Mail management to commence genuine negotiations on the future of the Mail Centre network.

Over the weekend, and today (Monday 15th), there has been considerable media interest following leaks of some of the contents of the Hooper Report. The selected leaks that have been placed by unattributable people is damaging to a serious debate about the contents of the report. The CWU has written to Lord Mandelson, Pat McFadden, and Richard Hooper seeking details of the publication of the report. We believe only its early publication and a serious national debate can ensure favourable Government action on the report.

Billy Hayes Dave Ward
General Secretary Deputy General Secretary (Post)

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 16 Dec 2008, 14:01

http://www.cwu.org.uk/news/archive/41737/.html

The long expected Hooper report, into the future of Royal Mail will be published today. There is huge speculation in the national press regarding its contents. The report is generally expected to include proposals to include partial privatisation and for the government to take over the liability of the pensions deficit.

The union is being widely reported in the press as being opposed to any privatisation including joint ventures. Billy Hayes, general secretary has said: "when the banks are being nationalised and everybody is seeing the failure of the private markets, why would the introduction of private capital be the answer to the future of the British postal service". The Union is committed to opposing the break up, closures and privatisation of the postal service.

The Union had long campaigned for a review of the impact of competition into the postal service, the poor regulatory system and the growing funding problems in Royal Mail. In particular, the Union wants to see action taken by the government to resolve the growing pension deficit and reverse threats to pension benefits within Royal Mail.

The report is due to be published at 3.30 pm this afternoon. The report will be available after that time along with the Unions formal response.

Post by **fmrPOSTIE** » 16 Dec 2008, 14:19

As we know "selective leaks" have come out over the last couple of days with intense media speculation that the business will be part-privatised. I have to say this is pure speculation and to date, the Govt has given a comittment to honour its 2005 Election Manifesto promise of keeping RM publicly-owned. This was also reaffirmed by the Warwick II agreement back in the Summer. No labour minister has publicly said they want to privatise it and BERR press releases have said the same.

At the moment we'll have to take the government by their word, yes there will be changes but I just cant see any form of JV getting off the ground. There are too many technicalities wrt breaking up the PO, most notably the requirement for Primary Legislation in the HoC and the HoL. Requiring a vote by all MPs, this would be a serious bit of Legislation/Policy to get through.

A little reminder: EDM 548: PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF ROYAL MAIL
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetai ... ESSION=875

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 16 Dec 2008, 14:30

Thanks for the link fmrPostie here is the list in full:

