UK Parliament / Open data

Postal Services Bill

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Drake (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bills on Postal Services Bill.
I thank the Minister for that detailed response. I am conscious of the lateness of the hour and that the detail of pension valuations is not everyone’s cup of tea. I took from what the Minister said that the Government’s actuaries will be involved in making a full assessment of the value and type of assets in relation to liabilities before any transfers are made under Clauses 17 and 21. It would be very helpful for the record to show that. That is exactly what I sought to achieve. I noted the assurance that the Government would not seek to deploy Clause 18 in a way that weakened the employer covenant. Wholly hypothetically, if Post Office Counters did not retain the Crown offices on its balance sheets and did not get a good settlement on the transfer of assets and liabilities, my concern is that the combined effect would not be very helpful to the members in that section of the Royal Mail scheme. However, the Minister has given assurances that that is not the Government’s intention, and that they will actively seek to ensure that the application of Clause 18 does not weaken the employer covenant behind any of the sections. Those assurances are very helpful and, if the record shows them, I can withdraw my amendment. Amendment 56 withdrawn. Clause 21 : Restriction on power to transfer assets Clause 21 : Restriction on power to transfer assets Amendment 57 not moved.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

727 c563-4 

Session

2010-12

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top