HC Deb 15 March 1971 vol 813 cc892-4
9. Sir G. Nabarro

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will now make a further statement on losses arising from the postal strike and additional finance and/or re-financing for the Post Office Corporation, following heavy losses sustained this year.

Mr. Chataway

I refer to the reply I gave my hon. Friend on 9th March, and I am now considering with the Post Office what further measures may be necessary in the aftermath of the strike.—[Vol. 813. c. 76.]

Sir G. Nabarro

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is the third Parliamentary Question on this subject? Is he not aware that I asked him on 15th February, 9th March and again today about the losses arising from the strike? Whereas £27 million was the loss on the postal business, is it not a fact that the telephone and telecommunications business continued largely to operate at a profit, and would it not be correct to say that the overall loss of all the Post Office undertakings on account of the strike amounted to about £20 million?

Mr. Chataway

The Post Office has not yet been able to make an accurate assessment of the extra profits that it earned on the telecommunications side as a result of the strike, but I think my hon. Friend's guess is probably pretty accurate.

Sir G. Nabarro

As always.

Mr. Golding

Is it not a fact that the last time the Post Office as a whole lost money was in 1957 when the right hon. Member for Wallasey (Mr. Marples) was Postmaster-General?

Mr. Chataway

I am afraid that I could not confirm that in any way. As the hon. Gentleman knows, when we came into power on this occasion we faced a very substantial shortfall on the target.

Mr. Richard

Could the right hon. Gentleman, however, say that one of the things that the court of inquiry, which is to look into the claim made by the U.P.W., will be entitled to look at will be the way in which the Post Office presents its accounts? Indeed, as the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro) said, would it not be more accurate, in determining whether the claim of the Post Office workers was justified, to recognise that a loss made on postal services may, indeed, have been made up by some profit from telecommunications?

Mr. Chataway

I have no intention of arguing on either side of the case that the court of settlement will have to decide. But it would be a new departure and one which would not be widely welcomed if the principle of cross-subsidisation between telecommunications and postal business were to be accepted.

13. Mr. Carter

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what was the monthly profit or loss to the Post Office on its telecommunications services and its postal services, respectively, for the month of December, 1970.

Mr. Chataway

As with other nationalised industries, statements of profit and loss are given by the Post Office on an annual basis and included in its Report and Accounts.

Mr. Carter

I thank the Minister for that reply. Whatever the answer be, will he not agree that profitability should not be the sole determinant of wage levels in the nationalised industries, and, in particular, will he agree that postal workers as a group should not be called upon to subsidise industry, commerce and business in general?

Mr. Chataway

No one would argue that Post Office workers should subsidise anybody. But the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that it was the previous Administration which set targets of profitability for the Post Office and established the Post Office Corporation.

Mr. Charles R. Morris

Inasmuch as the Post Office, with the Government's active encouragement, lost £27 million during the past two months, will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that that will bring that much nearer the ninepenny post which he held out as a threat prior to the recent industrial dispute in the Post Office?

Mr. Chataway

If a settlement of the order of 19½ per cent. had been made —I made my remark in that context—the ninepenny post would have come a great deal sooner.

Mr. Kenneth Baker

Will my right hon. Friend look again at some of the services on the postal side which are losing money, in Particular, the telegram service, which is losing between £2 million and £3 million a year? If the public can make do without the telegram service for six weeks, is it not possible that they could make do without it for much longer than that?

Mr. Chataway

The Post Office has made clear that, in the aftermath of the strike, it is looking at a number of its services.

Mr. Richard

Will the right hon. Gentleman recognise, however, that, if he is looking at those services of the Post Office which seem to be unprofitable, there is no logic in then coming to the House and trying to hive off some of the profitable ones?

Mr. Chataway

I have put no proposals to the House on that score.