HC Deb 11 February 1932 vol 261 cc1000-1
9. Mr. HICKS

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the total reduction in building expenditure following the demand for economy during the ensuing year amounts to £55,525,875 in respect of Government Departments and local authorities, a sum which represents 23 per cent. of the normal annual value of building and 12 weeks' unemployment for the total personnel of the building trade (858,170); and whether, seeing that the charge for unemployment insurance benefit will be nearly £9,000,000, he will take steps to encourage wise spending, as the charge for interest on the money involved is less than one-third of the money that will be required for unemployment benefit if all the schemes are suspended?

Sir H. BETTERTON

As stated by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health in reply to a question put by the hon. Member for the Hemsworth Division (Mr. Price) there is no reason to think that economies on building by the Government or municipal authorities amount to any sum approaching the figure of £55,500,000 mentioned in the question; I am afraid, therefore, that I cannot accept the calculations which the hon. Member bases upon it. As regards the line to be drawn between wise and unwise spending, my right hon. Friend issued a circular on this subject on 11th September last to local authorities with which, I have no doubt, the hon. Member is familiar.

Mr. HICKS

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken any steps to check the accuracy of the figures, or will steps be taken?

Sir H. BETTERTON

The very first item in the sum of £55,000,000 is a large amount in respect of a scheme which was turned down by the last Parliament.

Mr. HICKS

Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the volume of work which a number of municipal authorities have under consideration was not taken into account and, therefore, that there is the possibility of the figures in question being understated rather than overstated?

Sir H. BETTERTON

No, I do not think that at all, but what I am pointing out is that, from the evidence in my possession, I think the figure of £55,000,000 is a very large overstatement.

Sir P. HARRIS

Does my right hon. Friend realise that in London, as a result of the circular to the local authorities, they have cut down their expenditure on housing by about three-quarters and are cancelling all their contracts and stopping buying any new estates, the result being a large reduction in the numbers employed on house building?

Sir H. BETTERTON

That is a question that should be addressed to the Minister of Health.

Mr. McENTEE

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's refusal to accept these figures, can he supply any figures that he would consider accurate?

Mr. SPEAKER

Mr. Mander.

Mr. McENTEE

May I ask for an answer to my question?

Mr. SPEAKER

We have already had a number of questions on these particular points.

Forward to