asked the Minister of Food what was the consumption of flour per head of the civilian population in 1950; and how does this compare with 1938 and 1945.

The provisional estimate is 205 1b. per head as compared with 194 lb. before the war and 241 lb. in 1945.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the growing volume of complaints by local authorities about the wilful waste of flour and the increasing amount of bread that is being put into dustbins? Should not some appeal be made for economy in this respect?

The figures I have given do not seem to support that suggestion.

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that the present allocation of sugar to manufacturers only allows for the production of one 2-lb. tin of golden syrup or treacle per head of the population every seven months; and, in view of the demand for this food, if he will state when the 10 per cent. cut in sugar to manufacturers, made in January, 1950, is likely to be restored.

The production of golden syrup and treacle is nearly twice what it was in 1939. When the domestic ration was put up last January we should have liked to restore the small cut made in 1950, but we thought that housewives would rather have the sugar.

Is my hon. Friend aware that at this time of rising prices, 1-lb. of strawberry jam costs the same as 2-lb. of syrup? Is this not a good reason why the allocation should be increased as soon as possible?

asked the Minister of Food on how many occasions his food enforcement officers in Shrewsbury have, since 1945, taken action which, if taken by police officers, would require the production of a warrant.

I regret that this information is not available.

Will the hon. Gentleman not reconsider this matter and try to get this information, in view of the fact that these gentlemen possess powers which are not possessed by the police, who are compelled to keep a very careful record of this sort of infringement of civil liberties?

To provide such information would be quite beyond our capacity. It would mean taking on more staff.

asked the Minister of Food why some additional proportion of the present abundant milk supplies are not being used to maintain the cheese ration at three ounces a week.

The recent bad weather has caused a sharp fall in milk production and the balance available for manufacture has been 40 per cent. less in the first three months of this year than in the same period of 1950. Apart from essential production of milk powder for baby food, and some condensed milk for the Services, cheese is already given priority and milk is being diverted for its manufacture.

Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that there has, in fact, been plenty of milk for ordinary consumption in the last few months, and in view of this can he not divert some of it to maintain the cheese ration at what was, a couple of days ago, its legal level?

I have already explained that we are giving priority to cheese production, but that milk production this year has been 40 per cent. less than last year.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that in a few days' time he will be depleting the milk supplies still further by allowing, in response to clamour from the Opposition, the sale of cream at 6s. a pint? Why is my hon. Friend still pursuing this policy with regard to cream?

Does the Minister think that recent political developments have cleared the weather at all?

asked the Minister of Food on what grounds he asked cheese mongers to ignore the annulment by this House of the Statutory Instrument reducing the ration of cheese from three ounces to two.

My right hon. Friend made no such request to cheesemongers.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman on 11th April express, in the House, the hope that traders would act responsibly and maintain the ration at two ounces? Was that not flouting the will of the House, and before he did that would it not have been better for the right hon. Gentleman to have come to the House and told us what he proposed to do?

asked the Minister of Food in what form he gave guidance on 10th April, 1951, to trade organisations on the subject of the then cheese ration; whether in so doing he made it clear that they were free to sell three ounces of cheese per ration book; and whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT any documents or correspondence issued by him on this subject.

The statement which was issued with my right hon. Friend's approval on 10th April, 1951, was as follows:

Was not that statement calculated to induce in the minds of traders the wholly fallacious belief that they were not free to provide three ounces of cheese on the ration, and can the hon. Gentleman say whether it had that intention?

The statement was calculated to explain the position as fully as we were able to do so at that time.

asked the Minister of Food on what grounds he was unable to inform traders on 11th April, 1951, that they were free to sell three ounces of cheese per ration book.

On grounds of law and public interest. The Order fixing a two-ounce ration was no longer enforceable by proceedings, but that Order was not revoked by His Majesty in Council until the following day. In view of the fact that the supplies available would not sustain a ration greater than two ounces, to invite traders to sell a three-ounce ration would have shown disregard for the public interest.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say how he reconciles that statement with the assurance given by the Foreign Secretary that the Government accepted the decision of the House on this issue?

Answer.

In view of the importance of the statement of the Foreign Secretary on that occasion, will the Parliamentary Secretary reply to that question?

I understood the Foreign Secretary to say that he accepted the decision of the House, which, in fact, he did.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the attitude taken by shopkeepers on this matter shows considerably greater wisdom than that taken up by the Opposition?

Is the Parliamentary Secretary contending that it is consistent with an assurance that the decision of the House had been accepted to seek to prevent traders implementing that decision?

asked the Minister of Food when he will open negotiations with the New Zealand Dairy Produce Marketing Commission in order to regain for the United Kingdom the largest possible proportion of the New Zealand export of cheese.

