---

Postal Services Bill [HL]

My reaction to the Minister’s speech is, phew—if I may be allowed in this Chamber to use a four-letter word. He, as he said, covered an enormous number of points. In retrospect, it was a mistake for the noble Lord, Lord Clarke, my noble friend Lord De Mauley and me to agree to such an enormous grouping. I do not know about the noble Lord, Lord Clarke, but, as a result, I certainly cannot make a point-by-point, justified response to the Minister. I should like to refer to just two points on this question of the deficit. The Government are working on a brought-forward deficit which I think was actually done in March 2006. That has been revalued as far as possible to March 2008. But the next—what was the word that the Secretary of State and I just used?—"definitive" uprating is to be the March 2009 revision. My question was about the basis on which that revision will be made. Will it be made on exactly the same criteria as the March 2006 calculation or will it use FRS 17, which I accept does not apply to public sector finances? I have yet to be told any good reason why it should not. I suspect that the deficits we are talking about are very much larger than we are led to believe at any particular moment. That is probably a subject for one of the noble Lord’s letters. Not being an accountant, I shall be totally incapable of understanding— on my feet, as it were—what the Minister is itching to say. However, since he is itching, I might as well give him the opportunity.