HC Deb 16 April 1896 vol 39 cc1069-70

But there is one aspect of one part of this question to which I should wish to devote a few minutes, and that is the question of the increased deposits in our Savings Banks. ["Hear, hear!"] The deposits in our Savings Banks—in which I include both the Trustee Savings Banks and the Post Office Savings Banks —amounted in 1875 to £68,000,000. In 1885 they hadincreasedto£94,500,000, and in 1895 they had nearly reached £144,000,000. ["Hear, hear!"] The deposits in the Post Office Savings Banks have more than doubled in the last 10 years. In so far as this is due to the increased thrift and prosperity of our working classes, it will be a source of hearty congratulation to all of us ["Hear, hear!"]—but I am afraid that, if we investigate the matter, we shall find another cause, not quite so satisfactory, to which part of this increase has greatly been due. ["Hear, hear!"] I find that the annual percentage of increase in the deposits in the Savings Banks between 1875 and 1893 was 3.4 per cent., but between 1893 and 1895 it had more than doubled. The increase was 7.9 per cent., and, of this increase, it is estimated that about half—or, in other words, more than £10,000,000—is due to the operation of the Savings Banks Act of 1893. That Act raised the maximum limit of annual deposit from £30 to £50, and made other changes in a similar direction. In 1894, 35,874 persons deposited in one single sum the maximum annual amount of £50 to a total amount of £1,793,000. In 1895, that number of persons so depositing increased by 35 per cent. to 48,500, and deposited in one single sum the maximum amount, to a total of £2,425,000. I cannot think that any large number of those persons belong to the wage-earning classes — ["hear, hear!"]—for whom, surely, the benefits of the Savings Banks were intended. ["Hear, hear!"] Now I do not see why the State should undertake, the business of banking for persons who are perfectly well able to take care of their own deposits and to invest them to the best possible advantage—["hear, hear!"]—-and particularly I do not see why that should be done when, as happens under the present law, the State is compelled to pay 2½ per cent. for deposits at short notice at the Savings Banks—a higher rate of interest than would be given by most ordinary banks—and thus, at the present price of those Government securities in which such deposits must by law be invested, actually to incur a loss by receiving them. I do not want now to argue whether we should lose a little in order to encourage thrift among the working classes, but I do not see why the Government should lose in order to enable depositors who belong to quite another class to obtain a larger interest for their money than they can obtain from the ordinary banks. ["Hear, hear!"] I do not desire to dwell on the point, but I have thought it right to call the attention of the Committee to the present situation, because I think that before long it may become necessary for me—if I have the honour to remain in this office—to propose some alterations in the existing law which may have the effect of preventing the abuse of the Savings Banks system without discouraging thrift, and among these alterations may probably be included a reduction of the present rate of interest on deposits above a certain amount in our banks. ["Hear, hear!"]