EDM 548

PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF ROYAL MAIL 11.07.2005

Grogan, John 214 signatures
Abbott, Diane Allen, Graham Anderson, David
Anderson, Janet Atkins, Charlotte Austin, Ian
Austin, John Banks, Gordon Barlow, Celia
Battle, John Bayley, Hugh Begg, Anne
Benton, Joe Berry, Roger Betts, Clive
Blackman-Woods, Roberta Borrow, David S Brown, Lyn
Brown, Nicholas Brown, Russell Burden, Richard
Burgon, Colin Butler, Dawn Campbell, Gregory
Campbell, Ronnie Caton, Martin Challen, Colin
Chapman, Ben Chaytor, David Clapham, Michael
Clark, Katy Clarke, Tom Clelland, David
Cohen, Harry Connarty, Michael Cook, Frank
Cooper, Rosie Corbyn, Jeremy Cousins, Jim
Crausby, David Cruddas, Jon Cryer, Ann
Cummings, John Cunningham, Jim Curtis-Thomas, Claire
Davidson, Ian Dean, Janet Devine, Jim
Dismore, Andrew Dobbin, Jim Dobson, Frank
Dodds, Nigel Donaldson, Jeffrey Donohoe, Brian H
Doran, Frank Dowd, Jim Drew, David
Dunwoody, Gwyneth Durkan, Mark Eagle, Angela [R]
Efford, Clive Ellman, Louise Engel, Natascha
Ennis, Jeff Etherington, Bill Farrelly, Paul
Field, Frank Fisher, Mark Flello, Robert
Flynn, Paul Foster, Michael Jabez Francis, Hywel
Galloway, George Gapes, Mike George, Bruce
Gerrard, Neil Gibson, Ian Gilroy, Linda
Godsiff, Roger Goodman, Helen Griffith, Nia
Gwynne, Andrew Hall, Patrick Hamilton, David
Hamilton, Fabian Hancock, Mike Havard, Dai
Henderson, Doug Hendrick, Mark Hepburn, Stephen
Hermon, Lady Hesford, Stephen Heyes, David
Hillier, Meg Hodgson, Sharon Hoey, Kate
Hood, Jim Hopkins, Kelvin Howarth, George
Hoyle, Lindsay Humble, Joan Iddon, Brian
Illsley, Eric Jackson, Glenda James, Sian C
Jenkins, Brian Johnson, Diana R Jones, Helen
Jones, Kevan Jones, Lynne Jones, Martyn
Kaufman, Gerald Keeble, Sally Keeley, Barbara
Keen, Alan Kemp, Fraser Khabra, Piara S
Khan, Sadiq Kilfoyle, Peter Kumar, Ashok
Laxton, Bob Lazarowicz, Mark Lepper, David
Lloyd, Tony Llwyd, Elfyn Love, Andrew
MacDougall, John Mackinlay, Andrew Malik, Shahid
Mallaber, Judy Marris, Rob Marsden, Gordon
Marshall, David Marshall-Andrews, Robert Martlew, Eric
McCafferty, Chris McCarthy, Kerry McCarthy-Fry, Sarah
McCrea, Dr William McDonnell, Alasdair McDonnell, John
McFall, John McGovern, Jim McGrady, Eddie
McKechin, Ann McKenna, Rosemary Meacher, Michael
Miller, Andrew Mitchell, Austin Moffat, Anne
Moffatt, Laura Moon, Madeleine Morgan, Julie
Mudie, George Mullin, Chris Murphy, Denis
Murphy, Paul Naysmith, Doug O'Hara, Edward
Olner, Bill Osborne, Sandra Owen, Albert
Pope, Greg Prentice, Gordon Price, Adam
Prosser, Gwyn Purchase, Ken Riordan, Linda
Robinson, Geoffrey Rooney, Terry Ruane, Chris
Ruddock, Joan Salter, Martin Sarwar, Mohammad
Seabeck, Alison Sheridan, Jim Short, Clare
Simpson, Alan Singh, Marsha Skinner, Dennis
Slaughter, Andy Smith, Geraldine Smith, John P
Snelgrove, Anne Soulsby, Peter Southworth, Helen
Spellar, John Starkey, Phyllis Stewart, Ian
Stoate, Howard Strang, Gavin Stringer, Graham
Stuart, Gisela Taylor, David Thornberry, Emily [R]
Trickett, Jon Truswell, Paul Turner, Desmond
Ussher, Kitty Vaz, Keith Vis, Rudi
Walley, Joan Waltho, Lynda Wareing, Robert N
Williams, Alan Williams, Betty Williams, Hywel
Wilson, Sammy Winnick, David Wood, Mike
Wright, Anthony D Wright, Tony Wyatt, Derek

That this House welcomes the commitment from the Government in its General Election manifesto that `...we have given the Royal Mail greater commercial freedom and have no plans to privatise it. Our ambition is to see a publicly-owned Royal Mail fully restored to good health, providing customers with an excellent service and its employees with rewarding employment. We will review the impact on the Royal Mail of market liberalisation, which is being progressively introduced under the Postal Services Act 2000 and which allows alternative carriers to the Royal Mail to offer postal services'; notes that the industry's regulator, Postcomm, has proposed to initiate a complete liberalisation of the postal market in advance of EU liberalisation and that the regulator has further proposed to introduce an extremely restrictive price control; expresses concern that these two initiatives are being pursued with no reference to the anticipated review of the impact of the Postal Services Act 2000 on the Royal Mail; calls upon the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to initiate the review as soon as possible with the aim of strengthening the ability of Royal Mail to retain the Universal Service Obligation; and urges the Royal Mail and the Government to agree a business plan which is in line with the commitment given in the General Election manifesto and which provides for a successful publicly-owned Royal Mail with all shares continuing to be owned by the Government.

As an Amendment to Grogan, John's proposed Motion (PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF ROYAL MAIL):

EDM 548A1

PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF ROYAL MAIL 19.12.2005

Sheerman, Barry 1 signatures

at end add `apart from a distribution of non-transferable shares distributed to employees based on common amending or co-operative principles.'.

Post by **fmrPOSTIE** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:07

LIVE: Royal Mail Statement by Lord Mandelson

For those that want to watch this afternoon:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/chec ... m=1&nbwm=1

Post by **fmrPOSTIE** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:18

Main Points:

** Govt should take over the pension deficit

** Improve RM performance by forming a " strategic minority partnership" with another postal operator.

** Proposes that Ofcom should takeover from POSTCOMM, maintaining the USO.

Peter Mandelson confirms TNT are interested in a "minority stake" in Royal Mail Letters, but not POL.

Full repsonse due in January.

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:24

Part privatisation, it's nothing more than what we expected

.

Post by **fmrPOSTIE** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:26

disgruntledpostie1 wrote:Part privatisation, it's nothing more than what we expected .

My understanding is that it is "illegal" to sell any shares in Royal Mail under the Postal Services Act 2000?

wonder what the Labour MPs will think, surely this will be the thin end of the wedge!

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:34

fmrPOSTIE wrote:
disgruntledpostie1 wrote:Part privatisation, it's nothing more than what we expected .
My understanding is that it is "illegal" to sell any shares in Royal Mail under the Postal Services Act 2000?

wonder what the Labour MPs will think, surely this will be the thin end of the wedge!

Mandy's in charge so anything can happen

k979aaa · Post by **k979aaa** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:37

Bringing in T.N.T or the other private companies will not solve the problems the royal mail faces in these times!. I am afraid peter :mfo mandelson and richard hooper are living in cloud cuckoo land and are miss guided in their conclusions!. If the future is T.N.T orange the future is sh*te for royal mail and all who work in royal mail!.

Post by **dvbuk55** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:39

fmrPOSTIE wrote:
disgruntledpostie1 wrote:Part privatisation, it's nothing more than what we expected .
My understanding is that it is "illegal" to sell any shares in Royal Mail under the Postal Services Act 2000?

wonder what the Labour MPs will think, surely this will be the thin end of the wedge!

Well in truth I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for a turnaround on that, but "shares" and "strategic partnership with investment" may sound the same to you and I but it won't be the same to the CWU, Royal Mail and the Government. We knew it was coming lets face it, it may not be 2009 or 2010 but it will come. We would need to look at how the partnership evolves - I can't really see them wanting a share of the labour intensive delivery market because they already get the sodding stuff delivered for next to nothing now.

Post by **fmrPOSTIE** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:44

Mandelson update:

He says that Royal Mail will continue in the public sector yet in the same breathe he says that other operators may come in and "partner" Royal Mail.

Mandelson: Rules out "any weakening" of the USO.

Mandelson: Royal Mail - a failure of "drive and confidence" has led to the company not taking up the Govt's offer of extra money. What the f**k is AL/AC up to?

Still some confusion over the minority stake issue.

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:45

It looks like a tough time ahead for MCs, transport and distribution. Maybe this is what they mean, TNT build new MCs and RM pay them for doing the work, then TNT deliver to the DOs.

Post by **fmrPOSTIE** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:48

UPDATE: Mandelson confirms new Legislation will be brought forward.

Let the battle begin!! Any news from the CWU yet?

k979aaa · Post by **k979aaa** » 16 Dec 2008, 15:51

Just watched the house of common's statement with alan johnson sat right behind the government minister!. This toe rag shat on us all did not lift a finger nay he agree's with mandelson and co!. CUT THE FUNDING NOW STUFF THIS FU*KING GOVENMENT NOW!.