1. Earl of Dalkeithasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the cost of producing 120 million 50p coins including plant, machinery and labour, but excluding the cost of the raw material.
§ The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Dick Taverne)A very small proportion of the nominal value of the coins.
Earl of DalkeithWould not the hon. and learned Gentleman, with the wisdom of hindsight, admit that the Government have made an expensive blunder and seek to redeem it by withdrawing all these coins, melting them down, and making a profit out of the fivefold rise in nickel prices since minting began and issue instead a paper note of equivalent value?
§ Mr. TaverneSpecifications of the coin were very carefully considered by the Decimal Currency Board. A new coin has always proved unpopular, and we should wait to see how this coin is accepted.
§ Mr. HigginsWas not that an intolerably vague answer? Surely the Government must know the answer to the Question. Why will not the Minister give it?
§ Mr. TaverneIf the hon. Gentleman is referring to the first reply which I gave, he will realise that the Mint is in competition with overseas competitors, and it has never been customary to disclose the cost of manufacture of any particular coin.
2. Earl of Dalkeithasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many 50p coins have been put into circulation to date; and what was the cost of their distribution.
§ Mr. TaverneApproximately 126 million 50p coins had been issued to the banks up to 31st October. The cost of distribution borne by the Mint is approximately £24,000.
Earl of DalkeithBut if the cost of producing more paper notes over a longer period is the decisive factor in switching to metal coins, would the Minister explain why he does not carry the argument to its logical conclusion and replace the £ note with a metal coin?
§ Mr. TaverneWe must have regard to the value of the coin and to the savings which accrue from having a metal coin instead of a note.
§ Mr. John SmithWould the hon. and learned Gentleman bear in mind that the new 10s. coin is not at all a bad coin but that what is wrong is that the new 10p and 5p pieces are far too large and that they are more than four times as heavy in terms of weight per value than any other currency in the world except one?
§ Mr. TaverneThe difficulty about the hon. Gentleman's suggestion, which in itself has quite a lot to be said for it, is that quite a number of complaints about the new coin are that it is too small.
Earl of DalkeithOn a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.
§ 7. Mr. Leadbitterasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received on the shape and size of the new 50p coin; and what reply he has sent.
§ Mr. Buchanan-Smithasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received about the new 50p coin; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. TaverneI would refer the hon Members to my reply to the hon. Member for Inverness (Mr. Russell Johnston) on 3rd November.
§ Mr. LeadbitterWill my hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that this coin is unpopular? It has been the subject of considerable public criticism. It certainly is confusing and possibly invites counterfeiting. In view of the obduracy of the Decimal Currency Board and the public's general concern, would it not be better if the Government were to indicate their willingness to review the matter?
§ Mr. TaverneOnly a very small proportion of the letters we have received refer to cases where the writers have seen a mistake made. I am aware that this is an unpopular coin at the moment, but the Board went into the matter very fully. The coin, as earlier new coins when introduced, must be given a chance.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithDoes not the hon. and learned Gentleman recognise that it is particularly in the retail trade, where people have practical daily experience of handling the coin, that the most complaint arises because of the confusion? In examining these complaints, I ask the hon. and learned Gentleman not to be insensitive to the very practical experience of these people.
§ Mr. TaverneIt is not for me to examine the complaints. It is for the Board to do that. These must be carefully examined. We must wait and see. In the course of consultations and researches, which were far more elaborate than occurred with the launching of any other new coin, the Board specifically made inquiries and consulted retail organisations.
§ 8. Mr. A. Royleasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will now instruct the Decimal Currency Board to with- 804 draw the 50p coin and replace it with a well designed note in view of the dangerous impracticability of the new coin.
§ 27. Mr. Roebuckasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the light of public reaction to the 50p piece, he will now enter into consultations with the Decimal Currency Board with a view to producing a coin more easily distinguishable from the 10p piece.
§ 31. Mr. J. H. Osbornasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will circulate a 50p note, as well as the 50p coin.
§ Mr. Farrasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will withdraw the new 50p piece from circulation and retain the 10s. note.
§ Mr. TaverneI would refer the hon. Member to the reply which my hon. Friend the Minister of State gave in reply to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor) on 22nd October.—[Vol. 788, c. 298-9.]
§ Mr. RoyleWill the hon. and learned Gentleman ask the Board to look at the whole matter again? Will he ask the Board to see if it would be possible to have a note as well as a coin and then assess the public reaction to the two different types of currency?
§ Mr. TaverneAt the moment there is a note as well as a coin. However, the hon. Gentleman is right, in that the note will be withdrawn. The reason for introducing the coin in the first place was that it will bring about a substantial saving in cost. In due course there is no reason why this coin should not become accepted in the way that other coins have been accepted.
§ Mr. RoebuckWhat sort of representation does my hon. Friend want before he agrees to examine the matter again? Have not the Licensed Victuallers Association, the shopkeepers' organisation, the pensioners, the housewives, and the hon. Member for Harrow, East written to him about this? Has he not studied the sheaf of letters which I have sent to him and which have arrived from all across the country? Why is it that he will listen so long to the antique and counterfeit peers on the Board and not listen to the voice 805 of the people? Will he reconsider the matter?
§ Mr. TaverneExperience with the 3d. bit and with the florin showed that time was required, and it would be a very mistaken reaction, just because there is an immediate unfavourable reaction to the coin, for the Board to say that the reaction to the coin, for the Board to say that the reaction to the coin will necessarily be unfavourable in six months' time.
§ Mr. OsbornIt is my view that this 50p piece should be given a chance and then perhaps the British people will get used to it. However, would it not have been more helpful if we could have had a guarantee that the 10s. note would be continued while people were growing accustomed to the new coin? Is it not a great mistake not to have ready availability of 10s. notes?
§ Mr. TaverneThe whole point of the operation is to save costs. If we had plans for continuing with the circulation of 10s. notes, saving would not take place.
§ Mr. FarrWhat representations did the Minister make to the retail bodies to which he referred? Were they given specimens of the new coins?
§ Mr. TaverneCertainly. It is not any of my business, nor that of the Government, to make these inquiries and representations. That is a matter for the Board. The Board consulted, and showed the coin to, retail organisations, transport organisations, cash handling organisations, cash handling organisations, slot machine manufacturers, consumer organisations, and associations for the blind.
§ Mr. Iain MacleodThe Financial Secretary will be aware from his postbag and from questions asked by hon. Members on both sides of the House of the dislike of this coin that exists at the moment. If this dislike continues, will he undertake to withdraw the coin, or is his mind completely closed?
§ Mr. TaverneWe must see over a considerable period of time how this progresses.
§ Mr. DempseyIs my hon. and learned Friend aware that it is not necessary to wait for a considerable period? Only last week a Scottish television programme showed that a survey conducted of all interests, from shopkeepers to house- 806 wives, had condemned the coin. Why should we be dragged behind the archaic members of this Board instead of a correction being made now, because the Board has obviously made a mistake?
§ Mr. TaverneI have studied the representations. Only a minority of the representations were opposed to a coin as distinct from a note. As for the objections to the type of coin, there were many different objections which all led to a different kind of coin being apparently more acceptable.
§ Mr. RoyleOn a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.
§ 23. Mr. Wingfield Digbyasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps were taken to sound public opinion on the 50p before its issue; and what has been the total cost of it to public funds to date.
§ Mr. TaverneThe Decimal Currency Board considered a number of possible specifications for the 50p and sought the opinion of representative organisations concerned with the use and handling of coins. They also had coin recognition tests carried out. It is not the practice to divulge details of coinage costs, because this information would be useful to the Royal Mint's overseas competitors.
§ Mr. DigbyIs not it quite obvious that there was a complete failure to anticipate public opinion, and is not the 5 new franc piece a comparable example in that it is not popular in France in competition with the 5 new franc note, although it is much more identifiable because the other coins are smaller? Was not that the writing on the wall which might have been seen?
§ Mr. TaverneAs I have already explained to the House, there were a number of precedents which all suggested that at first any new coin would be unpopular, but no coin has ever previously been issued with such elaborate research and consultation as was undertaken by the Decimal Currency Board on this coin.
§ Mr. RankinDoes my hon. Friend realise that, if he will promise to keep up the purchasing value of this new coin, he will have taken one of the most popular steps he has ever taken?
§ Mr. TaverneI take note of that.
§ Mr. HigginsThe Financial Secretary repeatedly refers to tests being carried out, but has not once said what were the results of those tests. Why does he give priority to these secret tests rather than to the public opinion which has been so clearly expressed by hon. Members on both sides of the House?
§ Mr. TaverneThe hon. Member has failed to take the point that one thing which is required for public reaction generally is time. Tests taken with housewives showed, among other things, that they had no difficulty in recognising the new coin. The retail, the cash handling and other consumer organisations in fact preferred this particular specification of coin to its rivals.
§ 32. Mr. J. H. Osbornasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, from information available to him from international sources, he will list the values of the coins, indicating size and weight, and notes in common circulation in each of the major countries in Europe, respectively; what is their equivalent value in the new British decimal currency; and how these compare in value with the decimal coins and notes to be circulated in this country.
§ Mr. TaverneWith permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a list of the coins and notes in circulation in those countries of Western Europe which have a population of over 10 million. The list indicates in millimetres and grammes the size and weight of each coin and the approximate present value in United Kingdom decimal currency of both coins and notes. In the time available, it has not been possible to establish whether all these coins and notes are in everyday use.
§ Mr. OsbornMay we be given information about the comparability of value for weight of comparable coins to the 50p piece, and is the Financial Secretary satisfied that this information has already been sufficiently circulated?
§ Mr. TaverneI hope that the hon. Member will have regard to the details which will be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT and which should give him this information.
§ Following is the information"
