SIR ERIC GEDDES.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 17431, 17 April 1922, Page 5

SIR ERIC GEDDES.

COMMTTIEE*S WORK COMPLETE. SXXCKJESTED ECONOMIES. (raoH OUBOWK OOEBESPONDENT.) LONDON, February 28. There was an interesting ceremony at the Treasury when Sir Eric Geddes, chairman of the Economy Committee, handed over the completed and unanimous report to Sir Robert Home, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and then he retired from public life, the House of Commons thereby losing one of its vivid personalities. The "five men of goodwill" who constituted the committee, which began work last July, were Sir E. Geddes, Sir Joseph Maclay, Lord Inchcape, Lord Farringdon, and Sir uuy Granet. The ; value of the servioes of these men of weight in business circles, with. their important financial interests, can scarcely be estimated on a cash basis^ — their reward should be the gratitude of the public. The total savings which they have recommended amount to £86,774,000,- or-with the £75,000,000 economies which the departments are supposed to be making of their own accord—to a total reduction of £161,774,000 for the coming year.'' It is noted that these savings fall considerably short of the "cut of at least £200,000,000 in Government expenditure," which the business men of the country late'y warned tno Cabinet was necessary to secure any revival in trade.

Cut the Housing Loss. . The main line taken by the committee is that the country* must deny ■ itself expenditure even on laudable objects until a balance between outlays and the revenue-producing capacity of the . community has ,"been established. .The report demonstrates that official emoluments have been. increased on a scale out of all proportion to the rise in the cost of living and to the improvement of the general condition of tile population. The lighting forces are paid more highly in proportion than the Civil Service, the difference in favour' of" the former in some grades being as much as 50 per cent. \ An illustration of the way in which cutting a loss may lead directly to employment is furnished by the recommendation that all houses built under the Government housing_ scheme •should be sold immediately. The burden on the taxpayer is about £10,000,000 per annum for the next 60 years; were the houses sold at*, hair their cost v the annual saving would be about £2l 10s per house, equal to about £3,600,000 per annum. Possibly the houses might not sell for as much as half the .cost, but against that possibility the estimated would be enlarged by the saving of the cost of future repairs, empties and noncollection of rent. A potent reason for immediate action .is that as long as these houses are in the hands # of the Government or of. local authorities the speculative builder, who is an asset to the'community though he is not popular, will-not'build.' Clear them o ff the market and speculative builders will, fctiow where they stand;. they will develop building sites and employ a great number of workmen. Brick, cement and a dozen other trades would feel the benefit. Thus a big saving to the taxpayer: would be coupled with a large reduction in; unemployment. TlTe latest section of the report reviews many of the minor departments. Under the head of Colonial and Middle Sast Services, the committee deals with the Colonial Office Estimates. The .provisional estimates submitted of the cost of these "services in 1922-23 amount to .£1G,128;532, as.compared with an expenditure of £&1,364. in 1913-14, and i5»,168,131 iff-1921-22; As- regards overseas settlement, £750,000 niay be rfeqmredin the coming year, and the Treasury'are disposed to think thfct £500,000 should be., sufficient to fulfil the obb'gations of the Government under the scheme. , ' Empire settlement proposals had been laid by the Colonial Secretary involving a further 1 expenditure amounting in 1922-23 to £1,245,000 for initiating a general measure of Empire settlement. The scheme agreed in 1921 was, roughly, to be financed as to 50 per cent, by this country and 50 per cent, by the Dominions. The only sum so far voted is £160,000 by Australia, ■which is the measure of «ny immediate Exchequer liability. The staff'of the Department was 211 ori August (Ist, 1914 j on April Ist, 1922, 413. The increase is accounted for by the greater volume of work due to ,'taking over the former German ; cblonie3 and the development of the colonies and Protectorates, particularly •in East; Africa; and, says the committee, , "we are unable to criticise it." The committee are of opinion that the net estimate of the Colonial Office should be fixed at £678,866, instead of £928,866 under the revised estimate, bsing\a'n increase of £306,102 under file provisional estimate.

Post Office Economies. Conclusions of the committee with reference to the Post Office are:— Eegular and systematic check of traffic and staff should be instituted for the postal services. Cost of indoor labour can be reduced fo *the extent of £150,000, and outdoor labour to the extent of £200,000. Uost of the telegraph and telephone staffs can be reduced by £40,000. - Standard of uniform should be lowered, as recommended in the case of other uniform services. The provisional estimate of £59,375,376 should be reduced to asavingof £2,475,231 in 1922-23, which is £47i,000 less than the revised estimates submitted.

"In the present financial condition of the country/' the committee state, "we dp hot think:it.is unreasonable that a great monopoly like the postal, telegraph, and telephone services should yield some return to the Exchequer in re*spect of the capital invested. It may be that in certain cases additional net revenue-could be derived from a reiSuctiou in charges, and to such reduction no exception can Be taken." No More Public Life. • y ■ Sir E. Geddes -has now said goodBye to public life, and he has gone abroad for an indefinite period. He is retiring into privacy, and he jocularly,confessed: "I shall be glad to get away. from all newspaper fuss. Newspapers, have" driven me out of public life. I went into Parliament in order to qualify myself as First "Lord of the Admiralty;, arid then I stayed on at the request of the Prime Minister and Mr Bonar Law.. I never meant to take up.politics, and now I have finished my public work so far as I see it. There :s nothing, however, in public life I regret so much as parting from my ' colleagues and from the Prime Minister; from whom I have always had the greatest kindness and for whom I have a great affection; On the cojnhad; ajvery,-yery hard job, for it has been absolutely unremitting toflr-a working against time. "We never thought it would take so long, and, we thought we should have finished by the end of the year. Our wprlc has,been,accomplished, 6f course, on,the broadest lines, lor necessarily in, ■the time it could not be absolutely exhaustive." . ■^ e '■*&?&& Standard'-' comments: indeed, had a remarkable career. An absolutely dynamic vitality has always' .characterised him. In business speed and : grasp he is amazing. Yet through

it all his temperament is absolutely schoolboyish. Ho has a genius for friendships, and his honesty and sincerity are always beyond a, doubt, pir Eric's committee has found its chief critic in the Admiralty; but it is a remarkable coincidence that, when Sll- - was First Lord of the Admiralty during'the war. Lord Beatty was almost vehement in his protests when. Sir Eric was changed to another position. I believe, as a matter of fact, Lord Beatty actually wrote to the King and the Duke of Connaught asking that air Eric should be retained as First Lord, urging his efficiency. A Morsel of Secret History. "I can tell you a. piece of secret history concerning Sir Eric's first position as Deputy-Director-General of Munitions in 1915. A crisis arose of which the nation has heard nothing. Huge preparations were made for augmenting the supply of shells. The shells were supplied, and then it was found someone had blundered in not making adequate arrangements for filling the shells.. There were serious things in the balance owing to the predicament into which we were flung. Strenuously Sir Eric laboured, overhauled the delay, and achieved woi'k of which .he is proud. Curiously enough, it is Sir Frederick Banbury's somewhat bitter remark concerning the 'Grandiose Transport Ministry' which seems to have stuck unjustly in-the public mind. From beginning to end the Transport Ministry onlv cost half a million. iNo doubt Sir Frederick himself knows how many times that sum multiplied was saved to the nation bybir Eric's knowledge of railways.