Cable faces new mail sale grilling

Burnley and Pendle Citizen: Business Secretary Vince Cable who is being recalled to the business select committee on April 29 to give further evidence over the privatisation of the Royal Mail Business Secretary Vince Cable who is being recalled to the business select committee on April 29 to give further evidence over the privatisation of the Royal Mail

The Business Secretary is being recalled by a select committee of MPs to give further evidence over the Government's controversial privatisation of Royal Mail.

Vince Cable will be questioned on April 29 by the Business Select Committee, which is drawing up a report on the sell-off.

He will be accompanied by Michael Fallon, a minister in Mr Cable's Business Department.

The committee made the announcement following last week's publication of a report by spending watchdog the National Audit Office, which found that the Government could have achieved better value for money for taxpayers.

The NAO said the Business Department took a "cautious" approach, which led to shares being priced at a level "substantially below" the initial trading price, after City banks advised that investors would not pay above 330p.

Labour has asked Mr Cable to clarify a number of "unanswered" questions over last year's sell-off.

Shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna said 16 priority investors selected by the Government to buy shares should be named, as well as details given of any arrangements to make sure they would not sell their allocation, as many of them did.

Mr Umunna has also asked for correspondence between the Government and banks advising on the sale to be published.

The move followed furious exchanges in the House of Commons last week, when Labour leader Ed Miliband branded Prime Minister David Cameron "the dunce of Downing Street" for selling a majority of the company for £1.4 billion less than its current valuation.

Mr Cable said: "More than 500 would-be investors in Royal Mail were approached in the lead-up to the sale. A number of long-term institutional investors who knew the company gave us the confidence to press ahead at £3.30 but no more and were some of the larger investors on day one.

"This is standard practice for any flotation. We did not seek to lock them in as they would have paid less for a stock they could not trade. And there were no meetings between myself or officials and these priority investors."

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:22pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Mickgill says...

And all he will say is that is what they were worth when we sold them, who in their right mind would accept a gentlemen's agreement with the Bankers of all people not to sell the shares on ? Vince Cable that's who a man who jumps from party to party to further his career a man who is in a party that got just 7% of the vote at the last election yet now sits in high office and sells one of our treasures off on the cheap and cost the tax payer £2 billion in the process , the committee as others committee's have done will do nothing at all, the tax payers has been mugged .
And all he will say is that is what they were worth when we sold them, who in their right mind would accept a gentlemen's agreement with the Bankers of all people not to sell the shares on ? Vince Cable that's who a man who jumps from party to party to further his career a man who is in a party that got just 7% of the vote at the last election yet now sits in high office and sells one of our treasures off on the cheap and cost the tax payer £2 billion in the process , the committee as others committee's have done will do nothing at all, the tax payers has been mugged . Mickgill
  • Score: 9

12:50pm Mon 7 Apr 14

welshmen says...

Him and his mates are not FIT for purpose, sack the lot, get UKIP in....
Him and his mates are not FIT for purpose, sack the lot, get UKIP in.... welshmen
  • Score: 5

10:34pm Mon 7 Apr 14

ConcernedOssy says...

Yet again wrong person doing a job where he is well out his depth really needs retiring or whatever
Yet again wrong person doing a job where he is well out his depth really needs retiring or whatever ConcernedOssy
  • Score: 8

10:30am Tue 8 Apr 14

mollyyoung says...

I agree mickgill. The LibDems the party who support what they think is right for that time then when it comes to the crunch go the other way. No backbone if you ask me, just ask the thousands of students that voted for them on the back of the pledge not to raise tuition fees. As for UKIP, no thanks mate, proposing tax cuts for the richest and tax hikes for the rest of us, paid holidays and sick pay scrapped as well as maternity pay. If you think UKIP are for the working man, think again!
I agree mickgill. The LibDems the party who support what they think is right for that time then when it comes to the crunch go the other way. No backbone if you ask me, just ask the thousands of students that voted for them on the back of the pledge not to raise tuition fees. As for UKIP, no thanks mate, proposing tax cuts for the richest and tax hikes for the rest of us, paid holidays and sick pay scrapped as well as maternity pay. If you think UKIP are for the working man, think again! mollyyoung
  • Score: 4

