§ 52. Mr. GILLETTasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the estimated saving if the Overseas Trade Department, the Ministry of Transport, 183 and the Department of Mines were closed, allowance being made for the expense of such work as must be taken over by other departments?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe transfer of the work of these three departments to others would not, in itself, as I stated yesterday, effect any large saving. A substantial reduction in expenditure could only be effected by discontinuance of functions at present required of them, and its amount would necessarily depend on the extent to which such functions, which are in many cases statutory, were abandoned. These aspects will be examined in detail when the necessary legislation is presented to Parliament.
§ Colonel DAYCan the right hon. Gentleman say which Departments will take over the duties of the Ministries that are being abolished?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, Sir. It will undoubtedly be made known at a later stage; in any case it must be fully explained before the Bill is introduced.
§ Mr. R. MORRISONDoes the answer mean, in effect, that the abolition of these Departments is not essentially an economy proposal?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI referred yesterday to the abolition in terms which show that while it does not produce an immediate large and material saving, it indicates the spirit in which His Majesty's Government are addressing themselves to their duty in regard to the task of the curtailment of expenditure.
§ Mr. BATEYCan the right hon. Gentleman say what is the estimated saving by the abolition of the Mines Department?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI think that is covered by my answer which dealt with the three Departments.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI cannot give any exact figure that will be saved in regard to these Departments, either together or separately, but I am sure I am glad to receive from the hon. Member the tribute he has paid to the administration of the Mines Department by my right hon. Friend.
§ Mr. T. WILLIAMSAre we to assume that up to the moment no decision has been reached with regard to the redistribution of the functions of the three Departments referred to?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, Sir. I could not say that. The object and intention of the Government is to effect economy, not only by the absorption of Departments, but by reduction in expenditure, and the details of that will be laid before Parliament in due course before legislation is passed.
§ Mr. MARDY JONESIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as a result of his statement yesterday, as to the merging of the Mines Department in the Board of Trade, an impression is being created among the mining population that it is part of the scheme of the Government to back out of the conditions with regard to the reorganisation of mining entered into in 1926?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI am sure we can rely on the hon. Member correcting such an utterly erroneous impression.