the housing question 
33 
the pivotal Housing debate on List July, 1921, in the 
Commons :— 
“ The fact remains that we have now a permanent burden for 
60 years of ten millions a year on our taxes in order to provide 
these houses. ... I say we have incurred a commitment of 
£600,000.000 to provide these houses. . . ." 
Even so good a Coalitionist as Mr. Holmes—a 
Housing expert—could not swallow this. He inter 
rupted Sir Alfred Mond thus :— 
Mr. Holmes : " May I ask the Right Hon. Gentleman to clear 
up one point ? He said that it meant a sum of £600,000,000. 
I think his announcement was that 1 76,000 houses had been built 
at an average cost of £1,000 each. That comes to £176,000,000. 
How does the Right Hon. Gentleman arrive at a total of 
£600,000,000 ? " 
Sir A. Mond : “ There is a loss of £10,000,000 a year for 60 
years. It will not be quite £600,000,000. As the Hon. Member 
knows, some of these loans are of shorter date than others. I am 
not going into details, but roughly V may be estimated that 
you would spend £10,000,000 a year for 60 years. That is not 
Capital.” 
Let us apply Sir Alfred Mond’s curious reasoning 
to the cost of the war. About six thousand millions 
it cost and its annual interest is some three hundred 
millions a year. Suppose the debt is paid off in a 
hundred years— we shall be very fortunate if it 
jg he would no doubt tell us that the cost of the 
war worked out to thirty thousand million pounds. 
Is that the new arithmetic for which we are indebted 
to a Government of business men ? 
“ A permanent burden for 60 years of ten millions 
a vear.” When he tried to make the House of Com- 
c