§ 2.36 p.m.
§ LORD WILLIAMS OF BARNBURGHMy Lord, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will state the size of the National Debt on the date of the outbreak of war in 1939, on the cessation of war in 1945. on the date of the Budget in 1951 and on the date of the Budget in 1964; and the cost of servicing the debt at each of the dates mentioned.]
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT BLAKENHAM)My Lords, the figures in this Answer are for the National Debt at 31st March in each year. Figures for the precise dates in the noble Lord's Question are not available.
810 In 1939 the National Debt was £7,130 million, and it cost £229 million to service. In 1945 the Debt was £21,366 million, which cost £475 million to service. In 1951 the Debt was £25,922 million, and it cost £561 million to service: and in 1964 (these are provisional figures) the Debt was £30,224 million. The servicing cost is estimated at £1,085 million. These figures are gross figures; the Debt total for 1964 includes about £10,000 million borrowed for advances to the nationalised industries and other public bodies, on which the Exchequer receives £425 million in interest, reducing the Debt servicing cost to £660 million.
§ LORD WILLIAMS OF BARNBURGHMy Lords, may we have an assurance from the noble Lord that the Prime Minister will be warned against making the mistake during his electioneering campaign of blaming the Leader of the Opposition in another place for this increase in the National Debt?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMWell, my Lords, I am sure my right honourable friend the Prime Minister is well able to depict the facts as they are and not enlarge them in the way the noble Lord suggests.
§ LORD WILLIAMS OF BARNBURGHBut is it not true that he has a lot of most doubtful advisers round him?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, speaking as one who is somewhat prejudiced, I would not agree with the noble Lord. I think it is important to point out that advances to nationalised industries are some £8,500 million more than they were in 1951, and this accounts for quite a large portion of the large increase in the cost of servicing which is necessary.
§ LORD WILLIAMS OF BARNBURGHBut the noble Viscount will be aware that the Government's policy, which has been their policy for a very long time indeed, seems to be based on the belief that it is good, statesmanlike financing to pay off some of their debts by borrowing at a higher rate of interest.
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, I have too high an affection for the noble Lord to start a great argument on this subject. Perhaps he might like to debate it, but I should not like to agree with what he has said.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, would not the Leader of the Conservative Party Headquarters in the country agree that this financial record of the Government would only go to show that if there is anybody who is dangerous it is not the Socialists but the present Government, whose thirteen years' record of finance makes it most dangerous to let them be the Government again?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, all I would say about the record of this Government is that production has never been higher, and our national economy is far stronger than it has ever been. And long may it continue to be so!
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, is it not a fact that we handed over to the Government a Budget of just over £4,000 million in 1951, and that the Budget this year is £7,000 million, with only half the defence forces that we handed over?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, I can tell the noble Earl what he knows perfectly well, that the Labour Government handed over a financial crisis to the present Government in 1951, which it has taken us a long time to get out of.
§ BARONESS HORSBRUGHMy Lords, would the noble Viscount agree that some of the Budget is taken up in paying these higher pensions for widows?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, that is quite true.
§ THE EARL OF SANDWICHMy Lords, can my noble friend ascribe any reason for the fact that the Labour Party shows the most violent reactionary views on high finance? Is it not the case that the only burden to the nation in the National Debt is the cost of the salaries to those who administer it?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMMy Lords, I should tell my noble friend that I always prefer the Labour Party to make explanations of that sort for itself.
§ LORD STONHAMMy Lords, would not the £1,000 million servicing of the National Debt, which I understood to be the current charge, also be a charge on the taxpayer?
§ VISCOUNT BLAKENHAMThis is part of our general burden.