§ 2.58 p.m.
§ LORD ORR-EWINGMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will give an estimate of the overall sum paid out in earnings last year by private and public undertakings and how this compares with the total sum paid out in dividends.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, £29,775 million as wages and salaries and £1,804 million as dividends on preference and ordinary shares.
§ LORD ORR-EWINGMy Lords, do these figures mean that wages and salary increases after tax have some 20 times more influence on inflation than increases in dividends? Will this fact be borne in mind now that discussions are going on between the Government, the T.U.C. and the C.B.I, on an incomes policy?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, in the Byzantine phrase which the Treasury like to employ, comparative figures after tax are not readily available; but last year the ratio before tax of wages and salaries to dividends was 16.5. The ratio after tax would, of course, be some—
§ LORD ORR-EWINGTo one?
EARL JELLICOESixteen point five to one; yes. The ratio after tax would necessarily be somewhat higher. I do not think it would be right for me to be drawn into comment on the progress of the tripartite talks. They are due to resume next week. Progress was made last week. But I am afraid that noble Lords will find that I will not be tempted, however much they try, to comment on the substance of those talks.
§ LORD POPPLEWELLMy Lords, some of us may regard these types of Questions as very mischievous Questions. 1121 Would the noble Earl be able to say the number of people to whom the first amount, which represents earned income, is being paid, and the number of people to whom the second amount, which refers to unearned income, is being paid? Would he give the correct comparisons?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I think that I am being tempted into argument across the Floor of the House here, and that I would start being mischievous if I were to be tempted too far by noble Lords, either behind me or in front of me.
§ LORD TAYLOR OF MANSFIELDMy Lords, can the noble Earl state in figures the number affected as in receipt of wages and the number affected as in receipt of dividends?
EARL JELLICOENot without notice, my Lords; but if the noble Lords asks me a Question I shall certainly do my best to find the information.
§ BARONESS GAITSKELLMy Lords, though I would not describe the Question as mischievous, it is simplistic and can have no relation to the facts. We may as well look at the Stock Market, and what do we deduce from that? We deduce something quite different from what the noble Lord, Lord Orr-Ewing, means.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I am not proposing to make any deductions, mischievous or simplistic as the case may be, because I think we should be starting a debate if I tried to do so.
§ LORD WIGGMy Lords, the noble Earl, as a fair-minded man, will I am sure not make any deductions; but there are plenty of people, I am sure he would agree, who are less fair minded than he is, and perhaps even the questioner. Will the noble Earl agree that, if you were to make a comparison between earnings and dividends, surely you must take into account the vast amount that derives from the possessing classes in this country through mergers, bonus issues and unearned profits of all kinds?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, if we start taking all the factors into account I think we should be here until midnight.