10:46am Tue 8 Apr 14

ConcernedOssy says...

mollyyoung wrote:
I agree mickgill. The LibDems the party who support what they think is right for that time then when it comes to the crunch go the other way. No backbone if you ask me, just ask the thousands of students that voted for them on the back of the pledge not to raise tuition fees. As for UKIP, no thanks mate, proposing tax cuts for the richest and tax hikes for the rest of us, paid holidays and sick pay scrapped as well as maternity pay. If you think UKIP are for the working man, think again!
They are ALL for the working man !!! UNTIL THEY GET IN !!! But in reality they are ONLY IN IT FOR THEMSELVES !!!!
[quote][p][bold]mollyyoung[/bold] wrote: I agree mickgill. The LibDems the party who support what they think is right for that time then when it comes to the crunch go the other way. No backbone if you ask me, just ask the thousands of students that voted for them on the back of the pledge not to raise tuition fees. As for UKIP, no thanks mate, proposing tax cuts for the richest and tax hikes for the rest of us, paid holidays and sick pay scrapped as well as maternity pay. If you think UKIP are for the working man, think again![/p][/quote]They are ALL for the working man !!! UNTIL THEY GET IN !!! But in reality they are ONLY IN IT FOR THEMSELVES !!!! ConcernedOssy
  • Score: 2

10:52am Tue 8 Apr 14

ConcernedOssy says...

ConcernedOssy wrote:
mollyyoung wrote:
I agree mickgill. The LibDems the party who support what they think is right for that time then when it comes to the crunch go the other way. No backbone if you ask me, just ask the thousands of students that voted for them on the back of the pledge not to raise tuition fees. As for UKIP, no thanks mate, proposing tax cuts for the richest and tax hikes for the rest of us, paid holidays and sick pay scrapped as well as maternity pay. If you think UKIP are for the working man, think again!
They are ALL for the working man !!! UNTIL THEY GET IN !!! But in reality they are ONLY IN IT FOR THEMSELVES !!!!
They don't know or care what a working man looks like
[quote][p][bold]ConcernedOssy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mollyyoung[/bold] wrote: I agree mickgill. The LibDems the party who support what they think is right for that time then when it comes to the crunch go the other way. No backbone if you ask me, just ask the thousands of students that voted for them on the back of the pledge not to raise tuition fees. As for UKIP, no thanks mate, proposing tax cuts for the richest and tax hikes for the rest of us, paid holidays and sick pay scrapped as well as maternity pay. If you think UKIP are for the working man, think again![/p][/quote]They are ALL for the working man !!! UNTIL THEY GET IN !!! But in reality they are ONLY IN IT FOR THEMSELVES !!!![/p][/quote]They don't know or care what a working man looks like ConcernedOssy
  • Score: 3

3:07pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Mickgill says...

welshmen wrote:
Him and his mates are not FIT for purpose, sack the lot, get UKIP in....
Are you kidding me? all UKip are is far right Tory's who left because they could not get their own way over Europe , and all they talk about is Europe they have removed their 2010 manifesto because it revealed what they really are all about , that is removing women's rights, tax breaks for the rich, they would make sick and displayed do community work so they could cost funding to councils, remind you of anyone ? , leave Europe and 4 million jobs are at risk the first 700 thousand would be in the car industry and would vanish overnight, vote UKip not a chance .
[quote][p][bold]welshmen[/bold] wrote: Him and his mates are not FIT for purpose, sack the lot, get UKIP in....[/p][/quote]Are you kidding me? all UKip are is far right Tory's who left because they could not get their own way over Europe , and all they talk about is Europe they have removed their 2010 manifesto because it revealed what they really are all about , that is removing women's rights, tax breaks for the rich, they would make sick and displayed do community work so they could cost funding to councils, remind you of anyone ? , leave Europe and 4 million jobs are at risk the first 700 thousand would be in the car industry and would vanish overnight, vote UKip not a chance . Mickgill
  • Score: 1
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree