The SNP is playing cynical politics with the Royal Mail

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.leftfootforward.org/2013/10/ ... oyal-mail/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This week the dreadful privatisation of the Royal Mail was signed, sealed and delivered against a backdrop of widespread opposition from those who fear for the future of our postal service.

And whilst the SNP at their conference in Perth this weekend will be, rightly, quick to defend the Royal Mail and the universal postal service, they have failed to answer critical questions on stamp prices, how the postal network will be maintained, as well as how many staff will be employed and how their pensions will be paid in their desired separate Scotland.

Labour has opposed the sell-off outright and campaigned side-by-side with staff to try to stop it. From our vigorous opposition during the passage of the Postal Services Bill in 2011 which enabled privatisation I, along with Labour colleagues, have collected signatures for petitions, asked questions in Parliament, and have used every opportunity to highlight why this ideologically driven fire-sale should not have gone ahead.

Meanwhile, the first minister and his colleagues stayed silent. That was until last month when he called for a ‘moratorium’ on the privatisation, until after the referendum. Why did the first minister not oppose the sell-off outright? Why wait until the referendum? Why must he insist on playing politics with one of Scotland’s most important services? Why must it always be about putting Scotland on pause?

A few days later he moved from calling for a moratorium opposing the privatisation to saying the SNP would renationalise the service if people voted yes. This was an ill-thought through off-the -cuff statement that actually made the privatisation more attractive. Investors would see a possible yes vote as an opportunity not only to sell the most expensive part of the Universal Service Obligation (USO), but getting a ransom payment for the Scottish parts of the Royal Mail.

Alex Salmond’s promise of renationalisation at his weekly question time came just sixteen hours after his finance secretary said he could not commit to such a policy as he would not know the shape or format of the Royal Mail post-privatisation and how much it would cost.

And now the share price of the company has rocketed, increasing the value of Royal Mail by over 40 per cent, further pressure has been heaped on the SNP’s promise. You would have thought that they may have even contacted the Royal Mail or the Business Department to seek information? Well, no. Their officials do not even know how much it will cost.

Let me help them out. It is estimated it will cost Scottish tax payers in excess of £1.25bn. This is not including the significant subsidy or considerable price rises to deal with maintaining the six day a week, one price goes anywhere service within Scotland’s rural geography.

So, exactly how would they fund the purchase? How will they deal with the billions of historic and current pension fund deficits? Yet again, the SNP has cynically used an important issue to make their false case for separation, their argument that the grass is always greener on the other side.

Ultimately, the people of Scotland have the right to know what sort of postal service they will have should they chose to separate from the rest of the UK. From the small businessman in Inverness who posts his products across the UK, to the pensioner in Stirling who’s reliant on a timely service for her hospital appointment letters – they need certainty.

It is clear that Alex Salmond and the SNP will say and do anything to get people to put a cross in the ‘Yes’ box next September, even when they know in private that what the promise on Royal Mail renationalisation is neither true or workable.

The UK postal service is the epitome of how the UK is stronger together as it does not matter if you live in Shetland or Southampton, Edinburgh or Eastbourne, you get the same service at the same price.

[Danelectro]

http://www.leftfootforward.org/2013/10/ ... oyal-mail/

This week the dreadful privatisation of the Royal Mail was signed, sealed and delivered against a backdrop of widespread opposition from those who fear for the future of our postal service.

And whilst the SNP at their conference in Perth this weekend will be, rightly, quick to defend the Royal Mail and the universal postal service, they have failed to answer critical questions on stamp prices, how the postal network will be maintained, as well as how many staff will be employed and how their pensions will be paid in their desired separate Scotland.

Labour has opposed the sell-off outright and campaigned side-by-side with staff to try to stop it. From our vigorous opposition during the passage of the Postal Services Bill in 2011 which enabled privatisation I, along with Labour colleagues, have collected signatures for petitions, asked questions in Parliament, and have used every opportunity to highlight why this ideologically driven fire-sale should not have gone ahead.

Meanwhile, the first minister and his colleagues stayed silent. That was until last month when he called for a ‘moratorium’ on the privatisation, until after the referendum. Why did the first minister not oppose the sell-off outright? Why wait until the referendum? Why must he insist on playing politics with one of Scotland’s most important services? Why must it always be about putting Scotland on pause?

