---

Postal Services Bill [HL]

I thank noble Lords for tabling this amendment. Like the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, who voiced his support, I agree with the principles behind it. We on these Benches have repeatedly raised our concerns during these debates that the Government’s chosen method of proceeding with their policy seems almost designed to cause as much confusion and uncertainty as possible. It is no wonder that Royal Mail pension plan pensioners, deferred or otherwise, are concerned about what the Bill means to their pension entitlements. The Government have attempted to tread the impossible line between trying on the one hand to reassure their Back-Benchers that part-privatisation is not, in fact, part-privatisation, while trying to reassure taxpayers on the other that there will be no guarantee of Royal Mail pension plan liabilities without part-privatisation. The whole matter is made worse by the fact that the Bill does not provide much reassurance either. As a later group of our amendments highlights, the safeguard that pensioners will not suffer material adverse effect is buried deep in technical jargon and surrounded by exceptions and omissions. The Government are given enormous powers to do almost anything with remarkably little scrutiny or transparency. We therefore support the amendment as far as it goes. In fact, I would prefer that it went considerably further to cover the necessary transparency and scrutiny that this part of the Bill requires, but this would go some way to ensuring that those most affected are at least kept informed. We will save our encouragement for more stringent safeguards until we come to later amendments.