My Lords, I thank my noble friend very much for an extremely clear exposition. We started the group with an extremely clear and well expressed amendment from the noble Baroness, Lady Drake. I want to ask a question that perhaps cannot be answered this morning: namely, what information has been conveyed from Royal Mail either to Postcomm, as it is at present, or to the Government about the expected experience under the new pension scheme? Pension schemes are very difficult to keep in surplus or in balance if the number of employees is declining or their average age is rising. Royal Mail recently declared that it was going to reduce its staff and workforce and I think has further plans that might lead to that happening again in the future. In my submission it is likely that the new scheme, which is entirely properly set up under the arrangements as described, nevertheless could be threatened with going into deficit at an early date. In looking at that subject, I hope that the Government are also taking account of the comparative costs of pensions to Royal Mail and to other postal operators. As I say, I am not looking to receive a detailed assurance today as this is a new and rather complex point. Nevertheless, at a later stage I might consider it right to revert to this subject.
Postal Services Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Eccles
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 6 April 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Postal Services Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
726 c1741 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:32:53 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_734771
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_734771
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_734771