Negotiations with the New Zealand Dairy Products Marketing Commission about butter and cheese from the 1951–52 production season will take place in June. The proportion of cheese to be exported to the United Kingdom is one of the matters to be discussed.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us how the mind of the Minister is working on this matter? From what I gather he told us a fortnight ago we were getting the whole of the exportable surplus, but last week he said it was 90 to 97 per cent. What is the target to be when he starts discussions? Are we to get the whole of the exportable surplus, or not?

We shall endeavour to get as much dairy produce as possible.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the size of the exportable surplus very much depends on the price he offers?

asked the Minister of Food how much milk has been made into cheese since 1st January compared with the same period in 1950.

Thirty million gallons of milk were made into cheese for the ration from 1st January to 7th April this year compared with 38¾ million gallons, in the same period in 1950.

In view of the decline in home cheese making, would it not be wise to postpone the freeing of cream sales for a month or two, even if it does disappoint some visitors to the Festival?

As the hon. Member will know, we have postponed the production of cream.

By one week.

asked the Minister of Food what quantity of Eire's exportable surplus of eggs his Department proposes to take in 1951.

My Department has undertaken to buy the whole of the Irish Republic's exportable surplus of eggs for the year February, 1951, to January, 1952, but has agreed that in the five months, February to June, 1951, the Irish Republican Government, if it so desires, may sell up to 25 per cent. of the exportable surplus to other markets. So far, only trivial quantities have been sold to other markets and my Department has bought practically all the available supplies.

Has the hon. Gentleman ensured that his Department will take the 1,250,000 cases of fresh eggs this spring that they undertook to take from Eire?

As I have already stated, we have undertaken to buy the whole exportable surplus.

Could my hon. Friend say what price we are paying for these eggs?

rose——

Surely I am entitled to an answer?

The Question on the Order Paper is about quantity and if my hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge and Airdrie (Mrs. Mann) wishes to inquire about price she should put down a Question.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind, and take full note of, the encouragement afforded him by the pressure now being exerted on him from hon. Members opposite to increase his commitments to bulk purchase?

Can the hon. Gentleman tell the House what is to become of Mr. James Dillon's threat to drench us with Irish eggs?

asked the Minister of Food on what date in 1950 he permitted the free sale of eggs; and how many eggs had been supplied on each ration book from 1st January, 1950, to that date.

On 19th March. The average number of eggs per ration book from 1st January to 19th March, 1950, was 30.

asked the Minister of Food why he has failed to purchase large quantities of shell eggs offered respectively by Canada and Eire during the 12 months ended 31st March, 1951.

No offer of eggs from Canada was made to my Department in the 12 months ended 31st March, 1951. If such an offer had been made it is very doubtful whether we could have afforded the necessary dollars to take advantage of it. The purchase of eggs from the Irish Republic was the subject of an agreement covering the contract year 1st February, 1950, to 31st January, 1951. Under the agreement my Department undertook to purchase the whole of the Republic's exportable surplus of eggs. With regard to the arrangements from 1st February, 1951, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. and gallant Member for Gillingham (Squadron Leader Burden) today.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary now tell the House why the intake of shell eggs from Ireland has been steadily decreasing in the last three years—since 1948—and what prospects there are for the immediate future?

The recent reduction has, as the hon. Gentleman knows, been due to the weather.

asked the Minister of Food the quantity of shell eggs respectively of home produced and imported origins distributed in the United Kingdom during the year ended 31st March, 1951; the total subsidy paid; and the amount of such subsidy per shell egg.

The quantity distributed by, or on behalf of, the Ministry of Food in the United Kingdom in the year ended 31st March, 1951, was 4,698 million home produced and 1,782 million imported. The total amount of subsidy was £29,739,000 which works out at approximately 1.1d. per egg.

Is it not a fact that the hens which laid these subsidised eggs during the last 12 months are now being slaughtered in their hundreds of thousands to provide table poultry in view of the shortage of meat? Will there not thus be a Ministerially promoted egg famine immediately this flush period is over?

No. That does not appear to be the fact.

asked the Minister of Food what profit his Department made on frozen pork imported from France in 1950.

None, Sir.

asked the Minister of Food (1) what percentage of the carcase meat consumed in Great Britain during the latest period of 12 months for which figures are available, was supplied to canteens; and what percentage of the population are estimated to have consumed that allocation of carcase meat;

Of the total quantity of ration quality carcase meat consumed during 1950 it is estimated that 3.9 per cent. was supplied to industrial canteens, 3.6 per cent. to school canteens, and 4.4 per cent. to hotels, restaurants and clubs. I am afraid it is not possible to make the estimate asked for in the second part of the Questions.

If it is not possible to make that estimate, how can the hon. Gentleman and his Department possibly tell whether or not canteens, hotels and restaurants are getting more or less than their fair share and whether or not the men who produce the meat—the agricultural workers—could get some more instead?

We could estimate the number of main meals supplied in these establishments but it is impossible to estimate precisely the number of people who enjoy these facilities.

asked the Minister of Food what are the comparative quantities of meat available to a child, including the benefit of school meals, and to a diabetic, respectively.

Five school meals plus the present domestic ration would provide a child of five years or over with 23 pennyworth of meat a week. Diabetics get three rations at present amounting to 2s. 6d. a week.

Will the Minister reconsider the question of this very small ration for diabetics, bearing in mind the extremely small number of people concerned and the greatest possible need of their having more meat?

In these matters we act on the advice given to us by our medical advisers.

asked the Minister of Food if, in forecasting a rise in the weekly meat ration to 1s. 8d. in August, he took into consideration the desirability of reserving in cold store for use late in the winter some of the peak production of beef and lamb fattened during the summer grazing season.

For technical reasons it would not be practicable for us to do this on a scale which would make any worthwhile addition to our reserves.

Is there not the technical possibility of keeping back some home-killed meat in cold store, averaging out the supplies so that we do not run into another 8d. meat ration next winter?

We have looked into this matter carefully. Our cold storage capacity is not designed to freeze meat, and to provide two or three thousand tons of meat a week a cold storage capacity of 65,000 tons would be necessary.

How was the right hon. Gentleman able to make his forecast for August when he told the House last week that he never knew how much home-killed meat would be available until nine days before the week in which it was to be issued?

Is it not absurd to have a glut of meat from our home pastures in the middle of a meat famine? Will the hon. Gentleman not reconsider the matter of cold storage?

The main problem is not so much conserving our home killed supplies but of seeing that they are as widely spread as possible so that we can use cold storage space to store the imported meat.

asked the Minister of Food why he has not imported camel meat which is available in the Near and Middle East, to supplement the whale, reindeer and beaver meats now being imported to vary the meat ration.

None of these meats is included in the meat ration, and the hon. and learned Member must rely upon private traders to satisfy his tastes.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that if the Socialist Government have the hump camel meat makes an excellent diet?

asked the Minister of Food how many tins of Russian salmon have been delivered to Tyneside; and what was the average period they had been in stock.

About 313,000 tins were released for the North-Eastern area last month. They had been in stock for an average of about 24 months.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some of the Russian salmon has been in stock for 11 years? What compensation is being offered to the stores who have been sent these tins?

I am not so aware. I am dealing with the tins to which the hon. Lady referred and it was usual in the trade to store such tins of salmon for many years.

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that the recently announced differentiation of price as between shorn and unshorn sheep sent to collecting centres has caused confusion in Scotland and has affected marketing of fat sheep adversely; if he will state what is meant by shearlings; and whether hoggs, last year's lambs, are denied the extra 3d. premium if still unshorn.

I regret that, owing to a misunderstanding, the allowances for higher wool prices for certain classes of sheep in wool was not at first extended to lambs. I am glad to say that after further talks with the Agriculture Departments and the National Farmers' Unions, it has been decided that during the period of differential prices for shorn and unshorn animals an additional payment of 3d. per lb. estimated dressed carcase weight is to be made this year for all sheep and lambs in wool, including last year's lambs but not sucking lambs. Shearlings are animals which have been shorn once.

Will the hon. Gentleman see that proper publicity is given to that statement, as up to last week there was much confusion about the definition?

If there be confusion, we will do our best to see that the position is widely known.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the description of a shearling as being an animal which has been shorn once is not quite correct, because frequently lambs are shorn in the summer but are sold as lambs?

In our recent discussions we were advised by the National Farmers' Unions to retain the word, "shearlings."

Will the hon. Gentleman make clear that payments go back to 2nd April?

asked the Minister of Food whether, in view of the need for effecting a reduction in the cost of living, he will instruct his Department not to withdraw hides from public auction on the grounds that the prices bid are too low.

During the past four weeks the average price of hides sold at Ministry of Food auction sales has fallen by over 25 per cent. and considerably reduced prices have, therefore, been accepted. Prices offered at two recent auction sales, according to the best advice available, were not considered to reflect the current price levels and certain lots were withdrawn in accordance with the published conditions of sale.

When considering this matter will the Minister bear in mind that in the past 10 months, since hides became a Government monopoly, the Government have made a profit of £6 million out of the sales of hides, which has been reflected in the increasing cost of leather and boots and shoes? Is it not the business of the Government to get prices down and not to maintain them?

Even if it is true that hides have come down in price by 25 per cent. in the last month, is it not also true that the price went up from 19d. to 49d. in 10 months, during which the Government had a full monopoly? Is it not an abuse of monopolistic powers to refuse all supplies to the market?

The Government, like anyone else, have to look at the price level, and if it appears that there are buyers' rings which are bringing down prices below reasonable levels they must act in the same way as private traders would act.

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter again at he first opportunity.

asked the Minister of Food how much margarine and cooking fats have been exported to Tanganyika from the United Kingdom during the last 12 months.

In the year ended 28th February, 1951, the latest period for which details are available, three hundredweights of margarine, 21 hundredweights of cooking fat and one hundredweight of lard were exported to Tanganyika.

asked the Minister of Food how far margarine production will be reduced as a result of the shortage of sulphur.

My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade—[HON. MEMBERS: "Who is he?"]—informs me that if there is no serious worsening of the sulphur position, it should be possible to maintain supplies to edible oil refiners at their present level. We do not at present contemplate that any cut in margarine production will be necessary.

Has my hon. Friend seen recent Press reports, which suggested that margarine production would be reduced as a result of the shortage of sulphur; and does he not think that his reply will cause consternation in the Tory ranks because there will be one thing less for them to exploit?

I cannot take any responsibility for Press speculations.

asked the Minister of Food what restrictions he has put on firms in Leicester to prevent them from purchasing canned soups or other foods from Australia.

There are no restrictions on private firms purchasing from Australia canned soups or the majority of other processed foodstuffs; in fact, many processed foods, including canned soups, vegetables and jams, have been on open general licence since October, 1949. If the hon. Member can give me further details of any difficulties experienced by firms in Leicester, I shall be glad to look into the matter.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the managing director of a chain of shops in Leicester declared that he was not able to make purchases in Australia, and will he see that that statement, which was made as recently as 30th March, is refuted by him?

I have seen the report in question. No British purchasing mission has been to Australia recently nor has my Department purchased, for some years, any of the commodities specified in the article.

How many times have import licences been refused for imports by private traders which were in competition with bulk purchase imports? Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the proposed import referred to in the question was refused by us and eventually went to Palestine?

Is it not true that to import even under an open general licence a permit has to be obtained from the Treasury for the necessary funds, and that the stop is operated through the Treasury? Will the Parliamentary Secretary have this case investigated, as the statement was made in a debate broadcast by the B.B.C., and give the House the facts?

I have had this statement investigated and it appears to be unfounded.

asked the Minister of Food how much sugar has been produced in the sugar beet campaign which has recently ended.

Production from the 1950–51 campaign amounted to 374,000 tons refined and 330,000 tons of raw sugar—equivalent, in all, to 677,000 tons of refined sugar.

Can my hon. Friend say how these figures compare with the previous year?

Yes, Sir, they constitute a record.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary estimate how much sugar was lost through delay in processing, because not enough factories were available to take the crop this year?

I can assure the House that very little was lost. The Corporation and all the employees did a grand job.

In view of the magnificent production record of the British Sugar Corporation in this matter, will the hon. Gentleman resist any future temptation to meddle in the industry by nationalisation?

asked the Minister of Food whether he will provide an extra tea ration to chronic invalids.

On these matters my right hon. Friend takes the advice of the Food Rationing (Special Diets) Advisory Committee of the Medical Research Council, who are of the opinion that there is no medical condition requiring extra rations of tea for its treatment.

Is the hon. Member aware that I have not based this Question on medical condition, but on the fact that a cup of tea is one of the few pleasures which this type of person can get? It would not mean much tea. Would he not reconsider the whole question?

In these matters I think we should accept the advice of those best able to advise us.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept the advice of his own Minister and remember that "A little of what you fancy does you good"?

asked the Minister of Food why, on 10th April, 1951, 117 lambs entered by Mr. Wood, Nawton, were not allowed to be graded at the Kirby Moorside Grading Centre on the ground that they had arrived 20 minutes late.

The latest time for the acceptance of stock grading at this centre is 1.0 p.m. On the day in question the grading of the sheep of all other producers at this centre was completed by 12 noon, but the grading panel stood by until 1.0 p.m. when they closed their grading lists. As Mr. Wood's sheep did not arrive until 1.20 p.m., too late for grading that day, they had to be refused, but exceptional arrangements were made by the Ministry's area officer, who was in the market, for these sheep to be accepted the following day at Pickering.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that producers are not given notice of these times, which are the responsibility of a ministerial whim, and that the decision of the area officer meant that these sheep had to be walked some 15 miles? Will he see that the rules are interpreted more reasonably so that animals do not suffer unnecessarily by being taken long distances?

It would appear, from the fact that other sheep were tendered before 12 noon, that the notice was well known, but I will look into the matter.