THE COST OF BUILDING [To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.]
SIR,—The statement has appeared in your paper, and still- more widely in other organs of the Press, that the cost of building is low, that materials have fallen greatly in price, and that now is the time to build. I am sorry to say that these statements are an entire delusion ; most materials have only fallen fractionally, and labour still remains at more than double the pre-War figures. Any builder will tell you that the cost is still from fifty-five to seventy per cent. above pre- War. In this neighbourhood bricks were 30s. or 32s. per thousand pre-War, now 52s. 6d., four by two timber is. 4d., now 2s. 4d., cement 27s. 6d., now 47s. ; and a bricklayer or carpenter before the War was paid 8d. or 8id. per hour, now Is. 5d. or ls. 54d.
I have made it my hobby in latter years to improve a Small country property, and I know that cottages which I could build before the War for £250 and £300 now cost £450 and ZOO. No thoughtful person imagines that these labour costs will continue for all time ; the building trades unions, encouraged by the foolish propaganda of the politicians for a higher standard of living, and aided by a system of subsidies which was merely a camouflage of their demands, blackmailed the nation for enormous wages, with the result that the tax- payer is loaded with a huge addition to his income tax to meet the expenditure, and private builders have had to write off a considerable proportion of their outlay, as unrepresented by any lasting assets._ The mechanics whom _I have employed, albeit excellent men, have carried home, even this last summer, from £3 10s. to £4 a week. If I were a young man, I would not think of building anything which could wait, till prices are more reasonable.—I am, Sir, &c., H. G. LYS. Bournemouth.
Previous page
