HC Deb 24 July 1956 vol 557 cc205-6
43. Mr. McKay

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the percentage rise in the consumers' index from 1946 to 1948; what has been the percentage rise in the retail price index from 1948 to May, 1956; and, by comparing the percentage increase in the retail price index with the percentage increase in the consumers' index, what is the combined percentage increase on the basis of 1946.

Mr. H. Macmillan

Between 1946 and 1948 the Consumer Price Index rose by 15 per cent. Between 1948 and May, 1956, the Index of Retail Prices rose by 46 per cent. It cannot be assumed that if the Retail Price Index could be carried back to 1946 it would show the same movement as the Consumer Price Index between 1946 and 1948. The two indices could not therefore properly be linked in the way suggested in the last part of the Question.

Mr. McKay

Is the Chancellor aware that the figures clearly indicate that since 1946 the consumers' index has risen every year by 1 per cent. less than the retail index, and that the two indices taken together show a rise of 71 per cent. from 1946 to May, 1956; and that if those figures were applied to pensions, old-age pensions would be increased to 71s. 9d. a week?

Mr. Macmillan

That is what one might call the 64-dollar question. I found great difficulty and worked very hard to get the answer to the Question, but the trouble is that the hon. Member's right hon. Friends changed the system in 1947. I did not change the system; they did. I am informed by the highest mathematical and statistical authorities, and what the hon. Member has just said leads me to suppose that he has drawn the wrong inferences from insufficient premises.

Mr. H. Wilson

When the right hon. Gentleman has fully imbibed and studied the statistical advice given to him by my hon. Friend, will he go further into the question of how far these indices are affected by the rising costs of mortgages by building societies? Will he explain to the House how the latest increase in the interest rates of building societies squares, first, with his proposals for a plateau of stability, and, secondly, with the Prime Minister's "property-owning democracy"?

Mr. Macmillan

The right hon. Gentleman is usually so courteous and so relevant that I do my best to answer even his supplementary questions, but that one had nothing to do with the Question on the Order Paper.