Proceeding contribution from Lord Razzall (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 16 March 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Postal Services Bill.
Postal Services Bill
My Lords, the amendment is extremely constructive. However, I have a concern, which is the one echoed by my noble friend Lady Kramer. For those of us who argued long and hard during the last Bill for an employee share structure—which was resisted by the then Government—I am worried that we should be too prescriptive at present as to the form that the employee share scheme should take. Those of us who have had experience in the private sector in employee share schemes know that there are a lot of ways to skin that particular cat—this may well be one of them, but, having fought and won the battle to get at least 10 per cent held by an employee share scheme, I am worried that we will overcomplicate the Bill.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 726 c260-1
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Access Disadvantaged Assets Bank services Closures Banks Credit unions Cooperatives Industrial democracy Privatisation Opening hours Post offices Profit sharing Postal services Post Office Small businesses Rural areas Royal Mail Universal service obligation
- Legislation
- Postal Services Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:02:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726555
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726555
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_726555