Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Lea of Crondall (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 March 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Postal Services Bill.


Postal Services Bill

My Lords, following on the same theme as my noble friend Lord Hoyle, it is pertinent to point out that the Minister did not accept the importance of the question posed by my noble friend Lord Christopher on the previous amendment. We have had a broad sweep of what a marvellous idea private capital is. However, we have no idea about guarantees relating to asset-stripping or about country of ownership, sovereign funds and all the other items on the long list. Does that not dent the picture that we are expected to believe in, given that the picture could be this one, that one or another? Would it not be more relevant to mention the interests of the British people, as we are here to represent the interests of society as a whole? They are interested in such things as the universal service, obviously, and in not selling off public assets. It is said that a big profit will not be made from selling the Royal Mail to private business. Is it not relevant to remind noble Lords that in the great wave of privatisations in the 1980s, the undervaluation of British Airways, British Gas and British Telecom alone on the first day of trading amounted to more than £2 billion? That will happen again prima facie unless the noble Baroness can say how the Bill will ensure that that will not occur.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
725 c1539-40 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Industrial relations Finance Investment Privatisation Workplace pensions Parliamentary scrutiny Staff Pension funds Profit sharing Postal services Post Office Modernisation Shares Reform Shareholders Royal Mail Sunset clauses
Legislation
Postal Services Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk