asked the Minister of Food his latest estimate of the non-take-up of the bacon ration; and to what extent this surplus has enabled him to increase the ration from 4 oz. to 5 oz. as from 22nd February.

About 90 per cent. of the bacon ration was taken up by retailers during the eight weeks ending on 24th January. The resulting stock improvement was one factor, but a minor one, in helping us to restore the 5 oz. ration.

According to that, then, it would appear that the 10 per cent. Non-take-up of bacon is one of the reasons for the increase in the ration of from 4 oz. to 5 oz.? Can we assume that if the price goes up again as a result of the next Budget, so that more people cannot afford it, eventually the Minister will be able to de-ration bacon altogther?

As a matter of fact the bringing down of the bacon ration to 4 oz. was deemed necessary a considerable time ago, largely due to the question of supplies, from overseas especially.

In view of the fact that a considerable number of people do not take up the full bacon ration, especially those with large families, and the grocers pass that amount on to other people, how can the Minister tell how many are really taking up their full legal ration?

The system I use to check this is the system which has been used by my predecessors also for many years. We have also, as I have explained to the House before, the National Survey, the only organised system there is. The fact of the matter is that the take-up throughout the year of the bacon ration varies very considerably from week to week, but the fact remains that the consumption of bacon as a whole is in excess of last year's.

asked the Minister of Food what stocks of gammon bacon, per person per week, he expects to be available for sale off the ration; and how far he anticipates being able to maintain off-the-ration sales for the next six months.

About 1 oz. per week; and I hope to be able to continue at this rate for the next six months.

Should I be right in assuming that the Minister does not expect people who buy bacon off the ration to buy more than 1 oz. per week, because they will not get very far with that? May I ask him if I heard him correctly in answer to the previous Question, and that he said 90 per cent. of the ration was issued to the retailers? Does he not understand that we are concerned with the take-up by the customers, not with the amount issued to the retailers?

I explained in answer to the previous Question that the 90 per cent. figure is just for one period. If the hon. Lady will look back over the whole year, she will find that the average last year was nearer 96 per cent., because the amount varied from 99 per cent. down to 90 per cent. As I have said before, it is far more satisfactory to have 90 per cent. of a 5 oz. ration taken up than 100 per cent. at 2 oz.

asked the Minister of Food what increases in price for sweets and chocolate took place between November, 1951, and February, 1953.

The last general increase, ranging from 2d. to 6d. per lb., was in March, 1951. In December, 1951, some sugar confectionery lines were increased by 2d. per lb.

In view of these increases in price which have taken place in recent months, does the Minister think this the moment to abandon price control?

As a matter of fact, the really substantial price increase took place under the late Government.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that he is so busy trying to evade his responsibility that he has not answered my point, and will he answer my question, which was, does he think this the moment to abandon price control?

The fact that I did makes it perfectly clear that I thought so.

In view of the fact that the manufacturers say the price of sweets will be increased, does the Minister think this the right time to remove price control?

I have answered the Question on the Paper, and I am prepared to see what happens afterwards. I am perfectly certain it was the right thing to do, and at the right time.

asked the Minister of Food to what extent an increased allocation of sugar is to be made for the manufacture of sweets and chocolate.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Sorensen) on 11th February. The industry will also share in the partial restoration of the cuts made in 1951, of which the House was informed on 27th January.

If during the ensuing weeks the Minister finds that the demand for sweets exceeds his anticipation, and therefore makes an inroad on the supplies of sugar, will he take action?

It cannot make inroads on the supplies of sugar because, as I stated in my answer, to meet the initial rush the 9,000 tons saved from the allocation last year was distributed to manufacturers. I think that we have made ample provision for what we assume will be the initial rush, and I have no cause to be anxious about the situation.

Does the answer mean that after the initial rush the Minister will expect the consumption of sweets to be less; and if, on the contrary, it is more, where is the extra sugar coming from?

Let us take that fence when we come to it. At the moment it is quite all right.

asked the Minister of Food the national consumption of sweets and chocolates in each of the years 1951 and 1952; and on what estimate of annual consumption he based his policy of de-rationing.

The estimated civilian consumption in 1951 was about 421,400 tons and in 1952 429,200 tons. There may be a small further increase this year, but this was only one element in my decision to end control.

Are we to assume from the Minister's previous answers that he has made no provision for a substantial increase in the consumption of sweets and chocolates? Is it his policy to rely on rising prices to curb the housewife's freedom to buy any more sweets and chocolates?

If the hon. Gentleman had listened a little more carefully at the beginning of Question time and also last week, he would have learned that the 9,000 tons represents a once-for-all distribution of sugar for sweets and that the 8,500 tons is a permanent increase.

Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman know where the extra sugar is coming from?

The first amount comes from a saving on the allocation last year, and, as I announced in January, the 8,500 tons represents the restoration of half the cut imposed in 1951.

asked the Minister of Food to make a statement regarding the home production of cream.

I hope to make a statement in about a week's time.

Will my right hon. and gallant Friend bear in mind, in preparing this statement, that there are other counties, besides the three far western counties, which produce very rich and high-quality cream; that the flavour of strawberries and raspberries is improved by a really good cream, and that Dorset itself has a very good reputation in this respect?

I will bear that in mind.

asked the Minister of Food to make a statement on the production of wheat under the International Wheat Agreement.

I have no statement to make, but if my hon. Friend has any particular point in mind I shall be pleased to look into it.

Is it not a fact that under the present Agreement the acreage under wheat in most of the wheat-producing countries has gone down, especially in Australia; and does not the Minister, therefore, think that the Agreement needs revision in order to prevent that happening?

The purpose of the Agreement, as my hon. Friend is probably aware, is to ensure supplies of wheat to the importing countries, and as such it has nothing to do with production.

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that for the eight weeks ended 29th November, 1952, the latest available date before de-rationing, 9 per cent. of the sweets rations were not taken up; and to what extent this fact decided him in favour of de-rationing at the present date; and whether, in view of the non-take up of 2,318,000 rations of meat for the four weeks ended 29th November, 1952, and the non-take up of 4,540,000 rations of bacon for the four weeks ended 29th November, 1952, he will de-ration these food commodities.

The rate of uptake of sweets was only one factor in the decision. The uptake had been consistently low over many months. This is not the case with meat or bacon, to which in any case quite different considerations apply.

Are we to take it then, that the Minister, together with the Chancellor, once he has forced up the prices of these commodities far enough, and once he has got a long continuing non-take-up of these commodities, will then de-ration, as he has done with sweets?

The latter part of my answer is the only part really affecting this aspect. I said that in the case of meat and bacon quite different considerations apply.

asked the Minister of Food whether he can now announce agreement on a scheme to ensure display of price tags on meat in the shops.

I am glad to say a recent survey shows that butchers generally are responding to the proposal that they should use price tickets. The response is particularly good in the South. In Scotland I regret that so far it is poor. I am watching the position closely and I shall make a further review after a few weeks.

If there is not a real response to a voluntary scheme, will the Minister have a compulsory scheme? Is he not aware that he promised a decision within two weeks as long ago as last December, and that we have been waiting for it ever since?

The reason the hon. Gentleman has been waiting for it ever since is because a survey has been made of various butchers to see how far the voluntary appeal was successful. I am glad to say that, apart from certain areas, the results have been satisfactory, and I am hoping that as a result of certain areas being good others will follow their example.

In Scotland is not the reason, about which my right hon. and gallant Friend complains, that the purchaser in Scotland trusts the retailer.

Exactly what does the Minister mean by a "good response" and a "poor response" in terms of figures?

There was a good response in London, with about 200 out of 300 butchers visited. A poor response would, I regret to say, be Scotland with about 130 out of 1,600 visited.

asked the Minister of Food whether he will make it compulsory for housewives whose butchers fail to place price lists in places of easy access and within reading distance, to be supplied with price lists on application and instructions on how to distinguish between first and second qualities.

I do not think this would be practicable.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that his predecessor, his Parliamentary Secretary and, I think, he himself pleaded for three or four years for these tickets on meat, and as there is widespread feeling among housewives that they are being exploited by the butchers, will he take some steps such as withdrawing the ration from butchers who refuse to put tickets on the meat?

At the moment the only compulsion on the butcher, as the hon. Lady knows, is to put the price list in a conspicuous place where it can be seen by the shoppers. As I have said, in answer to previous Questions, I hope that the practice of putting tickets on meat will extend.

Is the Minister aware that the price list is very difficult to interpret? It can be interpreted by the butchers but not by the housewives, and the question of whether they are getting first, second or third quality is still anyone's guess.

I sympathise very much with them, but I do not think that this problem is entirely confined to these particular people. I am not at all sure that before the war a good many people could not tell.

asked the Minister of Food what conversations he has had with the French authorities, with a view to increasing the import of French meat.

None recently. France is not a traditional supplier of meat to the United Kingdom. But I am always prepared to consider offers of meat from France if price and quality are right, and subject to public and animal health safeguards.

Is it not the case that France, which is certainly not a traditional supplier of meat to this country, is prevented from selling the meat which she has had to spare because of special interests in this country who have been unwilling for her to become such a supplier? Is it not the case that France has a surplus of meat, and should we not now endeavour to obtain some of it?

The meat is available but the question of price must be considered. The last offer of meat from France was £342 a ton, which is considerably higher than we are paying elsewhere.

Will my right hon. and gallant Friend take every precaution to see that if meat is imported from France, it is not imported from a foot-and-mouth disease area?

As the Minister has not recently had discussions with France on this subject, how does he know the price which the French are asking today; and as, in the past, cases of foot-and-mouth disease, lack of sterling and the question of price have all been put forward as objections to prevent the importation of French meat into this country, will he re-examine the whole question?

I am always open to consider any offers. The hon. Gentleman asked, "When did I hear anything about it," and I said that I had not heard about it since 11 months ago, when the price was £342 a ton, which, I am sure, the hon. Gentleman will agree is far too high for us to pay.

asked the Minister of Food what increases he has recently authorised in the profit margins of retail butchers; what the total amount is of these increases; and what effect they will have on meat prices.

From 16th February, margins were adjusted to raise the profit to the trade by £1.8 million in a full year. This adjustment is only one of many factors and will not of itself significantly affect retail prices.

How is it possible for butchers to get another £1.8 million a year out of the meat trade without that affecting the price of meat to the consumer? Is not this just another case of how everybody does well under the present Administration except the wretched consuming public?

I said in my answer that this is only one of many factors. If this factor were the only one, the retail price of meat would rise about.15d.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the retail butchers are able to get whatever price they like because he will not do what we have asked him to do—get them to exhibit the price per lb. of the commodity so that the customer knows what he is buying? The butchers are already getting more than they are allowed.

This is exactly the same method as was employed in May, 1951.

Will the Minister give an honest answer to the Question? [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw!"] Will the Minister give a straight answer to it? [Interruption.]

I cannot hear what is being said.

Will the Minister give an assurance that he will take some of this margin from the butchers if they will not agree to a universal scheme for displaying meat prices in the shops?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Food whether his Department will include a higher proportion of beef in the ordinary meat ration allocated to the St. Austell district of Cornwall on the grounds that its population contains a large number of workers engaged in heavy work in the china clay industry, who are not, and cannot be, provided with canteen facilities and whose traditional diet of Cornish pasties cannot be suitable prepared with mutton or pork.

No, Sir. The St. Austell district is receiving on average its fair proportion of beef and an increase could only be made at the expense of allocations to other districts.

Is the Minister aware that not only are the St. Austell china clay workers very big dollar earners in the export market, but Cornwall is a beef exporting county, and will my right hon. and gallant Friend look into the special case of the clay workers, as their needs cannot be met by industrial canteens?

The real position is that the St. Austell district percentage is slightly better than that for the western area as a whole.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman ask the butchers of St. Austell to make this concession in return for their share of the bonus of £1.8 million which he has just announced?

asked the Minister of Food whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the wholesale section of the bread industry is drawing subsidy for providing the consumer with the National fixed price loaf against retail selling costs which, in part, the wholesaler is not bearing; and if he will adjust the subsidy accordingly.

The information on costs and margins which my Department receives from all sections of the trade does not support this view.

Is it not a fact that costings as submitted to the Ministry for subsidy purposes by the Wholesale and Multiple Bakers Federation for the March and June quarters of last year showed a difference between the profit of the wholesaler and the loss of the retailer of more than 10s. per sack whereas the subsidy is the same per sack?

The fact is that the producer-retailer provides a service which is not provided by the wholesaler. Figures published by the National Association of Master Bakers in March do not substantiate the claim that the profit is necessarily greater than that of the producer-retailer. In any case, in co-operation with the baking industry we are having an investigation into the position.

asked the Minister of Food to consider fixing a wholesale price for the National loaf, in addition to the present fixed retail price, to allow a reasonable margin for retail selling costs based on the average of retail selling margins for all sections of the food industry given in the recently published Government census of retail distribution.

There are no sufficient grounds for altering at this date the arrangements which have been working for twelve years.

asked the Minister of Food when he will permit the return of the loaf from 1¾ pounds to its former weight of 2 pounds.

I am looking into this.

Is not this an opportune time when the white loaf is being introduced to let the housewife have two pounds of bread instead of one pound and three-quarters which so many think is two pounds, a practice introduced by the late Socialist Government?

asked the Minister of Food what foodstuffs still remain rationed; what space is regarded as the irreducible minimum in the ration book for the coupons or dockets that these rationed foodstuffs need occupy, as compared with the standard ration book as used during the last few years; what steps he is taking to reduce the size of the present ration book; and what economies can be anticipated by the substitution of a modified and simplified ration card, in view of the curtailment of foodstuffs' rationing.

Meat, bacon, sugar, butter, cheese, margarine, cooking fats and eggs are still rationed. The ration book for the year commencing next May will contain eight pages less than the present book. Any further reductions which are practicable will be made as soon as possible.

Does my right hon. and gallant Friend realise how greatly the general public will welcome de-rationing; and as an earnest of the desire of Her Majesty's Government to scrap all food rationing at the earliest possible minute, will he introduce the smallest possible ration book and endeavour to impose a time-table to get rid of rationing at the earliest possible minute?

Is it not becoming increasingly obvious to the House and to the nation that the function of the Minister is that of being official receiver to wind up the affairs of the Ministry?

If it is of benefit to the country, I could not agree more with the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Food the number of persons employed by his Department in the administration of sugar rationing; and what financial saving, in respect of salaries and overheads, would result from abolition of such rationing.

About 300 staff are employed. If sugar rationing were abolished, the salary saving would be about £100,000. Other savings cannot be estimated.

Flushed with the great success of his earlier de-rationing measures, will my right hon. and gallant Friend bear in mind that the greatest single service he can perform to the housewives of this country is to de-ration sugar at the earliest possible moment, and further to extinguish himself and his Ministry?

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that the prices of 21 brands of tea, representative of the teas ordinarily bought by the bulk of consumers, is used in computing the interim index of retail prices; that, for these 21 brands, the average level of prices in mid-January, 1953, was about 16 per cent. higher than in January, 1952; and whether he will, therefore, re-introduce price control on tea.

The increase arose from removal of subsidy last June. Since control ended in October, the average price has declined slightly, even though the public are buying a higher proportion in the better blends.

Is the Minister aware that that directly contradicts the answer of the Minister of Labour to my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Willey), which appeared in HANSARD of 5th February? The facts are that to meet—

The hon. Gentleman is starting to state the facts. He ought to be asking for them.

I started by saying "Is the Minister aware." I will put my question again. Is the Minister aware that that contradicts the answer given by the Minister of Labour to my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, North, contained in HANSARD of 5th February; and is it not a fact that all the prices of teas have gone up, and that it is only the very cheap brands, which are mainly dust, that people can now afford to take up?

My answer does not contradict the statement of my right hon. and learned Friend at all, because the opening part of my answer was that the increase arose from the removal of subsidies last June.

Does my right hon. and gallant Friend consider that there is any significance in the phrase in this Question—"the bulk of consumers"?

Is the Minister aware that the sale of the lower-priced packets of tea is to be deprecated because the better qualities of tea go a great deal further?

asked the Minister of Food at how many markets held on Saturdays calves are sold for slaughter; and for how long they are kept before being killed.

