| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Putney postal "service" | |
| Posted by: | Fraser Pearce | |
| Date/Time: | 08/07/10 15:13:00 |
| “So I think we should concentrate the blame on the managers of the Royal Mail; and don't let's forget that the late unlamented Chief Executive, Adam Crozier, was paid huge amounts for his incompetence.” - Or perhaps blame our political class, which legislated this situation into existence? The EU’s Privatisation of Postal Services directive became British law via the Postal Services Regulations 1999. These regulations made the Royal Mail Britain’s universal service provider – obliging the Royal Mail to deliver mail throughout the UK regardless of whether it’s profitable (hence all the junk mail).* At the same time, however, the legislation allowed other companies to cherry pick services, such as delivering mail above a certain weight to the most profitable areas. In effect, the Royal Mail’s now obliged to deliver mail unprofitably to help other companies make a profit. The longstanding British tradition of delivering mail across the country for the same cost has also been destroyed, with the Royal mail ‘streamlining’ services in order to compete. The Royal Mail was therefore doomed to failure, with the above legislation having a disproportionate impact on the UK. Thanks to Article 88 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, the British government can’t subsidise the ailing Royal Mail either. …This doesn’t, however, account for variable levels of service around the country, false ‘while you were out’ messages or unanswered letters of complaint. It does, however, provide a broader context. * In 2008, this situation was analysed by Richard Hooper, former head of Ofcom. Hooper's report said, "Large firms had seen clear benefits from liberalisation, including more choice, lower prices and more assurance about the quality of the mail service, but there had been no significant benefits for consumers and smaller businesses." |