HL Deb 01 August 1923 vol 54 cc1509-16

LORD SOUTHWARK had the following Question on the Paper:—

To ask His Majesty's Government whether, in view of the unanimous opinion of the commercial community that an immense volume of postal communications would result from a return to the penny postage, and in view of the unsatisfactory result of increasing the weight of letter packets carried for the minimum charge of 1½d., they will now consider the desirability of reducing the minimum charge for letter packets at home and to all British Possessions, Egypt, U.S.A. and Tangier to one penny, with a corresponding reduction of the weight to one ounce for inland letters and half-an-ounce for other parts of the Empire, U.S.A., etc., thus again realising the idea of Imperial penny postage, which, by increasing communication between this country and the different parts of the Empire, would increase trade and thereby bring increased revenue to the National Exchequer.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, in asking the Question which appears on the Paper in my name I wish to say that chambers of commerce and business men desire to impress upon His Majesty's Government that they should not be timid, but should courageously proceed at once to carry out the sound policy of an Imperial penny postage on the lines suggested in the Question. The reductions in postal charges recently made are not sufficiently great to encourage a vast increase in correspondence. I do not propose to refer to the speech delivered by the Postmaster-General in the House of Commons a few days ago. He considered in detail questions of losses and profits, but the fact is that the present policy of the 1½d. post and the arrangements made in connection with it are not satisfactory, and are not likely to bring about the result that we desire. The delay in announcing the reduction of postal charges has not allowed time for manufacturers and others to prepare their circulars and catalogues for the new season's business, and hence comparatively little progress has been made.

Now is the time to announce further reductions for autumn and New Year business. If an announcement were made immediately that Imperial penny postage, was to be adopted on the lines set out in my Question there would be an enormous increase of postal business before the end of this year, which would mean that our greatest commercial traveller, the Post Office—I have called it by that name before—would be doing a great work in reducing unemployment, setting business going with our Dominions, and, in addition, vastly improving our home trade and increasing the revenue. Whilst my Question deals chiefly with our own Empire, I must add that cheaper foreign postage is urgently needed, too. I should like to commend to His Majesty's Government the splendid, practical letter on penny postage from my noble friend Lord Blyth which appeared in The Times last Saturday. We have every reason to be most grateful to Lord Blyth for the great services he has rendered in regard to cheap postage.

In this connection, I should like to draw your Lordships' attention to a matter which is not without interest. Sixty years ago it was publicly recognised in this country that our national well-being is linked up with cheap postage and enduring friendship with France. In 1864 the first Albert medal of the Royal Society of Arts, which has since been annually presented to the most eminent citizen of any country, was awared to Sir Rowland Hill for his great services to arts, manufactures, and commerce in the creation of the penny postage, and for his other reforms in the postal system of this country, the benefits of which have extended over the civilised world. Those are the terms of the presentation. It is a singular thing that in the following year, 1865, the second Albert medal was awarded to Napoleon III for distinguished merit in promoting, in many ways, by his personal exertions, the international progress of arts, manufactures and commerce. … and his enlightened commercial policy. … in favour of British subjects. These are facts of outstanding importance at this juncture when we wish to continue our friendly relations and commercial intercourse with France.

Cheap postage is wanted, not only to improve trade and commerce, but to add to the domestic happiness and comfort of the many millions of our Empire's population, to whom the penny postage would be a God-send. No better instrument, in my opinion, for commercial and social success can be adopted than the penny postage and a system of frequent communications. If I may say so, I am very glad to see sitting opposite me the noble Duke, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, an ex-Governor-General of Canada, an ex-Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and the possessor of much experience of our Colonies. I was only thinking that if this matter could be pushed forward before the visit of the Dominion Premiers it would afford a very nice opportunity for the noble Duke to inform them that we propose at the earliest possible moment to adopt Imperial penny postage.