| FRANCE | |||
| Coinage | |||
| France centimes | |||
| 1 | 23.00/1.4 | 1.3 | .1p |
| 1 | 15.00 | 1.65 | |
| 2 | 27.00/1.9 | 2.2 | .2p |
| 5 | 17.00 | 2.0 | .4p |
| 10 | 20.00/1.7 | 3.0 | .8p |
| 10 | 20.00 | 3.0 | |
| 20 | 23.50/1.7 | 4.0 | 1.5p |
| 20 | 23.50 | 4.0 | |
| Francs | |||
| ½ | 19.50 | 4.5 | 3.7p |
| 1 | 24.00/1.9 | 6.0 | 7.5p |
| 5 | 29.00/2.2 | 12.0 | 38.0p |
| 10 | 37.00 | 25.00 | 75p |
| Notes | |
| Francs | |
| 5 | 38p |
| 10 | 75p |
| 50 | £3.75 |
| 100 | £7.50 |
| 500 | £37.50 |
| WEST GERMANY | |||
| Coinage | |||
| Pfennig | |||
| 1.35 | |||
| 1 | 16.50/1.38 | 2.0 | .1p |
| 2 | 19.25/1.52 | 3.25 | .2p |
| 5 | 18.50/1.7 | 3.0 | .6p |
| 10 | 21.50/1.7 | 4.0 | 1.1p |
| 50 | 20.00/1.58 | 3.5 | 5.7p |
| D. Mark | |||
| 1 | 23.50/1.75 | 5.5 | 11.4p |
| 2 | 26.75/1.79 | 7.0 | 22.8p |
| 5 | 29.00/2.07 | 11.2 | 57.0p |
| Notes | |
| D. Mark | |
| 5 | 57 |
| 10 | £1.14 |
| 20 | £2.28 |
| 50 | £5.70 |
| 100 | £11.40 |
| 500 | £57.00 |
| 1,000 | £114.00 |
| ITALY | |||
| Coinage | |||
| Lira | |||
| 1 | 17.20/1.2 | 0.625 | less than |
| .1p | |||
| 2 | 18.30/1.4 | 0.8 | .1p |
| 5 | 20.20/1.5 | 1.0 | .3p |
| 10 | 23.30/1.6 | 1.6 | .7p |
| 20 | 21.30/1.6 | 3.6 | 1.3p |
| 50 | 24.80/2.0 | 6.25 | 3.3p |
| 100 | 27.80/2.0 | 8.0 | 6.7p |
| 500 | 29.00/2.2 | 11.0 | 33.0p |
| Notes | |
| 500 | 33p |
| 1,000 | 67p |
| 5,000 | £3.30 |
| 10,000 | £6.60 |
| 50,000 | £33.30 |
| 100,000 | £66.60 |
| SPAIN | |||
| Coinage | |||
| Centimos | |||
| 10 | 17.50/1.19 | 0.75 | .1p |
| 50 | 20.00/1.48 | 4.0 | .3p |
| 50 | 20.00/1.25 | 1.0 | .3p |
| Pesetas | |||
| 1 | 21.00/1.33 | 3.5 | .6p |
| 2½ | 25.00/1.87 | 7.0 | 1.5p |
| 5 | 23.00/1.56 | 5.57 | 3.0p |
| 25 | 26.50/1.73 | 8.5 | 15.0p |
| 50 | 30.00/1.98 | 12.5 | 30.0p |
| 100 | 34.00/2.08 | 19.0 | 60.0p |
| Notes | |
| Pesetas | |
| 1 | .6p |
| 2 | 1.2p |
| 5 | 3.0p |
| 10 | 6.0p |
| 25 | 15.0p |
| 50 | 30.0p |
| 100 | 60.0p |
| 500 | £3.00 |
| 1,000 | £6.00 |
| TURKEY | |||
| Coinage | |||
| Kuras | |||
| 5 | 17.00/1.35 | 2.5 | .2p |
| 10 | 21.00/1.7 | 4.0 | .5p |
| 25 | 22.60/1.75 | 5.0 | 1.2p |
| Liras | |||
| 1 | 27.00/2.4 | 8.0 | 4.6p |
| 2½ | 30.00/2.7 | 12.0 | 11.6p |
| 10 | 34.00/1.6 | 15.0 | 46.0p |
| Notes | |
| Liras | |
| 5 | 23p |
| 10 | 46p |
| 20 | 93p |
| 50 | £2.31 |
| 100 | £4.63 |
| 500 | £23.15 |
| 1,000 | £46.30 |
| UNITED KINGDOM | |||
| £ s. d. Coinage | |||
| Pence | |||
| 1 | 30.86/1.91 | 9.449 | .41p |
| 3 | 21.97/2.79 | 6.804 | 1.25p |
| 6 | 19.40/1.4 | 2.827 | 2.50p |
| Shillings | |||
| 1 | 23.59/1.73 | 5.6652 | 5.0p |
| 2 | 28.50/2.31 | 11.3104 | 10.0p |
| Half-crown | |||
| 32.31/2.31 | 14.1379 | 12.5p |
| New Pence | ||
| ½ | 17.14/1.1 | 1.7820 |
| 1 | 20.32/1.5 | 3.5640 |
| 2 | 25.91/1.8 | 7.1280 |
| 5 | same as for the | 1 shilling coin |
| 10 | same as for the | 2 shilling coin |
| 50 | 30.00/2.5 | 13.5000 |
| Notes |
| Shillings |
| 10 |
| Pounds |
| 1 |
| 5 |
| 10 |
| 20* |
| *To be introduced before 15th February, 1971. |