HC Deb 01 March 1938 vol 332 cc1007-15

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £164,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1938, for Expenditure in respect of sundry Public Buildings in Great Britain, not provided for on other Votes, including Historic Buildings, Ancient Monuments, Brompton Cemetery and certain Housing Estates.

8.15 p.m.

Colonel Nathan

There is one small item upon which I should like some information. It is a small item of "additional receipts," that is, admission fees to the Tower of London, Armouries and Jewel House, £2,000; the sale of guide books and postcards, £500; and miscellaneous, £800. It will be interesting to know how these items arose—whether it was due to the increased interest in the Tower of London and the Jewel House on account of the Coronation.

Sir P. Sassoon

I think that was the case.

Rear-Admiral Beamish

I do not know whether the case of an interesting building in connection with the hospital at Greenwich comes under this Vote or not, but if so, I should like to ask a question about it.

Sir P. Sassoon

That comes under the Vote.

Mr. MacLaren

I hope the Minister will explain this Vote.

8.16 p.m.

Sir P. Sassoon

This Vote covers all the services which my Department has to do for other Departments which are not accounted for in other more specialised Votes—such as Labour and Health, Revenue buildings, public buildings overseas and art and science buildings. It also includes the Foreign, Colonial and Dominion offices, the headquarters of the Defence Departments, and such Departments as the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Pensions and the Stationery Office. It covers also certain historic buildings and ancient monuments, the administration of which is in my hands. I am glad to say that on this occasion it is not necessary to go into great detail and explain why this extra sum is needed. Nothing is needed on the main sub-head of the Vote, which covers new works. Sub-head (c) is the maintenance and repair of public offices. Here owing to an underestimate of a number of small jobs of less than £500, which I am called upon to execute, I am short of £22,000. It is because these jobs are of a minor character that it is impossible to estimate accurately the amount of work we shall have to do; there are too many urgent cases cropping up during a year. It has been found that, on the whole, it is better to take a lump sum based on the average of what has been spent in this part of the Vote during the previous three years. This has been done in this case, but the requirements of a great many Departments, and new Departments particularly, in connection with the defence services, have falsified the experience of past years, and therefore I have to ask for this additional sum. About £8,000 of this extra sum is required for maintenance work on the increased number of existing buildings which have been brought under my charge chiefly in connection with the defence services.

Turning to rents, this is not altogether an extra sum as I shall get some of it back as Appropriations-in-Aid, because it has been spent on two items whose cost I shall recover. One is the line of space at the Earl's Court Exhibition for the British Industries Fair which opened on the 21st February, and the other is the amount required for the Tithe Redemption Commission, which is self-supporting. Then an increasing number of premises means an increase in the expenditure on fuel, water, lighting, cleaning utensils, laundry and other household articles. For these I have to ask for an increased provision. Similarly with furniture. The increased staffs in Government Departments, especially those in connection with Defence services, make an additional provision necessary. The Committee will see from the Paper that so far as these increases are concerned they add up to a considerable amount but have been largely set off by savings. These savings are the result of the delay in a number of schemes, the new Government offices at Edinburgh, which are not making as rapid progress as had been hoped. There is also the extension to the Stationery Office Printing Works at Harrow, the new Whitehall buildings, and the purchase of a new site for the Ordnance Survey Office. I am glad to be able to inform the Committee that the difficulties of commencing the new Whitehall buildings have been surmounted and it is anticipated that the demolition of the houses at present on the site will be begun this summer. Once more the underspending of the voted provision has involved a parallel deficiency in the Appropriations-in-Aid. We shall not receive a sum of £50,800, which we expected to spend in 1937, and which we were due to be paid out of a balance of £600,000 provided by the Finance Act, 1908. This balance will, of course, be drawn upon next year.

Mr. Kelly

I did not hear from the Minister the rental which we are paying in connection with the Earl's Court Exhibition, and whether it is a greater amount than we paid in previous years when the exhibition was held elsewhere.

Sir P. Sassoon

This is the first year that the Office of Works have been concerned in this matter and I do not know whether I can give any comparison.

Mr. Kelly

What are you paying this year?

Mr. Benn

Will the Minister also inquire whether there is anything in this Vote for the building of the British Pavilion at the Paris Exhibition?

8.23 p.m.

Mr. Davidson

In regard to the item "furniture," is this £40,000 required because of the extension of the Defence services? Can the Minister give us further information as to the furniture required for the Defence services? Is it office furniture? Is bedding involved?

Sir P. Sassoon

The increase is in the various Departments. These are new buildings or extensions, and as the hon. Member knows the Service Departments have been increased and expanded and others have been taken over for new accommodation. There is nothing in the Estimate about rental, and I do not think we usually give figures as to rental.

Mr. Davidson

Does this item include the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence, because it is generally understood that the purpose of creating this Department was to bring about economy?

The Deputy-Chairman

We cannot go into that question on this Vote.

Sir P. Sassoon

It does not only apply to Defence Departments but to extensions in other Departments, the Ministry of Transport, the Board of Education, and the accommodation which is necessary in connection with the Physical Fitness Campaign, and to many other cases.

8.25 p.m.

Mr. Benson

I observe that the anticipated savings on Public Offices, etc., amount to £95,000, which covers a large number of items. The anticipated shortage on the Appropriations-in-Aid, which apparently is limited to Government offices in Whitehall, is £50,000, which is more than half the total anticipated savings. That would suggest that in the first year the percentage of overhead charges was enormous. Can the right hon. Baronet elucidate this matter?

8.26 p.m.

Sir P. Sassoon

If the hon. Member is referring to the new Whitehall building, the original estimate for Appropriations-in-Aid, was £282,000, and the deficiency now—

Mr. Benson

I think the new Whitehall building has not yet been started. I take it that the anticipated savings include the whole of the amount which it was intended should be spent on the new Whitehall building.

Sir P. Sassoon

The Finance Act, 1908, provided that £600,000 of the surplus for the financial year 1907 should be applied in defraying expenditure incurred by the Commissioner of Works in erecting buildings in connection with public offices in Whitehall or buildings to be acquired for the purpose. A balance of about £193,000 remains unexpended and is being utilised as an Appropriation-in-Aid of the expenditure on the new Whitehall building. As the expenditure on the building for this financial year will be £50,800 less than was estimated, there will be a corresponding shortage in the Appropriations-in-Aid.

Mr. Benson

If I understand the right hon. Baronet correctly, the whole of the money which it was proposed to spend on the Whitehall building was £50,800, which was to be paid out of the 1908 Fund. Therefore, as that money has been spent, the whole Appropriation-in-Aid falls.

Sir P. Sassoon

I do not know whether the money was spent on building, but it was spent otherwise.

8.28 p.m.

Mr. Batey

On page 32 of the Supplementary Estimates, under Sub-head I, I see that there is a Vote of £14,500 for fuel. Does that mean that increased prices had to be paid for coal? If so, what was the increase in price, and was the coal obtained from London merchants or direct from the colliery? I should like also to know the reason for the large increase of £8,100 for gas and £7,400 for electric current.

8.29 p.m.

Sir P. Sassoon

The increase in the amount is due to the fact that we have enlarged the number of buildings for which we have to supply electric current and gas. I do not think the hon. Member can have been present earlier in the evening when I dealt with the price of coal. We buy coal by competitive methods and put the orders out for competition. We buy in the cheapest possible market, and we pay the price for coal delivered, and not the pit price. During last year, the price of the coal which we bought increased on the average by about 4s. a ton.

8.30 p.m.

Mr. G. Griffiths

Can the right hon. Baronet tell we what has been the increase in the price of coal since the miners received their increase in wages in January, 1936? As far as I remember, there was an increase of 4s. last year, and an increase of 4s. this year, would mean a total increase of 8s. since 1936. The miners have received an increase of only 1s. a day, and in some cases 9d. a day. When there was an outcry all over the country about the wages of the miners, we were given to understand that the coalowners—

The Deputy-Chairman

Order. The hon. Member may not raise that point on this Vote.

Mr. G. Griffiths

As this is a Vote for a higher price for coal, surely we are in order, Captain Bourne, in discussing this matter.

The Deputy-Chairman

The hon. Member is entitled to ask the Minister why more money is needed, but he cannot expect the Minister to say why there is an increase in the price of coal.

8.31 p.m.

Mr. Lee

Are we to understand that this was an increase in price only, or was there an increase in the amount of coal needed?

Sir P. Sassoon

It was purely an increase in the price charged to us, including an increase in the freightage.

Mr. G. Griffiths

While I bow to your Ruling, Captain Bourne, I would like the Minister to answer my question about the increase in price during the last two years. I should like also to know whether the coal is bought direct from the pithead. The price of coal in Yorkshire, on last month's ascertainment, was 14s. 9d. a ton at the pithead, and before the increase in wages it was 12s. 1½d. a ton. I would like to know whether the coal is bought direct from the pit or from the merchants, after they have sold it to themselves two or three times before the right hon. Baronet's Department gets it.

Sir P. Sassoon

Our requirements are put out to competition, and we accept the lowest tenders for the coal we need.

Mr. Griffiths

From whom is the coal bought, the pit or the coal factor?

Sir P. Sassoon

From the contractor.

Mr. Griffiths

That means about the sixth contractor before the Department gets it.

8.32 p.m.

Mr. Davidson

When the right hon. Baronet finds that prices have risen, does he, before placing the order with the contractor, make an investigation into the reasons for the increase?

Sir P. Sassoon

If our requirements are put out to competition, we can compare the various tenders. It was not only an increase in the price of one sort of coal, but of several different varieties. It is difficult to say what is the increase in the case of one particular sort. Over the whole of the varieties of coal which we need, during the last year there was an increase, on the average, of about 4s. a ton, including the rise in cost of freightage.

8.33 p.m.

Mr. Davidson

May I ask on what basis the tenders are accepted?

The Deputy-Chairman

The hon. Member may not raise that matter on this Vote.

Mr. Viant

Will the right hon. Baronet inform the Committee what is the average price per ton which his Department has to pay at the present time?

Sir P. Sassoon

I cannot do so, because of the different varieties of coal which we buy.

Mr. Viant

I said the average price.

The Deputy-Chairman

That matter does not arise on this Vote. The hon. Member may ask why there is an increase in the Vote, but the other question must be raised on the Estimates.

8.34 p.m.

Sir Stafford Cripps

May we ask the Minister by how much each variety of coal has increased in price since last year? If he would tell us that, we should be able to get some indication of what we want.

The Deputy-Chairman

Hon. Members seem to me to be raising a question of policy which ought to be raised on the Vote for the salary of the Minister, and not on this Vote.

Sir S. Cripps

Further to that point, when there is a Supplementary Estimate of £14,500 for fuel, which is alleged to be due entirely to the increased price of that fuel, surely we are entitled to know by how much each variety of that fuel has increased in price. The figure of £14,500 is derived from that.

The Deputy-Chairman

Yes, but that is a different question.

Sir P. Sassoon

I do not think the price for each quality of coal can be given.

Mr. G. Griffiths

Was the contract price this year given to the same firm as had it last year?

Sir P. Sassoon

It goes out to competition.

Mr. Griffiths

But did the same contractor supply you this time as last time?

Sir P. Sassoon

I think there must be a great variety of contractors, but I could not give offhand the name of one particular contractor.

Mr. Benson

Will the right hon. Gentleman explore the question of purchasing, not in London, but at the pithead?

The Deputy-Chairman

No, that cannot possibly arise.

Mr. Batey

I take it that the Minister, before he brought in the original Estimate last year, would have contracted for a certain amount of coal. Now, having a Supplementary Estimate before us, I take it that they must have made a mistake in their original contract, or else they have been compelled to pay an increased price. I think we are entitled to know what has happened, because this £14,500 is a very large amount.

Mr. Wakefield

Is it not a fact that in this Estimate appears not only the increase in price, but also a considerable increase in use, due to the expansion of buildings and so forth?

Sir P. Sassoon

I have said that that is so, and that over and above that there has been an increase in the price of coal. Our contract prices are not for all kinds of coal, but for those particular qualities which we need, and they are obtained after competition.

Resolved, That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £64,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1938, for Expenditure in respect of sundry Public Buildings in Great Britain, not provided for on other Votes, including Historic Buildings. Ancient Monuments, Brompton Cemetery, and certain Housing Estates.