HC Deb 23 January 1968 vol 757 cc193-4
13. Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many non-industrial civil servants there were at the latest convenient date; how this compares with the number a year previously; and what functions now performed by the central Government he proposes to eliminate in order to secure a reduction in these figures.

Mr. Harold Lever

In October, 1967, 469,670. The comparable figure for October, 1966, was 440,400. Future work will reflect the policy changes announced on 16th January.—[Vol. 756, c. 1591.]

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Does the last Answer mean that the figure will increase or decrease? Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied with the very heavy calls on manpower and finance which result from this steady increase in the non-industrial Civil Service? Cannot the Government get rid of some of its functions, perhaps starting with the Land Commission?

Mr. Lever

In fact, in accordance with decisions already taken by the House, we had anticipated a significant increase— of 11,000 above those figures—in the Civil Service concerned. We will try to hold that increase back to the present numbers, which will, in effect—in order to implement the policy decisions of the House—amount to a cut in the numbers employed.

Mr. Molloy

Will my hon. Friend note that, when it suits their purpose, hon. Gentlemen opposite, acting as constituency Members exert all sorts of pressures for works and services to be carried out in the constituencies, and then, when acting as a body, they are opposed to an increase in the number of civil servants? Will he ignore this masochism and see that, if it means that this Civil Service has a contribution to make in the provision of civil services, its numbers will not in any way be cut down?

Mr. Lever

It is interesting to note that the percentage of the working population employed in the Civil Service compared with 15 years ago shows that, if anything, there has been a slight reduction in the proportions. I take fully into account the arguments advanced by my hon. Friend.