A few days later he moved from calling for a moratorium opposing the privatisation to saying the SNP would renationalise the service if people voted yes. This was an ill-thought through off-the -cuff statement that actually made the privatisation more attractive. Investors would see a possible yes vote as an opportunity not only to sell the most expensive part of the Universal Service Obligation (USO), but getting a ransom payment for the Scottish parts of the Royal Mail.

Alex Salmond’s promise of renationalisation at his weekly question time came just sixteen hours after his finance secretary said he could not commit to such a policy as he would not know the shape or format of the Royal Mail post-privatisation and how much it would cost.

And now the share price of the company has rocketed, increasing the value of Royal Mail by over 40 per cent, further pressure has been heaped on the SNP’s promise. You would have thought that they may have even contacted the Royal Mail or the Business Department to seek information? Well, no. Their officials do not even know how much it will cost.

Let me help them out. It is estimated it will cost Scottish tax payers in excess of £1.25bn. This is not including the significant subsidy or considerable price rises to deal with maintaining the six day a week, one price goes anywhere service within Scotland’s rural geography.

So, exactly how would they fund the purchase? How will they deal with the billions of historic and current pension fund deficits? Yet again, the SNP has cynically used an important issue to make their false case for separation, their argument that the grass is always greener on the other side.

Ultimately, the people of Scotland have the right to know what sort of postal service they will have should they chose to separate from the rest of the UK. From the small businessman in Inverness who posts his products across the UK, to the pensioner in Stirling who’s reliant on a timely service for her hospital appointment letters – they need certainty.

It is clear that Alex Salmond and the SNP will say and do anything to get people to put a cross in the ‘Yes’ box next September, even when they know in private that what the promise on Royal Mail renationalisation is neither true or workable.

The UK postal service is the epitome of how the UK is stronger together as it does not matter if you live in Shetland or Southampton, Edinburgh or Eastbourne, you get the same service at the same price.

[Godric]

Let me help them out. It is estimated it will cost Scottish tax payers in excess of £1.25bn

for at start that is a made up figure ... are this lot now saying Royal Mail is worth over £11 billion ?? try around £5 billion in current share price .... 2 years down the line when Tnt is delivering mail to every city UK wide that valuation figure and the share price will plummet severely .... nothing quite like a scare story ..... if Scotland remains in the UK rural areas face higher charges than cities and towns and fewer deliveries .... that is what market forces do

[Tman]

And those same market forces will also ensure the SNP would/will have far more pressing ways to spend their limited finances (in government) than worrying about how much a letter costs to send from Auchtermuchty, and so as the Labour Party has recognised, promising renationalisation is yet more of Salmond's opportunist but unrealistic "promises".
Does anyone really take that fat smug fool seriously in Scotland?

[taxi4leighton]

im not a SNP voter.i dont believe in independance.but do any of the other parties have any plans to safeguard our standards?.if you compare our conditions and the service we provide with TNT.Their is no comparision.but the quest for profits will see our wages,holiday entitlements,etc etc eroded.will any political party stand up for us?.Salmond is a chamelone but he at least has spoken out against this shameless fire-sale.i fear for the future.
p.s.
regarding value of RM.2 points. we have estate worth billions,e.g.Mount Pleasant in London.and the RM have secured tax credits of £2.8 billion over the next ten years.which means they can offset profits to that limit.thats what makes us so attractive

[Godric]

And those same market forces will also ensure the SNP would/will have far more pressing ways to spend their limited finances (in government) than worrying about how much a letter costs to send from Auchtermuchty, and so as the Labour Party has recognised, promising renationalisation is yet more of Salmond's opportunist but unrealistic "promises".
Does anyone really take that fat smug fool seriously in Scotland?

limited finances yer having a laugh son ... only 2 regions in the UK has a trading SURPLUS south east England and Scotland and not included in Scottish finances is Oil, Gas and Whisky so I think you will find we will just be fine and dandy up here

and unlike Royal Mail the Scottish Postal Service will not be under the constraints of the watch dog or cherry picking by rivals because it will no longer stand as the unfair competition was brought in by Westminster and not a independent Scotland

[mailman71]

And those same market forces will also ensure the SNP would/will have far more pressing ways to spend their limited finances (in government) than worrying about how much a letter costs to send from Auchtermuchty, and so as the Labour Party has recognised, promising renationalisation is yet more of Salmond's opportunist but unrealistic "promises".
Does anyone really take that fat smug fool seriously in Scotland?

