At the outset of my reply, I think I should mention the fact that the expected revenue from the increased charges in the course of the current financial year will be approximately £594,000. A number of the charges are not being levied until later in the year. I think that sum, in the computation of a Budget of some £100,000,000, disposes of the idea, one way or another, that the charges proposed are crushing or burdensome, or that they could possibly affect any argument in regard to the Budget if they were to be described as taxes.
The first point I wish to make is that I object in the strongest possible way to the suggestion that the charges paid for the postal services should be described as taxes. The Department is supposed to be run, as far as possible, on a commercial basis. The charges are not compulsory except to those who wish to avail of them. They are not compulsory in the way that a tax on cigarettes or alcohol is, on something that is used almost universally by everyone. The postal services, as I have said, should be run on a commercial basis.
Secondly, before going on to make a general comment on the speeches which have been made, I should mention that increased charges were levied during the 1948-51 period on no less than four occasions. The total extra revenue derived from these three increases amounted to nearly £1,000,000 per year—in actual fact to £935,000. In July, 1948, the letter rate for letters above two ounces, the printed paper rate for printed papers, newspapers, samples and parcel rates were increased. There were also increased charges for other miscellaneous items. The total amount of income brought inwas estimated to be £300,000. In August, 1949, minor charges in the foreign postal rates were imposed. I need hardly mention these because the amount of revenue derived was almost negligible. In March, 1941, the rate for foreign air mails was increased, the estimated revenue being £145,000.
In April, 1951, the former Government wrote a letter to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs sanctioning increased charges in respect of parcel post, printed paper, money orders and postal order poundages, which were estimated to bring in £213,000, and increases in telephone charges which were estimated to bring in £275,000. Those charges were implemented some time, I think, in July, 1951, by myself. They were confirmed by the present Government, but sanction for them lay on the table of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in April, 1951.
Therefore, the total increased charges by the last Government amounted to £1,000,000 a year. I think myself that all of it was necessary and was done with the object of trying to prevent a deficit arising at a time when the costs of materials, wages and salaries were rising. It was done with the same object as in the present case. The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs had at that time—I wish to be quite frank and to accord him the compliment— the same general viewpoint, that the postal services should pay for themselves. When the costs rose, there naturally had to be increases in the charges levied on the users of those services, in the same way as in the services of other public utilities and for other goods generally.
I am very glad to say that, taken as a whole, the comment on the character of the services has been highly favourable. Deputies of all Parties have pointed to an improvement in the services, particularly in the telephone service, and there have been very few complaints. The comment on the increased charges has been largely unrealistic. It is quite fantastic that many Deputies in the Opposition came in here and condemned increases in charges and then proceeded to advocate higher salaries for the staffs and more elaborate services. A great manyof their recommendations would have involved still further expense and still further increases in charges.
The Post Office is manned by officers of the Civil Service who, from long experience, have the general attitude of businessmen in the conduct of Post Office operations. They have a general understanding of what charges can be borne by the community. In the past, their predictions in regard to anticipated increased revenues have been reasonably good. I am prepared to take the advice of these very able men, and I have made up my mind to subscribe to the general tradition that the Post Office should, as far as possible, come at least near to paying for itself. In some years, it has actually earned a surplus. I am prepared to take the officers' advice as to the method to be adopted in securing at least a balance.
Since 1922 there have been 14 years of surplus in regard to the three services. There have been 18 years in which there were deficits, but in the case of eight of the 18 years the deficits were under £200,000. If you subtract the first seven years of our native administration and assume that deficits in those years were due to taking over from the British Government, to the impact of the civil war and its after effect, one can say that, in general, the tradition has been that the Post Office should come near to paying for itself, and that it might earn a modest surplus in some years in order to make some compensation for losses in previous years.
Until these new charges were imposed, the Post Office had no rival I know of in this coutnry for the very moderate character of the charges for its services. Compared with 1939, the general postal rate had in the year 1952 increased by only a very small per cent. ; telephone charges were only 25 per cent. up; and a great many of the miscellaneous charges for other postal services were from 25 to 50 per cent. up. I do not know of any other public utility which has had the same record. I do not believe that the new charges will be crippling and, when they have been imposed, the increase in comparison with 1939 will be of thegeneral order of only 50 per cent. There are some exceptions to that. Certain charges, such as those for trunk calls, are not going up even the 50 per cent. over 1939. Some other charges may be slightly in excess of 50 per cent. over 1939. I know very few public utilities in this or any country, I know very few services of any kind, I know practically no goods, whose cost to-day is only 50 per cent. above 1939. It is a tribute to the Department and to the officers who conduct the services that even after these increases have been made there will still be great moderation in the charges levied.
I am very interested to know that, in all the comment there has been in the course of this debate, not one single Deputy has suggested that he has ever observed any notable over-staffing in my Department. I have heard many Deputies in the Opposition and on our own side speak on that point and I am particularly glad to have the testimony of Deputies of the Opposition, who were complaining of increased charges, to testify to the difficulties under which the staff worked and to hear them described as extraordinarily zealous and courteous officials. There has been no criticism that people were idle, pushing pens and doing nothing, or that there were people in the Department doing crossword puzzles.
