Reply from Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax MP

[Budfrog]

Dear Mr xxxxx,

Thank you for contacting me about Royal Mail privatisation. I hope that my reply will help reassure you of the Governments intent.

It has been announced that the privatisation of Royal Mail will begin in the coming weeks. As one of Britain's biggest companies it is relied upon by businesses and communities throughout the UK. However, with the number of letters we send declining and online shopping increasing, Royal Mail needs to have the freedom to compete with the internet, smart phones and international postal operators.

It is important that people have the facts right about what privatisation means. By allowing Royal Mail access to private capital to invest, hard-pressed taxpayers will no longer have to provide the money for investment. Also, a change in Royal Mail ownership does not trigger any change in the provision of the universal postal service. Royal Mail will continue to be obliged to deliver six days a week to urban and rural areas alike at the same, affordable prices. Free services for the blind and the armed forces will also not be affected by a change in ownership. Any changes to the uniform nature of the service or its minimum requirements would require new primary legislation. The Government have no plans for such changes and any suggestions otherwise are completely unfounded

I am pleased the Government is giving people the opportunity to buy shares in Royal Mail and is providing free shares to 150,000 employees. I strongly believe it is right to enable the chance for those hard working employees to share in the success of their company.

I want to make it absolutely clear that the Post Office is not for sale. Unlike Labour, there will be no closure programme under this Government which is providing £1.34 billion in funding over four years to maintain a network of at least 11,500 branches across the UK. Royal Mail and the Post Office are natural partners and the post office network will continue to provide services to Royal Mail under a ten year agreement signed last year. Furthermore, the Chief Executive of Royal Mail has also said it would be "unthinkable" that there would not always be a strong commercial relationship between the two companies.

The Communication Workers Union has accepted that modernisation of Royal Mail, for example more automation, means the company needs fewer people. In the last ten years of public ownership, 50,000 jobs have been lost in the company. Of course, nobody wants to see job losses but, regardless of ownership Royal Mail must continue to modernise and become more efficient.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Warm regards,

Richard Drax


-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxxxx
Sent: 12 September 2013 16:28
To: DRAX, Richard
Subject: Letter from your constituent Simon Walshe

Thursday 12 September 2013

Dear Richard Drax,

I took Early Voluntary Retirement from Royal Mail last year after 24 years as a xxxxxxx.

I am totally opposed to the privatisation of the business as I do not believe it is best for Royal Mail, the majority of it's employees or the customer.

The so called turnaround in RM's fortunes has been achieved on the back of massive hikes in postal prices, the offloading of the pension liability and the sale of RM real estate as a result of Mail Centre/Delivery Office closures. There have been savings from increased efficiency which have partly down to better planning, Mail Centre/Delivery Office rationalisation, utilisation of mechanised equipment and also down to the hard work and willingness of the Postmen themselves.

I believe that 'access' to external investment can be achieved, as it has in the past, with the company in state ownership and with continued profits it will be a public asset. I am unsure exactly what the motives of senior RM managers are and must question the decision that has been made by your party to forge ahead with a privatisation policy that both the public and the majority of employees do not want.

Yours sincerely,

(Signed with an electronic signature in accordance with subsection 7(3) of the Electronic Communications Act 2000.)

[ This message was sent by WriteToThem.com. If you have had any problems receiving this message, please email support@writetothem.com and we'll get back to you. See http://www.writetothem.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for more details about the service. We have sent this email to richard.drax.mp@parliament.uk; if this address is out of date please email us so that we can update our records. ]

________________________________


21:04 (2 minutes ago)

to Richard

Thanks for the 'Copy & Paste' reply ... still not convinced as are 70% of the public whom you are supposed to be representing.

[UnhappyGremlin]

Didn't really respond to the question(s) you asked.
Just trotted out the same old drivel and propaganda that RM/Cable/Fallon and Moya have been spewing.

Can't say I'd have expected anything else.

[RedlorryMan]

Same as the reply. I got from my MP Gavin Williamson Conservative MP for South Staffordshire. I think just a standard ConDem reply written by the same people as most of the PR from Royal Maiil.