The answer is no,up here we think he is a chancer.

[Danelectro]

And those same market forces will also ensure the SNP would/will have far more pressing ways to spend their limited finances (in government) than worrying about how much a letter costs to send from Auchtermuchty, and so as the Labour Party has recognised, promising renationalisation is yet more of Salmond's opportunist but unrealistic "promises".
Does anyone really take that fat smug fool seriously in Scotland?

The answer is no,up here we think he is a chancer.

so Salmond is a chancer and Cameron, Farage,Miliband and Clegg are beacons of truth honesty ?

Im no SNP supporter but they did win 2 elections in a row and they won them for a reason,if you cant work that out then maybe its you that's the chancer.

[Danelectro]

And those same market forces will also ensure the SNP would/will have far more pressing ways to spend their limited finances (in government) than worrying about how much a letter costs to send from Auchtermuchty, and so as the Labour Party has recognised, promising renationalisation is yet more of Salmond's opportunist but unrealistic "promises".
Does anyone really take that fat smug fool seriously in Scotland?

can you give a costed detailed answer to why it is unrealistic? You quote the Labour party as some experts on the economy and finance yet they were the ones who trousered billions on the Private Finance Initiative which was not only unrealistic but blatantly ripping off the tax payer.

[fishtank]

Labour has opposed the sell-off outright and campaigned side-by-side with staff to try to stop it.

No Labour didn't.
Some Labour MPs opposed the sell-off outright and campaigned side-by-side with staff to try to stop it.
Others didn't and when the leadership were asked to endorse a decision to renationalise made by delegates at conference they bottled it arguing over the cost.

A strange argument at the time given the fact that if a government receives £3.3 billion for selling it really that's £3.3 billion you have in the bank to buy it back...or did they also know that it had been massively undervalued and would be worth £5 billion after less than a week of trading?

[Tman]

You quote the Labour party as some experts on the economy and finance yet they were the ones who trousered billions on the Private Finance Initiative which was not only unrealistic but blatantly ripping off the tax payer.

I didn't quote them as experts on anything, only that they rightly recognised that Salmond was talking out of his backside when he promised to renationalise RM.
Those PFI schemes are seen as mostly poor value or unworkable now, but where do you get the idea that the the Labour Party "trousered billions" from them?
I don't know what the labour party is supposed to have done with those "trousered billions" because they're broke now, but if you know something re these misappropriated billions I'm sure Cameron would love to hear it?

That aside, pointing out faults with other UK politicians doesn't really improve the perception of Salmond's slim grip on financial reality. It should be a little more serious than the old "ahh yeah but what about....?" style of politics.
Pointing out that Cameron and Milliband are kn*b-ends really doesn't excuse Salmond from being one too.

[taxi4leighton]

salmond doesnt have slim grip of economics.what do you think he was before he became politician?

[Danelectro]

[
Those PFI schemes are seen as mostly poor value or unworkable now, but where do you get the idea that the the Labour Party "trousered billions" from them?
I don't know what the labour party is supposed to have done with those "trousered billions" because they're broke now, but if you know something re these misappropriated billions I'm sure Cameron would love to hear it?

.

We are still paying back the PFI its part of the deficit. .Cameron knows all about it but wont directly blame that sort policy as he didn't oppose it when Labour introduced it,just like he didn't oppose the deregulations of the banks etc etc

[Danelectro]

[
Those PFI schemes are seen as mostly poor value or unworkable now, but where do you get the idea that the the Labour Party "trousered billions" from them?
I don't know what the labour party is supposed to have done with those "trousered billions" because they're broke now, but if you know something re these misappropriated billions I'm sure Cameron would love to hear it?

.

We are still paying back the PFI its part of the deficit. .Cameron knows all about it but wont directly blame that sort policy as he didn't oppose it when Labour introduced it,just like he didn't oppose the deregulations of the banks etc etc

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... -debt.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tman]

Ah, must be true, it's in the Torygraph.
But you said the Labour Party "trousered billions", didn't you?
Any proof of that allegation? Does it improve Salmond's standing even if it were true?