§ 24. Mr. Bruce-Gardyneasked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what estimate he has made of the total cost to. public funds of his Department during the current calendar year; and how this figure compares with the corresponding figure for 1967, after allowing for changes in functions and responsibilities.
§ 26. Mr. Boyd-Carpenterasked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what reductions he is now proposing to make in the numbers employed in his department; and what reduction this will produce in the estimates of his Department for the coming financial year.
§ Mr. Frederick LeeThe cost of the Department in the current calendar year is estimated at£1,340,000. The corresponding figure for 1967, adjusted to take account of the transfer of responsibility for prices and incomes policy to the De- 1552 partment of Employment and Productivity, was£1,210,000. I do not foresee any further significant reduction in numbers or cost.
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneWhat did the tax payers get for the£1.3 million spent last year? Would not any taxpayer listening to Ministerial replies this afternoon think that this money could be saved, to great advantage to the nation's economy?
§ Mr. LeeMembers of the public, after listening to the quality of the questions, might well reach the same conclusion. We believe that the Department has done an exemplary job.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterIn the light of an earlier Answer, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the one form of saving in public expenditure which would result in universal applause would be the abolition of his Department and, to use their own jargon, would it not be better to redeploy them into activities helpful to exports?
§ Mr. LeeI do not agree. To eliminate this great Department would be very short-sighted indeed. The economic planning which has gone on is a great advance on anything which went on before.