Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Postal Services Bill.


Postal Services Bill

My Lords, I listened carefully to what the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin, said. I remember that occasion well, given my interests at the time and the continuing interest which I declared on a previous occasion. As I said, we do not seek to oppose the injection of private capital. Interestingly, there was almost unanimous support for the 2009 Bill, which applied the same formula that I applied to the House today. I hear the points made by the Minister on private sector investment but it is not quite true that it said ““100 per cent privatisation”” in either the coalition agreement or Liberal Democrat manifesto; I noticed that those were not the words that she used. I stick by my original assertion that this is new territory. It is an important and fundamental decision and one on which we should test the opinion of the House. Division on Amendment 2 Contents 165; Not-Contents 218. Amendment 2 disagreed. Clause 2 : Report on decision to dispose of shares in a Royal Mail company etc Amendment 3 Moved by


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
727 c478 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Assets Costs Bank services Closures Capital investment Archives Pensioners Northern Ireland Privatisation Pensions Museums and galleries Public consultation Post offices Pension funds Profit sharing Postal services Postal Services Commission Post Office Scotland Small businesses Shares Reform Wales Valuation Trusts Rural areas Royal Mail Universal service obligation
Legislation
Postal Services Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk