The main Conservative criticism of the Government's plans for the Royal Mail should be similar to their criticism of its education plans a few years ago. The Labour Party's back benches won't allow the full reform that is necessary and the watering down they are insisting on is limiting the gains for consumers and taxpayers.
As well as Jonathan Sheppard's excellent post on the Platform, I thought a post on the TaxPayers' Alliance blog by my colleague Ben Farrugia very effectively answers the criticism levelled by people like Daniel Kawczynski MP, that privatising the Royal Mail hurts the consumer interest.
Ben points out that, in countries with privatised postal services, even rural areas tend to enjoy far better standards of service than they do here:
"Nowhere has found a magic formula, but in both Germany and the Netherlands services improved following total privatisation and the end of direct Government involvement. In both countries a monopolistic provider remained (Deutsche Post in the former, TNT in the latter) following privatisation, just as it would here. But with a different set of incentives, efficiencies were found and innovation introduced. In Germany they have established a 'travelling post office' for the more quiet rural areas, travelling around a prescribed area and offering customers the services they enjoyed at their local branch, including some banking services right on their door step. 95 per cent of letters posted in Germany (to a German address) are delivered the next day. 99 per cent of all mail is delivered within two days. And that is all post, not just 'special delivery'. It is not cheaper, but considering the rises in UK stamps, it is not much more expensive either."
If reform could mean consumers can enjoy improved services and taxpayers can avoid having to write yet more subsidy cheques, it seems pretty clear that the Government's main failure is fudging the issue to sate the demands of their backbenchers.
