Forum menu
Wasn't the deal agreed during the previous Govt?
Democracy - the least worst system weve tried.
Labour, the least worst government we can vote for?
might turn it around.
they should sell the whole shytehole of a country while their at it.
Well it was actually privatised in 2013 during the Cameron gov't, but that's probably Labours fault as well. Somehow.
I thought it’d been sold in the 1980s
On the contrary, Margaret Thatcher was famously very opposed to the privatisation of Royal Mail.
And ironically the Tories needed the Liberal Democrats to help them privatised it.
The government are selling Royal Mail to a Czech billionaire
Well I hope they put a silhouette of his portrait on their stamps, otherwise I feel that they might be falling foul of the trade description act.
So you could say that the Czech is in The Mail.
The race to the bottom has well and truly accelerated now then.
Previous government, but could be stopped. Not really been the Royal Mail for a long time.
I've not really been paying attention to any of this, so this is a question.
How easy would it have been to stop something signed off by the previous Government? If they could stop it, what are the consequences? Is it even worth saving?
I spent 9 months working as a postie, I can’t imagine a worst employer no regard for worker safety or the law, knowingly send people out to work with vehicles with bald tyres and dangerous faults. Absolute them and us attitude between workers and managers and will run away and claim victimisation when you try and bring up a legitimate issue. Most people like their posties but loathe them as an organisation. Expect further price increases and more deterioration of service.
Interesting that press reports (presumably) are making people think it's a Labour government action.
@dovebiker I was a postie for nearly 26 years took the money and ran in 2009 best decision ever !
Interesting that press reports (presumably) are making people think it’s a Labour government action.
See also, the Chagos Islands deal and early prisoner release. The dishonesty of the mainstream media shouldn't be underestimated.
I was a postie for nearly 26 years took the money and ran in 2009 best decision ever !
I wondered why I never got that 20 quid my aunt sent me back then.
This whole thing barely registers on my giveashitometer. Most of my deliveries to my house are via a courier, I would say I get one Royal Mail letter every 2 weeks, other than junk mail that I have not asked for. The only useful thing Royal Mail do for me is collecting small parcels from the house, but I guess another courier would manage that just as well.
I do understand that the universal price is really important for rural communities and Royal Mail are better placed to preserve that, but I do not feel like it is some sort of cherished service that must be preserved at all costs.
Just read this on the BBC website, and the first half of the story does indeed read as if the government are selling it, rather than IDS. Weird reporting. Carry on reading to the end and you get the actual story.
@failedengineer. I'm genuinely curious that you are so animated about this. Makes me wonder what I am missing. How does it impact you and why do it make you want to change voting intention?
Interesting that press reports (presumably) are making people think it’s a Labour government action.
That does seem to be the populist opinion if Twitter is anything to go by. Which it probably isn't.
I’m genuinely curious that you are so animated about this. Makes me wonder what I am missing. How does it impact you and why do it make you want to change voting intention?
For all the crimes against the population that have been inflicted upon us by various governments both red and blue in my lifetime alone, this does seem to be a deeply odd hill to choose to die on. Like, the Iraq War under Blair was perfectly acceptable, but selling the Royal Mail (which they aren't, AIUI it was already sold by our favourite renowned pig-botherer) is a step too far?
ElShalimoFull Member
Wasn’t the deal agreed during the previous Govt?
Yeah, but we all know that Labour's *really* behind it all, somehow.
@failedengineer - I want to know why you've failed as an engineer? I've been winging and getting away with it for 36years now.
I'm sure all necessary Czechs and balances are in place
TBH what difference does it make to you (unless you work for them),everything else has literally been sold off
And anyway I am sure that Daniel Kretinsky wants to own Royal Mail because he was concerned that people in the UK weren't receiving the best postal delivery service possible. So a cheaper more efficient service I am positive is just around the corner.
How easy would it have been to stop something signed off by the previous Government? If they could stop it, what are the consequences?
Well when Keir Starmer was desperate to become Leader of the Labour Party he included the renationalisation of the Royal Mail in one of his 10 socialist pledges, so the former DDP obviously thought that it was doable:
5. Common ownership
Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.
Opinion polls have consistently shown overwhelming public opposition to firstly the privatisation of Royal Mail and then overwhelming support for renationalisation.
But presumably the wishes of a Czech billionaire are now more important to Keir Starmer than the wishes of British people, as is profits for shareholders......tough decisions and all that.
The government are selling Royal Mail to a Czech billionaire, according to the news.
