Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Turner of Camden (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 31 March 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Postal Services Bill [HL].


Postal Services Bill [HL]

I support my noble friend Lord Clarke of Hampstead’s amendment. He is attempting to deal with the problem also raised by the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, in his amendment, but I find this rather more acceptable. It accepts that this section of the Bill allows for the RMPP to be divided into different sections. It then ensures that if a pension scheme is carved into sections, the scheme is segregated. The segregation, as I understand it, means that the assets and liabilities of each section are ring-fenced, and that is important. The amendment requires a sectionalised scheme to be segregated, which means that if there is a section for qualifying accrued liabilities sponsored by the Secretary of State, it cannot be cross-subsidised by the Royal Mail or post office companies. My noble friend Lord Clarke of Hampstead has found quite an ingenious way of dealing with the issues he raised when speaking to his amendment. I commend it to Members of the Committee.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c1044 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Conditions of employment Contracts Industrial relations Finance Liability EU law Insolvency Government assistance Government shareholding Private sector Pensions Partnerships Post offices Pension funds Pension Protection Fund Postal services Ofcom Postal Services Commission Post Office Modernisation Regulation Voting rights Technology Royal Mail TNT
Legislation
Postal Services Bill (HL) 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk