Superannuation Bill

My Lords, I recognise the concerns which lie behind the amendment. Again, we have inherited from the previous Government the published protocol, to which reference has already been made, and the determination, where possible, to build a leaner and more efficient Civil Service. In the nature of the case, many of the civil servants about whom we are talking are outside London, so there will have to be a variety of different schemes aimed at local circumstances. There will have to be a certain amount of outsourcing. The Cabinet Office is responsible for the protocols and the staff working on the protocols remain hard at work late in the evening. I am assured by those behind me that the director in question is responsible for pay and pension policy, employment policy, trades union issues at a national level and, until last month, diversity and well-being issues. Discussions are actively under way. It is certainly intended that there will be additional outsourcing to assist in relocation and retraining. Noble Lords will be aware that, as under the previous Government, wherever possible we avoid compulsory redundancies by providing, where we can, relocation and retraining. I am able to reassure the Committee that the revised protocol allows for more than three months to find new roles. I hope the noble Lord will understand if, on some of the many very detailed questions which he has asked me, I write to him with the answers. I remind him that the recently published Cabinet Office Business Plan states that the Cabinet Office is committed to publishing a plan to help former civil servants find work with proposals to support them to move into the private sector and into self-employment, including options on franchises. We have already discussed the published protocol which was agreed with the Council of Civil Service Unions to deal with surplus staff, with which, no doubt, the noble Lord is very familiar. Secondment to the private sector has been discussed and may take place were possible. Again, we shall have to take into account the differences in people in Newcastle compared with people in Bradford and people in Cardiff. I stress that this is not simply a London issue. Many of the people who are likely to be affected by these measures are scattered around the country. I reiterate that we are committed to publishing plans to help former civil servants to find work with proposals to support them either to transfer to other posts within the Civil Service or to move into the private sector or into self-employment. We are conscious that there is a myriad different individual circumstances. The provision of new skills and opportunities is a very important part of this process. Having made that commitment, and a further commitment to write to the noble Lord with answers to his many specific questions, I hope noble Lords will feel reassured that we are very committed to finding alternatives wherever we can. On that basis, I call on the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.