HC Deb 16 July 1973 vol 860 cc9-11
8. Mr. Golding

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will give authority to the Post Office to increase its planned investment by £30 million in the 1975–76 financial year of its five-year programme.

Sir J. Eden

No, Sir.

Mr. Golding

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the waiting list will get longer and longer until the Post Office is allowed to get rid of the waiting list by increased investment? Further, is he aware that there is great disappointment in the Post Office at the recently announced cuts in investment? Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that not only the waiting list but the quality of service will deteriorate? When it occurs, that will be the responsibility not of the Post Office but of the Minister.

Sir J. Eden

I recognise the tremendous amount of effort that the Post Office and the manufacturing companies together have been making to try to shorten the waiting list. The cutbacks referred to in the capital expenditure exercise will have some impact on the reduction of the waiting list. I expect it still to go down from its present figure of about 200,000 but after that it may well begin to come up again. At this stage it is terribly difficult to tell what will happen. The situation depends enormously on the success that is generally attendant on the efforts being made by the Post Office and the manufacturing companies, which I do not expect will in any way be diminished as a result of the cutback.

Mr. Selwyn Gummer

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of my constituents have been waiting a long time for a telephone? At the moment it looks as if they will have to wait even longer. Further, those who have a telephone find that the Post Office is not very helpful when it says that persons who dial will get through 99 per cent. of the time—because that is not true. The fact is that because we have not invested enough in the past—and it is a reason why we should invest in the future many people with a telephone find that the instrument does not enable them to get through the first, second or third time. Will my right hon. Friend consider that point again? There is considerable dissatisfaction with the telephone service. It is felt that it is not being run as well as it might be.

Sir J. Eden

My hon. Friend has misunderstood or over-exaggerated the impact of the cutback. We are talking about a 4.5 per cent cutback in the total planned capital expenditure of £662 million. That will not have a dramatic effect.

Mr. Robert C. Brown

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that other statutory undertakings, such as gas, electricity and water, have to make provision for their services on new housing developments? Why does not the Post Office have to make the same provision for telecommunications? Is not it about time the Government made the finance available to the Post Office to do so?

Sir J. Eden

The finance is available and the Post Office makes provision for new housing development. All that is happening is that in the growth of the programme, which is a very substantial one, there has been a small cutback as part of the contribution from this sector of the economy owing to the need for restraint in capital expenditure. All sections have contributed to that and it is right that the Post Office should have done so, too.

Mr. Tom King

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that despite the proposed cutback the level of expenditure is still vastly greater than that envisaged by the Opposition when in Government? Will he say what the waiting list would be if we were stuck with the level of investment that the Opposition had in mind?

Sir J. Eden

I cannot give an answer to the last part of my hon. Friend's question, except that it would be very much greater than it was when the present Government took office. My hon. Friend is absolutely right in suggesting that there is a programme of growing capital investment in telecommunications.

Mr. Gregor Mackenzie

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the 4.5 per cent. that he has just mentioned—perhaps he will correct me if I am wrong—relates to the fitting of telephones and not to the overall investment programme? That would make a substantial difference to the answers that he has just given. Will he clarify the position now?

Sir J. Eden

The 4.5 per cent. relates to the cut of £30 million from the total investment programme of £662 million. The major part of that cut falls on telecommunications, which is the major part of the capital-intensive operation. It will affect those operations which are short-lead time ones and can therefore be reasonably easily controlled. It does not in any way affect the major investment programme in new equipment, which I described in my statement on 18th June.