§ 21. Mr. McKayasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many salaried persons are included in the category of those who received a total of £5,060 million in 1960; whether this number includes directors who receive yearly or part-time fees; what part of the total sum is comprised by such fees; and if he will in future publish in his monthly digest of statistics details showing the average number of people receiving salaries of up to £2,000 per annum, between £2,000 and £5,000 per annum, and between £5,000 and £10,000 per annum, respectively, together with the totals of annual salaries for each group.
§ Sir E. BoylePrecise figures of the division of the total labour force between wage earners and salary earners are not availably but it is estimated that the total number of salary earners in 1960 was about 6¾million, including directors. Directors' fees are in general included in the figures of earnings taxed under P.A.Y.E., from which the estimates of wages and salaries are derived, but are not separately identified. It is estimated, however, that the total of such fees included in the figure for salaries paid in 1960 was of the order of £200 million. So far as publication of numbers of salary earners in various ranges of income is concerned, I would draw the hon. Member's attention to table 67 in the 104th Report of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue. This table shows total Schedule E incomes classified by sex and by range of remuneration, but separate figures for wages and salaries are not available. This information can only be obtained annually, with a considerable time lag, and would not be appropriate for publication in the Monthly Digest of Statistics.
§ Mr. McKayI am very thankful for the Minister's reply. At the same time I think the object of the Question itself should be taken notice of and implemented. We have all the possible in 1110 formation relative to wages. Why cannot we get the same information relative to other personal affairs?
§ Sir E. BoyleI ask the hon. Gentleman to study my original Answer again. I apologise for its length, but it was a long Question and one could not use the traditional remark—" as the Answer contains a number of figures…" I hope that the hon. Gentleman will find the Answer informative.
§ 22. Mr. McKayasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what particular factors resulted in a 61 per cent. rise in total salaries between 1954 and 1960 compared with a 40 per cent. rise in total wages over the same period.
§ Sir E. BoyleThe faster rise in total salaries than in total wages can be attributed mainly to the simple fact that over this period the number of salary earners rose much faster than the number of wage earners.
§ Mr. McKayDoes not the Minister think that, when we know the number of these people, it should not be difficult to obtain the number who get that money? Therefore, is not it necessary that we should have as much information on this subject as we have about wages? I hope we shall do something in this matter.
§ Sir E. BoyleI do not wish to be discourteous to the hon. Member, but I understood the original Question and Answer better than his supplementary question. If the hon. Member wishes further information on the whole subject, may I suggest that he looks at the very good analysis in the book by Butler and Rose on the last General Election?
§ Mr. JayCan the Financial Secretary say what were the percentage rises in the number of salary earners and wage earners respectively?
§ Sir E. BoyleBetween 1954 and 1960 the number of salary earners increased by about 22 per cent. and wage earners by about 1 per cent.