The trade of the country is suffering most seriously at the present moment, in my opinion, from the continual changes in the holder of the office of Postmaster-General. Postmasters-General generally begin their term of office without any particular knowledge of postal matters, more especially of postal charges and the great advantage to the country of cheap postage and postal facilities. Chambers of commerce and business men have had to set to work to educate these successive Postmasters-General, and we have always found them very willing to receive instruction, to hear our case, and to show great sympathy. Unfortunately, when one is on the point not only of becoming converted but of trying to persuade the Treasury and His Majesty's Government to carry out this reform, another Postmaster-General is introduced, and it seems to me that he starts with anything but a progressive attitude.

Since my noble friend Lord Illingworth was Postmaster-General, the office has been held by Mr. Kellaway, Mr. Neville Chamberlain, and Sir William Joynson-ILicks, and is held at present by my right honourable friend Sir Laming Worthington-Evans. I do not know that Mr. Kellaway began in a very progressive frame of mind, but before he left he had made some progress; he had done something and had promised a great deal more. When Mr. Neville Chamber-lain was appointed Postmaster-General it was felt to be a great advantage by the commercial world. It was said: "Here is a business man who knows all about it, "and in almost the first speech he made outside he expressed himself as in favour of a penny postage and promised to help it in every way. We thought that was a great move in favour of carrying out this wise policy. Then Sir William Joynson-Hicks came in as a thorough enthusiast who wanted to do everything, and was going to do everything. He has left behind him some slight improvements. He has been promoted and he may be useful to us because he occupies the important post of Financial Secretary to the Treasury. That is the office which in the past has generally put a little bit of a check on the wheel of progress in connection with this particular postal reform.

I was hoping that the noble Marquess, the Deputy Leader of the House, was going to reply to me, because I have every reason to be very grateful to him for a very sympathetic answer he gave me on a previous occasion, but I see that he is not in his place. What I want to impress upon His Majesty's Government is this. Having regard to the really strong feeling that exists in favour of this reduction of postage, I urge upon His Majesty's Government to have courage and not to be frightened by-some financial authorities among the permanent officials who assert that it-will result in a great financial loss to the country. It will do nothing of the sort. It is because you keep the postage at 1½d. and make the weight higher than is necessary that the present arrangement is not a success. You will find, if you adopt the policy I propose, that you will have an enormous increase in the quantity of postal matter, that the revenue will be higher and that the change will be a benefit to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The fact is that this dear postage, as I have pointed out before, is a great clog on the wheel of progress. There arc certain industries to which cheap postage; is no particular advantage, such as the iron, the coal, and the stool industries, and I have hoard it said by noble Lords and others before now that they wished the postage was half-a-crown instead of 1½d. That is not the sort of thing that I am pleading for in connection with the progress of industry. It is the manufacturers, both large and small, who produce articles for general use who want cheap postage as a means of increasing their trade. Cheap postage will be of very great advantage to the people in our Colonies, not only to those engaged in commerce but to the private citizens to some of whom a 1½d. post is expensive.

I have pointed out on previous occasions that the cause of the penny post is damaged by the people who are using halfpenny stamps and sending in open letters documents of a private and confidential character. They do it for the sake of economy. Rather than pay l½d., they put their private business papers into an open envelope, which they stamp with a halfpenny stamp. You would find that in such cases the adoption of a penny post would have a very large influence. I do not know who is going to reply to my Question, but I hope it will be a noble Lord who will have some sympathy with me and will not give me what I might call the usual cut and dried official answer. I hope he will say that although he is only able to give an official answer this afternoon, we may take it from him that he will use his best endeavours to persuade his colleagues to carry out this policy, which, I am certain, would be of great benefit to the country.

THE EARL OF LUCAN

My Lords, the noble Lord who asked the Question has almost put the answer into my mouth. Although I am afraid I cannot altogether meet his wishes on behalf of the Poet Office in every respect, still I hope he will find that the Post Office is not unsympathetic. This is not by any means the first occasion on which the noble Lord has introduced to this House the question of cheaper postage. I am sure that he has always done so in a most friendly way and because of his anxiety that the Government should not lose sight of a reform which he rates, and justly rates, so very highly and as so important-to the trade and commerce of the country. I am sure that nobody is better qualified than the noble Lord, with his knowledge and experience extending over so many years, to speak on behalf of the trade and commerce of the country. I can assure him that His Majesty's Government cordially share his views as to the desirability of re-establishng the penny post at the first possible moment, as soon as financial conditions will allow. They fully appreciate the importance of the Question which he has brought forward, which is in regard to the reduction of the inland postage from 1½d. to 1d. with a corresponding reduction of the weight to one oz. for inland letters and half an ounce for other parts of the Empire, and so on.

Now, finance of course comes into this question most of all. It has been estimated that the reduction of postage from 1½d, to 1d. would mean a net loss of £5,000,000, after allowing for any increase of traffic. The noble Lord laid great stress on the fact that a lower rate of postage would lead to what he described as an immense volume of postal communications, but he will perhaps have seen the speech of my right hon. friend Sir Laming Worthington - Evans, in another place last week, in which it was stated that the result of the reduction from 2d. to 1½d. in June, 3922, had been most disappointing in so far as leading to a great increase in postage is concerned. The net gain was only an increase of 4 per cent. in the number of letters, and therefore there was only an insignificant increase to set against the gross loss of revenue arising from the reduction. If there, were a further reduction from 1½d. to 1d. no doubt there would be an increase of business, and it would probably be more than 4 per cent., but it is quite clear that it would not in any way make good the loss of revenue which would result from such a reduction of the rate of postage.

There is one sentence in my noble friend's Question referring to the, "unsatisfactory result of increasing the weight of letter packets carried for the minimum charge of 1½d." I do not quite understand whence my noble friend gets that information, because his view is not shared by the Post Office. The increase from 1 oz. to 2 ozs. has only been in force about two months, and the Post Office see no reason to suppose that the results will be unsatisfactory. A very small amount is involved in any case, because a very large percentage of the letters are under 1 oz. in weight. I may point out to my noble friend that important concessions have been made by the Post Office this year as regards parcels post, heavier letters, and telephone charges, amounting in the aggregate to £2,500,000 a year.

The other point raised by my noble friend was that of Imperial penny postage. I must point out to him that even if we did reduce the rate from 1½d. to 1d. that would not result in Imperial penny postage, because most of the British Possessions have a considerably higher rate than 1d. The Australian rate is 2d., the Canadian 1½d., the Indian 1d., and the South African 2d. Therefore, my noble friend would hardly get Imperial penny postage if his proposal were adopted by the British Government. I hope that my noble friend will not insist upon the ½ oz. which he suggests in his Question. It is considered by the Post Office that it would not materially reduce the loss of revenue, and that the inconvenience would largely outweigh any saving thereby secured. The noble Lord and I are both old enough to remember when the ½ oz. weight was used many years ago. Then all our friends abroad who wrote to us used the horrible paper which was almost transparent, and through which the pen tore holes. If one wrote with a heavy pen the writing was almost illegible. I am afraid that the re-introduction of the ½ oz. weight for letters abroad would result in our going back to that experience.

I think I have dealt with all the points raised by my noble friend. In conclusion, I can only repeat the answer which I outlined at the beginning, that the Government, while entirely sympathising with his desire to re-establish penny-postage, consider that it is a reform which the present financial position does not warrant, entailing as it does so much sacrifice of revenue. The question will, however, be fully considered before the next financial year with reference to the estimated revenue and expenditure of the Post Office in 1924–25. It is too early at present to forecast whether the financial situation will justify a further sacrifice of revenue on so large a scale, but the noble Lord may be assured that the matter which he has so much at heart is having the fullest attention of His Majesty's Government.