The news (including BBC) seem to be, for whatever reason, strongly implying that this is the (Labour) government's doing, by saying the takeover has been "approved"
but could be stopped
I don't think it could though? AIUI, the "approval" means that it passes whatever checks it needs to in terms of national security, etc, and that being the case there simply isn't the mechanism to deny what is essentially otherwise a fairly ordinary takeover bid. It's already been sold off from public ownership, years ago, it's simply being sold on now.
don’t think it could though? AIUI, the “approval” means that it passes whatever checks it needs to in terms of national security, etc, and that being the case there simply isn’t the mechanism to deny what is essentially otherwise a fairly ordinary takeover bid. It’s already been
There was no need to stop it. If Starmer had stuck to the “pledge” he made when he claimed that public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders, and the government had a policy of renationalising Royal Mail, then I very much doubt that Daniel Kretinsky would have been interested in it and there would be no takeover happening now.
With the correct legislation nationalisation is perfectly legal. If Charles the First managed to do it I am sure that it is not beyond Keir Starmer's capabilities. He certainly previously thought that he could do it.
I'm similarly outraged that a company that for too long was a monopoly and has continued to give crap service for expensive prices has been sold to someone else. You'd kind of hope this billionaire businessman has some kind of idea of how to run a successful business and as a result we may actually see something resembling a decent vfm postal service...
It doesn't affect me personally. It's the principle. A Labour government should be re-nationalising the sold off assets, not carrying on with the sale. By trying to appeal to people who would probably never vote Labour, they are alienating old lefties like me. I'm sure that they (or certainly Starmer) don't care in the slightest because I'm part of a dying (literally) breed.
@rustynissanprairie - I never actually failed as an engineer (I was a design draughtsman/Project Engineer back in the pencil days), I moved into sales and marketing. I just wish that I'd stuck it out, it was the only thing I've ever been good at!
With the correct legislation nationalisation is perfectly legal.
I'd have preferred it not to have been sold off in the first place but, as above, where would the money come from to buy it back? is it even worth spending that kind of public money on a declining industry?
By trying to appeal to people who would probably never vote Labour
I don't think this particular issue has anything at all to do with Labour trying to appeal to Tory voters.
Don't be mistaken into thinking that STW reflects public opinion, according to a recent yougov poll 75% of voters support renationalising Royal Mail and only 15% oppose it.
Even if every single one of the 15% was a Tory voter that is still a lot of Tory voters who don't oppose the renationalisation of Royal Mail.
Renationalisation of the nation's assets is massively popular with voters, including Tory voters, if Starmer's government makes the "difficult decision" not to renationalise Royal Mail it has to be for ideological reasons, certainly not because it lacks voter appeal.
have the government got 3.6bn to buy royal mail
So it is debatable whether the UK government can afford to buy something which it turns out that a Czech billionaire can afford?
Where would the money come from to buy it back?
Taking Northern Rail back into public ownership has certainly worked out well.
if Starmer’s government makes the “difficult decision” not to renationalise Royal Mail it has to be for ideological reasons, certainly not because it lacks voter appeal.
Considering the ferocious resistance they're encountering on every front where they're trying to raise taxes or cut spending I suspect they're looking at the 3.6 Billion it would cost them and have decided that the plaudits they'll get for re-nationalising the RM will be more than outweighed by the pain of raising the money.
Oh, and if the sale had already been agreed under the previously government they'd probably end up in court and on the hook for a very hefty legal bill if they quashed it now. Which I'm sure the press would have a field day about as well.
I'm not a Labour supporter but.. government is tough.
@johnnystorm the Royal Mail isn't anywhere near profitable enough to cover the interest payments on £3.6B of government bonds
Oh, and if the sale had already been agreed under the previously government they’d probably end up in court and on the hook for a very hefty legal bill if they quashed it now.
As I said previously no need to quash the takeover bid, just nationalise Royal Mail. The courts could do about as much about that as they could about privatisation.
Which I’m sure the press would have a field day about as well.
So "the press" sets the agenda, not voters and the government which they elected?
Excuses, excuses, excuses, always an excuse for not doing the right thing.
Where would the money come from to buy it back?
Same place it always comes from.
And the government gains an asset.
Look Labour or the Tories - both are signed up to private-is-best.
And as terrible as the Tories are we have a Labour government that is working in the interests of capital - why on earth is anyone shocked these days?
The ship has sailed
Until we change the whole damn outlook on the way markets don't actually work then we will keep getting these shitty governments not operating in the interest of the majority.
No real point in keeping going on about the Tories now - it's up to Labour to fix things.