§ 2.35 p.m.
THE EARL OF DUNDONALDMy Lords, 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, in view of the losses incurred by British Railways, reported as exceeding £100 million last year, they do not consider that the time has come for the free holiday travel facilities available to railway employees, their wives and families to be reviewed.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF POWER (LORD LINDGREN)My Lords, the British Railways Board keep these concessions under review, but changes in them could not have a significant effect on the deficit.
THE EARL OF DUNDONALDMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his reply. Is he aware that a railway employee, in addition to other concessionary travel, is allowed three free travel passes a year for his wife and family, one of which can be to anywhere in France, and that, assuming an employee lives somewhere in the middle of England, like Crewe, where many do, this concession may have a value of about £150 a year tax-free?
§ LORD LINDGRENYes, my Lords, and, as an old railwayman, I know that some of the directors of the old railway companies, some of whom are in this House, still have their gold passes to take them anywhere they like. So far as these concessions are concerned, they are taken into account when wages and salaries are 578 negotiated. Railway employees' travelling does not stop paying passengers from travelling, and so in fact they are extra passengers not taking up revenue-earning seats.
THE EARL OF DUNDONALDI thank the noble Lord for his further reply. I detected in his first Answer that this would not have much effect on the railway deficit. He has not disagreed with me about the figure of £150 a year tax-free. Would he not agree with me that, on the assumption that perhaps half the total railway employees in the country—that is approximately 175,000—take these concessions, they cost the railways and the taxpayers approximately £25 million a year?
§ LORD LINDGRENNo, it costs nothing because carrying extra persons on a train, when they are not taking up revenue-earning seats, costs the railways nothing. If these concessions were withdrawn, obviously there would have to be an addition to the wages and salaries. It is quite a common custom in all trade, industry and commerce for those associated with a particular concern to get some concessions in the field in which their organisation operates.
THE DUKE OF ATHOLLMy Lords, am I to understand that the Minister agrees that they get this concession tax-free?—because every other kind of employee has to pay tax on concessions of this type.
§ LORD LINDGRENSomeone who gets a concession in an industrial organisation, which is a reduction in the price, gets it tax-free.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, as one who takes a slightly different view from that of my noble friend Lord Dundonald, may I ask if the Minister is willing to consider whether or not it would be feasible, practicable and desirable for personnel of the London Underground, who come under London Transport, to have the advantage given to the staff of the British Railways with regard to these concession tickets?
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, there are what are called reciprocal arrangements, and that applies in other fields of life, too. I doubt whether the butcher and baker pay each other the full price.