HC Deb 23 January 1968 vol 757 cc186-8
3. Mr. Blaker

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what cuts he proposes to make in public spending in order that full advantage may be taken of the opportunities provided by devaluation.

12. Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what progress he has now made with his review of public civil expenditure; whether he will now indicate what specific cuts will be made in 1968–69; and whether he will make a statement.

52. Mr. Higgins

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what cuts in Government expenditure it is now proposed to make as a result of the review announced on 18th December, 1967.

Mr. Roy Jenkins

I refer the hon. Members to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on Tuesday, 16th January, which was published as Command Paper No. 3515.—[Vol. 756, c. 1577–1620].

Mr. Blaker

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that figures published yesterday show that the number of civil servants increased by 57,000 in the three years up to last October? If it is possible to make massive reductions in the Armed Forces, why is it not possible to make similar reductions in the size of the Civil Service, as opposed to just holding the numbers?

Mr. Jenkins

If it were possible to make reductions, I would be eager to do so, and I do not regard what we are laying down for the forthcoming year as being the last word in this respect, but I must have regard to the duties imposed on the Civil Service. I well remember, having been a Departmental Minister myself recently, the pressures which were put upon me from both sides of the House to improve recruitment in many aspects of Government service.

Mr. Higgins

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the figures so far published still leave a number of ambiguities? Can he tell us what the figures in the first column in his table of public expenditure for 1967–68 would have been before allowance had been made for the £400 million of cuts announced before Christmas, since it is far from clear what the situation was?

Mr. Jenkins

That is a somewhat hypothetical and detailed question. If the hon. Gentleman would put it down, I should be glad to answer.

Mr. Mendelson

But would my right hon. Friend not agree that the relevant rearrangements are those which will release resources for the export drive? Would he, therefore, not listen to those voices which urge him to produce psychological cuts which show only that we are being harsh to our own people?

Mr. Jenkins

All cuts which produce results are of relevance to the situation, but I intend to have regard to the facts as well as to psychology of the situation.

Mr. Higgins

The right hon. Gentleman said that my Question was hypothetical and detailed. What was hypothetical about it and is £400 million a mere detail?

Mr. Jenkins

That sum is not a mere detail, of course, and the situation is set out as clearly as it can be, but if the hon. Gentleman wants some elucidation and will put down a Question, I will gladly answer it.

Mr. Rankin

Would a cut in private capital wealth not be or more help to the country in its hour of need and would my right hon. Friend consider that?

Mr. Jenkins

I think that that is a different question.

Mr. Gresham Cooke1

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as against the projected savings of £300 million in the recent statement, the winter Supplementary Estimates of this year have already gone up by £320 million?

Mr. Jenkins

I am aware that certain winter Supplementary Estimates were laid for expenditure which has already taken place, but I am not aware that Members of the Opposition have urged me not to undertake the payments involved, of which the biggest item was for combating foot-and-mouth disease.