The British
government is pressing ahead with its controversial plans to privatise Royal
Mail, a decision described by the Financial Times as
the “most ambitious privatisation since John Major sold the railways in the
1990’s.”
Royal Mail is an
iconic institution, dating back to 1512 under Henry VIII’s reign, and its
privatisation is being met with stiff resistance from labour unions.
Business Secretary
Vince Cable announced the plans to the Cabinet on Tuesday. It will entail a
stock market flotation of the company, a process which will take four to six
weeks that according to industry watchers could value the company at up to 3
billion GBP.
The announcement
comes at a time when the 125,000 postal workers are being balloted for a
strike, the results of which will be announced on October 3.
In a statement, the
Communications Workers Union said the plans to
sell are a “betrayal of the British public — 70 per cent of whom are against
privatisation according to a Sunday Times poll at the weekend.”
In a letter to a
postal employee on the government website, Michael Fallon, the Minister for
Business and Enterprise ,
had justified the sale on the grounds that it would give Royal Mail “future
access to private capital” to “modernise and take advantage of opportunities to
grow.” It should not have to compete with hospitals and schools for “scarce
public resources,” he said.
Mr. Fallon has
promised the continuation of existing delivery patterns, and 10 per cent shares
of the company for postal employees, though he made no commitment on whether
these shares would be discounted or given free.
Bill Hayes, the CWU
General Secretary, calls the government argument “dogma from old-fashioned
Tories wedded to privatization.”
In a statement on
CWU’s website, he argues that privatization is the “worst way to access capital
as it’s more expensive than borrowing under public ownership” pointing to
Network Rail, the public utility that owns and operates Britain’s network
infrastructure, which “borrowed billions on private markets at cheaper rates
under an arrangement which doesn't affect public debt.”
No comments:
Post a Comment