THE BLOT ON THE BUDGET.
[To THE EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR."]
would like the courtesy of a brief reply to the recent letter entitled " The Blot on the Budget." Your correspondent criticizes the present cost of the Civil Service and alludes to " the extravagant and burdensome estimate of £317,000,000." May I point out that this outlay is nearly entirely explained by post-War services, which did not exist before the War? X90,000,000 goes to the Ministry of Pensions; education costs very materially more than it did in 1914.; the Ministry of Labour naturally requires a bigger staff to deal with unemploy- ment; and we are still clearing up many of the War agree- ments, which are a temporary liability and not a permanency. There have been very drastic curtailments in the Estimates for this year, and economies are still being made. If the sug- gestion of your correspondent were carried out, I am afraid that the machinery of Government would be so much hampered that the public outcry would be irresistible.—I am, Sir, &c., CHARLES WATNEY.
Parliament Mansions, Victoria Street, London, S.W. 1.
[We think Mr. Watney would hear a vast and audible sigh of relief instead of an outcry.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
