Swiftly They Move

The business section of today’s Daily Mail remarks upon a sell-off of Royal Mail taking place as early as April of this coming year. The paper also briefly details a list of potential buyers including TNT, Deutsche Post and the US Federal Express.

This merely points out the true inevitability of the situation – that the future of Royal Mail is in ‘privatisation’. It does not matter what we think about this; whether we agree or disagree with ‘privatisation’, it is not up to us to decide any longer – and it has not been our decision for quite some time.

As I previously highlighted, the European Union Postal Services Directive 2008/6/EC, which amended the previous Postal Service Directive 97/67/EC has decreed that ‘privatisation’ will indeed occur. Furthermore, as Directive 2008/6/EC clearly states:

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 31 December 2010 at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.

Therefore the ‘privatisation’ of Royal Mail from its position as majority universal service provider must occur by 2011. In targeting April for a sell-off, our Labour administration is simply doing as it is being told by our EU masters in the Commission rather than following the advice of any policy groups or reports.

I should also point out that even if the Conservative party were against the ‘privatisation’ of Royal Mail (which they are not), then it wouldn’t make the blindest bit of difference. Our continued membership of the European Union confers upon us the necessity of obeying its legislation which is now part of our own law.

Ivory Towers

Writing in the Daily Mail today, Quentin Letts (the paper’s Parliamentary Sketchwriter) discusses yesterday’s weekly episode of PMQs – this time between Harriet Harman and William Hague – and the forthcoming special Speaker’s Conference.

The Speaker’s Conference has been called by the House of Commons Speaker, Michael Martin, to address the growing problem of political disillusionment and distrust of most politicians in Britain, as well as declining electoral turnouts.

On a somewhat similar note, Quentin Letts, observing Prime Minister’s Questions from the gallery in Parliament, wrote that:

Looking down at the poor saps in the Commons yesterday, it was hard to be sure why anyone normal would want to be a Member of Parliament.

He then ponders for just a moment why a supposedly intelligent woman (yes, he is referring to Harriet Harman – who would have thought it?) would submit themself to the braying ordeal of Prime Minister’s Questions, before asking:

Is it worth all the effort? And are ministers truly powerful?

An interesting pair of questions – but does Mr Letts take them any further or even begin to hint at why Ministers in Britain have indeed lost many of their powers? Of course not. The EU elephant in the room goes unmentioned once again, and the Mail’s Parliamentary Sketchwriter blabs on undeterred.

Furthermore, one suspects that Quentin Letts cannot even grasp the reasons why a new breed of men and women are attempting to enter high office. In short it probably has something to do with the fact that MPs are, for the most part, short of ideas and lazy. As such, Ministerial hopefuls yearn for the luxuries of the government gravy train – high salaries, big expenses and huge pensions, plus an almost total absence of responsibility.

That is why people such as Harriet Harman submit themselves to Prime Minister’s Questions; it is not for the power but for the perks and the privileges of office – real or perceived. And it is probably also why that with each passing day ‘normal’ citizens in this country become even more fed up with a political system that they can do very little about.

The Euromail Transition

The ever honest, truthful and impartial BBC tells us that our Government are backing a report by Richard Hooper which recommends the partial privatisation of Royal Mail and our postal service.

I suppose I could briefly highlight what may seem like an interesting contrast between the likely sale of a longstanding public service to a foreign postal company by our Government and the fact that Labour are still imagined by many to be against the privatisation of public industries – but then, what exactly would be the point?

We should know by now that Labour and the Left haven’t been interested in nationalisation and the ownership of industry for years. Labour’s supposed clause four moment in which Blair amended the Labour party’s constitution and its commitment to ‘secure … the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange’ was entirely irrelevant.

Decades before that moment there had been a radical revolution in thinking on the Left, since which Leftists have become steadily more interested in bringing about cultural rather than political revolution in order to successfully pursue their social and political agenda. As such the Left and the Labour party haven’t seriously been committed to nationalisation since the early sixties.

Click here to continue reading the article…