Michael Burke writes:
There are now 403 million reasons why Royal Mail
should not be privatised. Financial results for Royal Mail just announced show
that operating profits in the latest 52 weeks jumped to £403m, from £105m in the previous year. The government has
signalled it intends to press ahead with a deeply unpopular privatisation even
though Royal Mail achieved this return to profitability while remaining in the
public sector.
All sides are agreed that the company will need
to invest. Royal Mail faces the threat of a declining market as various forms
of electronic messaging replace old-fashioned letters. But it also faces an
opportunity in the form of a fast-growing parcels business, driven by the rise
in internet retailing and home delivery. Investment is needed to manage the
efficient decline of the letters business while using its unrivalled network to
offer a market-leading parcels business.
Against all logic, the government insists that
the capital required for investment must come from the private sector, and that
this means Royal Mail must be sold off. But economists, from Adam Smith onwards, have
recognised that the government can borrow more cheaply than private companies.
The same is true today. Interest rates charged to government are about half of
those charged even on highly rated company debt. Of course, in the private
sector Royal Mail would also have to pay out dividends to shareholders. This
has the effect of both increasing the costs of funds for and reducing the
amount available for investment.
Royal Mail could also borrow on its own account
at very low interest rates because it is implicitly guaranteed by the state,
something which would not be available after privatisation. State sector
companies all across Europe are allowed to borrow very cheaply because of their
links to government, including banks, railways, health care providers and, yes,
postal services.
The government argument that privatisation is
necessary because its borrowing is needed to fund spending on services such as
the NHS is false. Royal Mail could borrow more cheaply, more efficiently, on
its own account if it remains in the public sector. Far from being a drain on
scarce resources, Royal Mail could make a contribution to boosting growth and
improving government finances.
Any company producing operating profits of over
£400m can easily generate its own funds for investment and borrow for
expansion. Not a penny of government borrowing would be required. It is the
fall in investment which accounts for the slump in the British economy and
Royal Mail could make its own contribution to rectifying that. In addition,
although the government tries very hard to disguise this fact, investment by
the public sector can also generate returns, just as it can in the private
sector.
Ministers talk about selling it off – for £2bn to
£3bn. In reality, a business generating profits on this scale is
worth vastly more to government than that. Taxpayers, who supported Royal Mail
through difficult times with subsidies, would be doubly ripped off.
Financial market operators can calculate the real
value of Royal Mail using net present
value. NPV is the current value of all future cashflows. For a publicly
owned body, the calculation is straightforward. At current long-term interest
rates, how much would the government have to borrow to yield £400m a year? With
interest rates at 2% to 2.5% the answer is between £16bn and £20bn.
The proposed sell-off of Royal Mail has nothing
to do with greater efficiency or boosting investment. Privatisation would crimp
investment and the higher costs of borrowing would be extremely inefficient.
Instead, it offers the opportunity to make a killing by the private sector that
motivates this government, along with George Osborne's fiddles and schemes to
pretend the deficit is falling.
Royal Mail is growing and investing while it
remains in the public sector. Let it stay that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment