REVENUE BUILDINGS. (Hansard, 1 March 1938)

§ Sir P. Sassoon
This Vote, as its name implies, deals chiefly with buildings occupied by Departments responsible for the 1017 collection of revenue. The Committee will, I am sure, agree that, since such establishments are unavoidable, it is desirable that they should be well kept. This Vote, therefore, covers buildings occupied by the Custom and Excise Departments and those of the Inland Revenue, including the premises of their inspectors and collectors of taxes and the staff of the Inland Revenue valuer. It also includes work done by my Department for my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General, so far as it is not in the nature of capital expenditure. Of the three Departments with which I have to deal under this Vote, I think that the most difficulty is experienced with the offices of the Inland Revenue. Owing to the staff expansions and office reorganisation which have taken place in recent years, and for which I disclaim all responsibility, they have in many cases become inadequate or unsuitable. I have had the added difficulty of having to provide good offices in a large number of places when office accommodation, for one reason or another, simply does not exist.
My need for more money this year on the Inland Revenue side arises chiefly from better progress being made in a number of schemes than was expected. The lump sum deduction made from the gross total in respect of new works has again proved to be too large. Also some urgent expenditure has had to be incurred on the adaptation of buildings hired for Inland Revenue purposes. These were Turnstile House, Holborn, and Clifton House, Euston, required to house the Special Commissioners of Income Tax; and Waterloo Bridge House, needed to house staffs of the Departmental Claims Branch and the Chief Inspector displaced from Cornwall House close by. As under the other Votes, the acquisition of new premises has sent up the sums for cleaning, custody and the provision of household articles, under Sub-head M, the cost of which has been increased by the rise in prices.
On the Post Office side the most interesting item is, perhaps, the adaptation of the old Palace of Engineering at Wembley for a television laboratory and for experimental work on broadcasting. With so new a service the original requirements could not be wholly foreseen and the accommodation proved to be too small so that the Postmaster-General asked me to find more space. This involved 1018 further expenditure on adaptations. Considerably more is required for maintenance, comprising a large number of items, all costing less than £1,000. They include such work as minor alterations, work for Christmas pressure, the supply of fittings for sorting and other offices. With perpetual expansion of Post Office work, it is inevitable that the cost of such items should increase; but it; is not easy to forecast with complete accuracy any of their increase in any one year.

§ Mr. Leslie
I notice that there is an increase of £20,000 on fuel. When the Office of Works has competitive tenders, is there much difference in the prices?

§ Sir P. Sassoon
I cannot add anything more to what I have said on the other Votes, as far as coal is concerned.

§ Mr. Leslie
What I want to know is whether, when the Office of Works receive tenders they observe much difference in the prices quoted.

§ Sir P. Sassoon
The point of having tenders is that there is a difference.

§ Mr. Leslie
I want to know whether there is much difference shown when you get the tenders. I want to know whether there is a ring.

§ Mr. Muff
When the Minister departs from his brief he has not very much to tell us in the way of detail. We have listened to a few minutes tribulation, from which we gather that the increase in the cost of living is causing some unrest in the mind of the First Commissioner. That is interesting from the standpoint of the ordinary householder, because the First Commissioner is sharing with the housewife the increases in the price of coal, soap and other utensils. The Committee is entitled to a more specific answer as to the reason why the Commissioner is having to pay £20,000 more for coal. Is he using more coal? If so, how many hundredweights more? Has the price of coal gone up by one halfpenny or one penny per hundredweight? The First Commissioner should tell us. In the Estimates there is an increase of £2,500 for domestic utensils. The First Commissioner should be more precise and tell us about that in more detail. Has soft soap gone up? We have had soft soap 1019 from him in his explanatory brief, but we want a little more than the brief.
We want the First Commissioner to garnish the story a little in detail. The right hon. Gentleman will find a responsive flutter in our bosoms because, if he is going through travail of mind owing to this increased expenditure he is only in the same category as at least a million housewives who are having to pay more for their soap, coal, brushes and pails. The Committee has a right to hear a little more about the more intimate workings of the right hon. Gentleman's Department instead of having so much left to their imagination. My imagination has been running riot and I have been wondering why the right hon. Gentleman wants so much more money for these very ordinary articles. Therefore, might I ask the First Commissioner please to shed a little light on the details of his interesting Department.

§ Sir P. Sassoon
It is difficult to refuse a request made in such a very alluring tone. I only wish I had more to say. This question has cropped up under all the other Votes, and I have unfortunately been obliged in every case to sing the same tune. Not only are we using a great many more household utensils, but they have gone up in price, as everybody knows, some of them to a great extent. There has been a great extension of Post Office and Revenue buildings. They have to be kept clean and unfortunately the method by which they are kept clean has gone up considerably in price. I regret it very much.

§ Mr. Batey
I do not think the Minister can expect the Opposition to be satisfied with that statement. It is not sufficient for us for him to say that he is sorry and cannot tell us more. When Supplementary Estimates come before the House we expect the Minister to be in a position to explain them fully. I am in a little more difficulty on this Estimate than I was on the last, because there are three items dealing with fuel, gas, electricity and water, all of which show increases. I was under the impression that when we passed the original Estimate last year we provided for an increase in the cost of fuel, and that whatever price was agreed to then would stand for all the coal supplied for the following 12 months, 1020 until 31st March. But here we are facing a Supplementary Estimate to carry us on until 31st March and under this item we are asked to pay an increased amount of no less than £28,000. The Minister's statement that they have had to pay an increase of 4s. a ton for coal would mean they were paying that increase on 140,000 tons of coal. It is difficult to accept that statement. I want the Minister to tell us whether they are really using so much more coal, and to give us a rough estimate of how much more, and also to state the number of tons on which they are paying the increase of 4s. a ton. The Minister has said more than once that they get their coal by competitive tenders. What some of us are anxious to know is whether increased prices have been forced upon the Minister by a "ring." We are afraid of some "ring" in the coal industry, and wish he would go direct to the collieries rather than submit to a ring.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
There are two items in the Estimate dealing with Post Office buildings in Glasgow. One items says: Glasgow, West Nile Street Post Office: Adaptations £1,120. I should like to know on what the money is spent and what is meant by "adaptations." Another item is: Glasgow, Langside Telephone Exchange: Adaptations £500. A further item is: Works costing between £1,000 and £2,000, £3,780. I should like an explanation of those three items. The last one is very vague. In all my years in this House I have never seen such a vague item in the Estimates. Talk about putting down "Miscellaneous." Nothing is designated. It is not even said that the money is spent on "adaptations," whatever that may mean.

The Deputy-Chairman
This is only an extension of the original Estimate, in which that phrase occurs.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
I do not follow you, Captain Bourne.

The Deputy-Chairman
If the hon. Member will be good enough to look at the original Estimate, of which this is a Supplementary Estimate, he will see that it includes an item for "Works costing between £1,000 and £2,000." If he wishes to raise the propriety of the entry he must raise it on the main Estimate.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
Thank you, Captain Bourne; but I should like an explanation of the other two items.

Mr. Davidson
I should like to press for some more information on those items concerning Glasgow. We like the present Commissioner of Works, he is the most inoffensive of Ministers, and he is most accommodating in trying to give us information, but I am sure he recognises that Members on this side must occasionally face their constituents, which is different, I understand, from the practice of hon. Members opposite, and we must get the necessary information to explain these items. It is all very well for Members here to talk of a mere £59,000 or £80,000 additional, but when we are speaking to our constituents they ask us to explain how the Minister's Estimate could have been "out" to that extent, and unless we have detailed information it is difficult to explain why there has been under-estimating to the extent of £20,000 or 130,000, which is often more than the average working man wins in the Irish Sweepstake—when he does win. Like my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) I am interested in Glasgow. I am glad to see this interest in Glasgow.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
I was interested in Glasgow before you were born.

Mr. Davidson
I know, but I am not responsible for that. We should like to know the explanation of this item of £1,120. As I have said, the Commissioner of Works is an inoffensive member of the Treasury bench, and I am afraid that some of his friends may have been "putting it across him." The Postmaster-General may have been taking advantage of his good feeling and courtesy. I know West Nile Street, Glasgow, very well indeed, it is a dismal street at the best of times, and I should like to know exactly what is being done at West Nile Street Post Office, as well as what is being done at Langside. An hon. Member who represents Langside is occasionally in the House. In Langside there are people who are very anxious indeed for improvements.
With regard to the rise in the cost of household articles, our party have inaugurated meetings all over the country to protest against the rise in the cost of 1022 living. We are explaining to housewives why they are paying more for their goods. I ask the Commissioner of Works, who could be truly described as the housewife of the Government, to give us more details. He has to look after matters which we and the average housewife in the country can well appreciate, questions relating to gas, electricity, furniture and household articles. In view of the importance of these things to the people of the country, I ask him for more detailed information under these headings.

§ Sir P. Sassoon
I do not know what further details I can give the hon. Member about them. I think I have said all I can say on the subject. Many of the household requirements are such things as washing materials and towels, and he knows those things much better than I do. I think he will agree with me about the Post Office which is to be put up in West Nile Street. The hon. Gentleman says that it is rather a dreary street, but I am informed that it is a very busy centre indeed and that the counter at the Post Office has had to be increased on two occasions, even as far back as 1930 Since then the business has increased by a considerable figure. The adjoining premises have been taken at a rent of £200 a year and the cost of adapting them is estimated at £2,660. The reason why the money falls into this Vote is that it was originally hoped that the work would be completed by September, 1936. Owing to the high tenders that were received, the matter had to be looked into for a good deal longer than was expected.

Mr. Davidson
Is local labour employed in these adaptations?

§ Sir P. Sassoon
It is a question of tender. It was not possible to start the work until much later and that is why the cost comes into this Vote, not because we had wrongly estimated it. The work could not be done in time. The hon. Gentleman knows that the work was completed in May of last year. I could give to the hon. Gentleman who asked me for details about the works costing £2,000, a long list of the works. I will let him have any details that he requires, but the list is so long that I do not think that I can conveniently give it to the Committee.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
The right hon. Gentleman has not explained anything regarding the Langside telephone exchange, on which £500 has been spent.

§ Sir P. Sassoon
This exchange is on Crown property and includes three residential flats. It is due for conversion from manual to automatic working in 1942. Rehousing will be required prior to that date and an extension is urgently needed. The extension can be effected either by adapting or by taking in the residential flats. The cost of the adaptation was to be met in the Postal Vote, but it was subsequently decided that as the premises are due to be sold in or about 1942 the work could be regarded as temporary and charged to the Building Vote. The £500 is required to enable the work to be started in the present financial year.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
Are there not tenants in those rooms at the moment and are they not to be displaced? Has the Post Office, or has the right hon. Gentleman, made any provision for rehousing those individuals in the flats, as the right hon. Gentleman calls them, that are to be taken over for this exchange?

§ Sir P. Sassoon
I could not say offhand, but I will let the hon. Gentleman know.

Mr. Davidson
The right hon. Gentleman states that the premises of the West Nile office had to be extended and when I asked what was the cost of the labour and where the labour came from, he answered that there were tenders, and that the Department had accepted tenders. May I ask where the tenders came from?

The Deputy-Chairman
I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that that is one of the matters which have been already approved, and that the question before us is merely an increase in the amount of the expenditure.

§ Mr. Muff
Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us something about the money which was expended upon that most interesting television experiment at Wembley? That is something in which we are interested. If the Assistant Postmaster-General could tell us something, I should be most grateful.

The Deputy-Chairman
That subject comes under the Post Office Vote.

§ Mr. R. J. Taylor
I understood the Commissioner to say that the cost of fuel had gone up by 4s. per ton. We feel sure that he knows nothing about the coal industry. Black diamonds have not been much under his consideration. Would it not have been possible, when such a large amount of money is involved, to make the purchases directly from the pits?

The Deputy-Chairman
If the hon. Gentleman wants to raise that matter, he must do so upon the question of the Minister's salary.

§ Sir P. Sassoon
I would like to answer the question which was put to me about the contract. It was given to a local firm and it employed local labour.

§ Mr. R. J. Taylor
I wanted to make the suggestion, if it is in order, that an increase of 4s. per ton seems a ridiculously high figure in view of the fact that pithead prices increased by only 1s. 8d. per ton. While not making any allegation that money has been misspent in any way, I would join with my hon. Friend the Member for Spennymoor (Mr. Batey) in pointing out what seems to us a better way of spending it, in view of the rising cost of living of which the First Commissioner of Works has been speaking. We are all familiar with the high cost of living; we hear all about it when we go and meet out constituents in the country. The Minister says that he asked for tenders, and I understood him to say that there was a variation in the prices tendered. This is not the first time I have heard of a slight difference in prices tendered, but that is not the way to get down to this problem. If this amount of money had represented an increase of pithead prices, it would have helped the miners' ascertainment, but has the First Commissioner the foggiest notion at all of how many hands the coal passes through before it percolates down to where it is used? The difference between an increase of 1s. 8d.—

The Deputy-Chairman
If the hon. Member wishes to raise that question, he must raise it on the Minister's salary.

§ Mr. Taylor
Could we have the price that is being paid? I think we are entitled to that. No clerk to a parish council could have got away with the sort of statement that was made by the 1025 First Commissioner. It was very nice and plausible and kind, and would have been excellent for a pleasant Sunday afternoon, but we are dealing here with public money that is being spent, and, unless the First Commissioner can tell us what he is paying for fuel, I do not think he is up to his job. I do not mean that offensively, but all of us here are councillors on our respective local authorities, and, if the borough treasurer came before us with an estimate of this description for the expenditure of money, we should want to know what he was paying for the various items. Therefore, with regard to such a large sum of money as is represented by an increase of 4s. a ton, at least we ought to know how much per ton is being paid.

§ Mr. Ellis Smith
My hon. Friends have raised an issue which is causing concern throughout the country. We move among people in all grades of life, whether representing big industry or ordinary consumers of coal like ourselves, and everyone we meet is expressing concern about the present position. We find that, as a result of this abnormal increase in the cost of coal, an additional £5,500 is required under one heading and an additional £20,000 under another heading. Taking the Estimates for fuel, gas, electricity and water, of which a certain proportion is represented by the cost of coal, they amount to an approximate total of at least £200,000, and the approximate increase due to the increased cost of coal would be about £25,000. Therefore, there is good ground for the anxiety which has been expressed by my hon. Friends, and we are entitled to ask what is being paid per ton for coal by the First Commissioner at the present time. He has told us that there has been an increase of 4s. 3d. per ton, but we want to know what is the price that is being paid per ton now. Moreover, we represent the people of this country, and I think we are entitled to ask whether the First Commissioner has consulted the Prime Minister in regard to this matter. The Prime Minister, as the result of pressure from all parts of the House—

The Deputy-Chairman
The hon. Member must raise that question on the Minister's salary.

§ Mr. Smith
I understand that we are strictly limited to dealing with the Supplementary Estimates, and I shall certainly accept your Ruling, but what I was going to point out was that in these Supplementary Estimates an additional sum of approximately £25,000 is required as a result of the increased cost of coal. If we are doing our duty as Members of the House we are bound to be concerned about that, and we are entitled to ask the First Commissioner whether he also is taking steps to protest against this abnormal increase, to ascertain who is getting the benefit of it, and to save the consumers as a whole from being exploited to the extent that they are. He, as representing the spending Departments who are the consumers, ought to join with other Departments in protesting against this increase.

§ Mr. Batey
Are we to have no reply from the Minister?

§ Sir P. Sassoon
I appreciate the anxiety of hon. Gentlemen opposite on this matter, but I do not think I can give any further information beyond that which I have already given. In this case there are three different items of fuel, and, of course, the increase is to a very large extent due to the increase in the building programme. As far as the increase in the cost of coal is concerned, I cannot give any definite figure, because it applies over a very large number of varieties of coal. The contracts are put out to tender, and hon. Members may be perfectly sure that we see that we get the cheapest possible tenders. The figure I gave represents an increase of roughly about 4s. per ton in the price of coal, but, as I said before, that includes the rise in freightage which has occurred since last October. The actual price of coal under the contracts is, as I have already explained, settled in July every year, and there is difficulty is estimating in March, since one does not know, but can only guess, what the price in the following July will be. That is why we have to come for a Supplementary Estimate. The price of the coal itself is fixed in the tenders in July for a year, but the fact of the freightage going up or down affects it one way or the other.

§ Mr. Batey
One understands that the price of coal is fixed from July in one 1027 year till July in the next year, but this is not the original Estimate, but a Supplementary Estimate in which the Minister is asking for an additional £25,000. It is no use his saying that several varieties of coal are bought. He was questioned on that point by the hon. and learned Member for East Bristol (Sir S. Cripps) not very long ago, and I understood him to say then that he did not buy a large number of varieties of coal. The varieties of coal are very few. There will be only two or three. We are entitled to know what was the price fixed in the original Estimate, and what is the price fixed in this Estimate. The Minister ought to tell us before we pass the Vote.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
We consider this a very serious matter. Here you have £20,000 more than the Minister had estimated the coal would cost. I drew the attention of the Secretary for Mines to-day to the fact that in Lanarkshire the pithead price of coal is 13s. 1¼d. a ton—that is the price on which the miners' wages are fixed—and that 20 miles from that colliery I am paying £2 6s. 8d. a ton. We are trying to find out who it is that is fleecing the public.

The Deputy-Chairman
That is a question of general policy. It can be raised only on the Minister's salary and not on a Supplementary Estimate.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
We are trying to get an explanation. We are not the purchasers of these great quantities of coal. We represent the ordinary people who buy by the cwt., and they are being exploited.

The Deputy-Chairman
The hon. Member cannot raise that question on this Supplementary Estimate. He is entitled to ask the Minister only why the amount is larger than in the original Estimate.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
The fact remains that here is £20,000 extra. There is not an extra quantity of coal nor a new quality. It is the same quantity and the same quality, and yet it costs £20,000 more. We want to know who is robbing the country of this £20,000.

§ Sir P. Sassoon
Obviously I have no responsibility for the prices of coal. I can only take them as I find them. It is not quite accurate to say that there has 1028 been no increase in the quantity. There has been an increase in the number of offices that consume coal.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
Did you not estimate for that? Do you tell me now that you under-estimated the amount of coal that you would require in the winter?

§ Sir P. Sassoon
The Supplementary Vote asks for money for new buildings, and those new buildings have to be heated. The price of coal is decided in July for the year. The last March Estimates had to be framed on the basis of 1936 and we did not know when we framed them in March what the price would be in July, when we had to make our new contracts. I have been asked what kind of coal we were using and whether it had really gone up in price. There are a great many different kinds of coal. We use a great quantity of large Welsh steam. The 1936 price at the pit was 19s. 6d. and in 1937 it was 23s. 6d. In the case of Midland large steam the 1936–37 figures on which we based our last Estimate were 15s. 6d. and in 1937 17s. 9d. Steam slack went up from 12s. 10d. to 15s. 9d. I am only a buyer of coal for my Department. It is not for me to express an opinion one way or another as to prices. I hope hon. Members will now allow me to have the Vote.

§ Mr. E. Smith
I should like to express my appreciation of the fact that the figures have been given us, but on behalf of consumers and taxpayers I protest against this exploitation that is taking place.

The Deputy-Chairman
The hon. Member cannot raise that now.