Ten. The calves are slaughtered either on the same day or on the following day.

Can the Minister say how it is possible to slaughter calves sold on a Saturday the same day or the following day, when so few slaughterhouses, if any, are open; and what arrangements are made for the feeding of the calves until such time as they are slaughtered? Is he satisfied that these arrangements are adequate?

If the hon. Gentleman has any instances where they are not satisfactory, I shall be happy to look into them.

asked the Minister of Food if he is yet in position to make his promised statement about sausages.

asked the Minister of Food to state the nature of controls and restrictions still in force governing the contents of pork, beef and other meat sausages including milk powder content and the skins; whether such controls and restrictions can be removed; and when he proposes to restore independence to manufacturers of sausages.

Thanks to increased supplies of meat I am able to remove the controls on price and meat content on 1st March. This new freedom will enable manufacturers to provide at competitive prices the widest possible varieties of sausages. Local and personal preferences of consumers can now be satisfied again.

Does my right hon. and gallant Friend appreciate that none will lament the passing of that Socialist monstrosity—the Webb milk sausage?

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that every housewife in this country will welcome his action? Is this not further proof of the intentions of the Conservative Government week by week to fulfil their promises?

May I ask the Minister what effect this decision will have on the subsidy for manufactured meat, which will continue to be given to butchers? They are still to get the subsidy, but he is discontinuing price control. Is this not a serious decision to take if, apart from the argument whether it is a good thing to control or not to control, in fact the Government are going to continue to give the subsidy on manufactured meat?

If the right hon. Gentleman would put down a Question on that point, I should be glad to give him a full answer.

If the right hon. and gallant Gentleman wants to do away with this control, will he take such protective steps as are necessary to safeguard the bread supply because of the increase of bread crumbs in the sausages?

asked the Minister of Food if he can explain the significance of the letter D, on certain packages of margarine, and the letter W, on others; and how far there is any public preference expressed for W margarine.

The letter indicates the factory at which the margarine was made. As regards the second part of the Question I have no information.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that there is an expressed desire for margarine W in the West of Scotland, and is that because it is fresher and contains more nut oil than the other?

The ingredients of all margarines are specified and supplied by the Ministry. There may be different processes of manufacture, but so far as the ingredients are concerned, they are identical in all.

asked the Minister of Food if he is now in a position to make a statement on the system of distribution following the de-control of egg rationing; and, if not, when he will be able to do so.

asked the Minister of Food on what date eggs will be derationed.

The new arrangements will come into force on the 26th March. As the detailed statement of these arrangements is necessarily rather long I am circulating it in the OFFICIAL REPORT in a written answer to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro).

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman satisfied that, contrary to the policy of this Government, eggs will now be accessible from the point of view of price to every section of the community?

purpose of this de-control is to try to get eggs into the shops, which has been quite impossible for the last seven or eight years.

Are these arrangements going to produce one more egg?

I think that is a gross understatement by the hon. and gallant Gentleman.

May I ask the Minister whether, in view of his decision, he has considered the anxieties of the National Farmers' Union about the breakdown of the orderly marketing of eggs, and whether his scheme, temporary or long-term, will in fact, as the National Farmers' Union require, involve the sending of eggs to licensed packing stations?

If the right hon. Gentleman will await the long and detailed statement which is to be made, he will find that when the original statement was made last November in the House, we said that we would immediately proceed with consultation with the National Farmers' Union, and as a result of these consultations this scheme has been put forward.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that there has been a greater demand for day-old pullets this spring than there has been for four years, and it is not uncommon for producers in the habit of buying 50 day-old pullets to increase their order to 300 or 400?

asked the Minister of Food if he will defer the introduction of the new white flour until the House has had an opportunity of discussing this subject.

No, Sir.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered distinguished medical opinion warning the public about the harmful effects of the white flour, as given by the Radio Doctor on two occasions? Will he give us the opportunity of discussing the scripts of the broadcasts, which I have in my possession, before the new flour is put on the market?

The hon. Gentleman should put down a Question to my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary on that. The National flour is available to anybody who wants it and the white flour is also available to those who want it. Whatever is added to the white flour is added only as a result of advice after investigation by the medical authorities concerned.

On a point of order. May we have your guidance, Mr. Speaker, as to how we may put Questions to Parliamentary Secretaries as the Minister has now invited my hon. Friend to put a Question to his Parliamentary Secretary?

I heard what transpired. and I thought the subject-matter of the Question which it was suggested might be asked of the Parliamentary Secretary had nothing to do with the Ministry of Food but was concerned with some broadcasting scripts.

Will the Minister reconsider his answer? The kind of bread for which they pay money is an important matter to housewives. They are often greatly perplexed. Will the Minister give the housewife some information in simple non-technical terms so that she may know the value of the different kinds of bread?

The National loaf will continue as it is today. Those who wish to have white tour—I understand there are a number—can get it. But the National loaf remains the same.

As the right hon. and gallant Gentleman has invited us to ask his Parliamentary Secretary a Question on the subject of white flour, might I now ask the Parliamentary Secretary to state his views on that subject?

That would be quite irregular.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Food the numbers and types of animals that were found to be so diseased, either wholly or in part, as to be unfit for human consumption during last year; and what proportion in each case this represented.

As the reply contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman give the proportion by number of the animals as well as the proportion by weight?

I would remind the hon. Gentleman that it took a very long time to provide the answer to this question. The proportion ranges from about 1.4 to under 1 per cent.

asked the Minister of Food the increased cost per person per week for rationed foods since April, 1952, to the latest convenient date; and whether he will name any foods rationed in April but de-rationed since, if these are not included in the final estimate of increase.

About 7½d. excluding tea and gammon on ration levels at April, 1952.

Do I understand from what the Minister has said that the increase on rationed foods per person per week over the past year has been about 7½d.? Did not the Chancellor of the Exchequer tell us that the increase over the previous year was 1s. 5½d.?

The hon. Lady had better look at her Question again. It says "since April, 1952." I have given her the figures since April, 1952.

asked the Minister of Food what is the present rate of subsidy on the price of each of the rationed commodities now subsidised; and what is the weekly value of the food subsidies to a family of four compared with that of 12 months ago.

As the answer to the first part of the Question contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The weekly value of the subsidies to a family of four is estimated at 9s. 5d. during the current financial year as compared with 12s. 8d. the previous year.

May we have a firm assurance from the Minister that, before he contemplates final extinction, he will put up a battle on behalf of the poorer housewives to maintain the subsidies which are left? Can we have an assurance that there will be no further tampering with the subsidies this year?

I should not have thought the hon. Gentleman wanted an assurance. The family of four that he mentions is 3s. per week better off since this Government came to office as a result of my right hon. Friend's Budget.

Following is the information:

UNIT SUBSIDIES ON RATIONED FOOD IN 1952–53
Commodity	Unit	Unit Subsidy
		Pence
Bacon	lb.	7½d.
Eggs	doz.	10d.
Meat (carcase)	lb.	1½d.
Butter	lb.	8¼d.
Cheese	lb.	1½d.
Margarine (domestic)	lb.	1¾d.
Cooking fat (domestic)	lb.	2d.
Sugar (domestic)	lb.	1¼d.

asked the Minister of Food the national total of milk consumption for each year from 1939 to 1952; how far there has been substantial reduction in consumption of milk during 1952 as compared with 1950 and 1951; and what he considers to be the reason for such reduction.

As the reply contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. There was no substantial reduction in the national consumption of mill during 1952 as compared with 1950 am 1951. The decline was less than 1 per cent. and 1.7 per cent. respectively am is too small to be attributed to any particular reason.

Does the figure of 1 per cent. relate to hundreds of thousands or to millions of gallons?

When the hon. Gentleman looks at the figures he will see that the position really is as I have said, that the reduction is too small to be attributed to any particular reason.

The right hon. and gallant Gentleman has not replied to my question. I presume he has the figures in front of him. To what quantity of milk does the percentage which he has quoted relate? Does the 1 per cent. involve hundreds of thousands of gallons or millions of gallons?

I believe it to be about 11 million gallons.

Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman agree that the consumption of milk in 1952 fell for the first time for a very long period and that the amount consumed was not only less than in 1951 but also less than in the previous year? Is not this a very serious reversal of the trend of milk consumption in this country?

I can only repeat what I have said, that the trend is so small at the moment that it cannot really be attributed to anything in particular.

Following is the information:

LIQUID CONSUMPTION OF MILK IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
CALENDAR YEARS 1939 TO 1952
Million gallons
1939	…	…	…	863.3
1940	…	…	…	937.0
1941	…	…	…	1063.9
1942	…	…	…	1114.3
1943	…	…	…	1169.0
1944	…	…	…	1205.1
1945	…	…	…	1242.8
1946	…	…	…	1303.9
1947	…	…	…	1305.5
1948	…	…	…	1417.1
1949	…	…	…	1513.8
1950	…	…	…	1557.2
1951	…	…	…	1572.9
1952	…	…	…	1546.1

asked the Minister of Food what answer he has given to the proposal by the Milford Haven Dock Company that Icelandic trawlers should land fish at Milford Haven.

I will send the hon. Member a copy of a letter I am sending to the hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Donnelly), who has been in correspondence with me on this subject.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware, if he is not too busy committing departmental suicide, that the housewife is being rendered desperate by the shortage of fish and the increase in price, and will he give an assurance that, if arrangements are made to have this fish landed at Milford Haven, he will not allow vested interests to sabotage its distribution?

I will not accept what the hon. Lady says either about the price or the quantity of fish. She knows perfectly well that this is a serious matter and that we are in communication with the Icelandic Government. There is nothing that I can do at the moment except to say that she should look at the letter that I will send to her.

As the Minister has heard the consumer's cry "from Blackburn's sooty mountain to Pembroke's pebbly strand," will he not reconsider what he has just said because it amounts to the complete abdication of his responsibilities in the distribution of fish?

No, I cannot agree for a moment with that.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence whether he will amend the existing procedure relating to National Service men who, after completing their full-time service, develop conscientious objections to part-time service, in order to ensure that such National Service men are not obliged to serve a sentence of imprisonment prior to their plea of conscience being considered by the advisory tribunal.

I have nothing to add to the reply on this subject which I gave to the hon. Member for Islington, East (Mr. E. Fletcher) on 29th October, 1952.

Does the hon. Gentleman not consider that this procedure is contrary to the principles of justice? Does he agree with his hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for War who, in reply to a Question of mine yesterday, said that a person claiming conscientious objection has to provide some form of evidence that he really believes what he says; and does he agree with his hon. Friend that incarceration in a civilian prison like Wormwood Scrubs or some other jail is a suitable method of obtaining that evidence?

The hon. Gentleman realises that there is nothing new about this practice. It has been going on for a number of years, and hon. Members on both sides of the House realise that National Service, both whole-time and part-time, is a heavy burden upon the young men of this country. Those who seek to evade it should not be able to do so lightly. Such men as the hon. Member has in mind have already had a chance, when being called up, to state their conscientious objection and they have not done so.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence whether he will release temporarily men from the Forces who were forestry workers so that they could assist in extracting timber blown down in the gales in the North-East of Scotland.

A close watch is being kept on the position. If the responsible authorities ask for assistance from the Services, their request will of course be sympathetically considered.

Is my hon. Friend aware there is a big demand for unskilled labour which can only be supervised by skilled foresters? As there cannot be many very skilled foresters in the Forces, would my hon. Friend consider releasing them until this mess is cleared up?

The consideration my hon. and gallant Friend has put forward will, of course, be kept in mind

Will the Minister extend this temporary release to all those whose families have had their livelihood or homes affected by the recent floods and gales, as was done last year when a similar disaster took place?

That, of course, is a much wider question.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence the number of British prisoners of war captured in the war in Korea and still held by the enemy.

Thirty-nine officers and 909 ratings or other ranks have been reported as prisoners of war in Korea. In addition, three officers and 36 other ranks are reported as missing, believed prisoners of war.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the Government propose to make a further detailed statement on the war in Korea, and why should we in this House have to rely for our information on what is happening in Korea, particularly to our own Forces, on what appears in the American Press?

Naturally my noble Friend is anxious to consult the convenience of the House in this matter, but he made a long statement not long ago. During this period of stalemate it is rather difficult to make a statement which differs in any material degree from the previous statement, but if there is any desire for a further statement it can be made.

But is the hon. Gentleman aware that a report appeared in one of the American newspapers sent to hon. Members of this House to the effect that the Commonwealth Division was being taken out of the line completely for a period of rest? Is that not information that ought to be conveyed to this House and not in an indirect way? Does not the question I am now putting directly arise out of the question of what is happening to the prisoners of war in Korea?

If the right hon. Gentleman desires a statement it can easily be made.

Captain Duncan.

Those last two supplementary questions had nothing to do with the Question at all. May I ask about British prisoners of war, the subject of the Question?

The supplementary questions were relevant, and we must get on I am afraid it is frequently my painful duty to prevent hon. Members asking supplementary questions, otherwise there would not be a chance for the hon. Members who follow. Hon. Members must take it with patience. It is as painful to me as it is to them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many cases of drunkenness were known to have occurred in Mauritius during 1952; in how many cases proceedings were taken against the people concerned; and for what offences.

The number of cases of ordinary drunkenness reported to the police in Mauritius in 1952 was 1,832, but alcohol contributed to 3,025 other cases. I have asked the Governor for details of the cases in which proceedings were taken and will write to the hon. Member when the information is available.

Would the Minister indicate how the number of prosecutions in 1952 compares with the number in the previous year? Has it diminished or increased?

I regret I have not got those figures, but I will certainly obtain them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that there are numerous restaurants in the main towns of Mauritius where alcohol is sold from the hours of 7 a.m. till after midnight; whether he is aware that this has very serious social repercussions on the population; and whether he will take steps to ensure that restaurants can only sell intoxicating liquor if they hold a licence and only within a stated period of time per day.

There are numerous restaurants in the main towns in which alcohol is sold, but a licence must be held for the sale of all intoxicating liquor, and the hours of sale are from 7 a.m. to midnight. The social repercussions on the population have already engaged the attention of the Government of Mauritius and an Ordinance has recently been enacted to restrict the number of licences granted.

Would the Minister look into the allegation as a great many of these restaurants are just off-licences camouflaged, and they are the seat of a great deal of the social trouble being caused, particularly in Port Louis and Rosehill?

The alterations in the regulation are designed to restrict the number of what I might call bogus hotels which have been selling liquor as the main part of their business.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will prohibit the manufacture, distribution and sale of liquor containing strychnine for the purpose of human consumption in Mauritius.

Under local legislation the addition of any substance to food or drink which will render it injurious to health is an offence, and the importation and disposal of strychnine is controlled. The Government of Mauritius is not aware that strychnine is an ingredient in any liquor manufactured, distributed or sold in the Colony and has no evidence that such liquor has been offered for sale.

My information, which comes from the Press of Mauritius, is that this strychnine is being used and is being injected into home-distilled liquor, particularly rum. Would the Secretary of State look into this matter a little more closely as these allegations are widespread?

I have given the official information and I think I cannot proceed further other than to ask the hon. Gentleman to give me any instances he has, which I shall be glad to consider.

On a point of order. Is it not the case that your predecessors, Mr. Speaker, have ruled that hon. Members who put Questions to Ministers are responsible for the accuracy of the statements contained in those Questions? If the statement made by the hon. Member in the Question which has just been answered is inaccurate, what penalties are imposed upon the hon. Member?

Responsibility for any inaccuracies in a Question rests with the hon. Member who puts it.

Is it not a fact that an hon. Member must get his information from somewhere? My information was from the Mauritian Press, and I am perfectly ready to hand it over to the Minister.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) if he is aware that the new Regulations relating to criminal proceedings in Kenya which prevent or limit the preliminary hearing of a charge before a magistrate, or magistrates, and which direct that such a charge must go direct to the High Court for trial are contrary to the principles and practice of British law; and if he will make a statement on the subject;

(2) what principles of law or justice are to be applied under the new Regulations promulgated in Kenya relating to criminal proceedings by the Attorney-General of Kenya, or other Agent of the Crown there, in granting or refusing his certificate that a criminal charge must go direct to the High Court without a preliminary hearing before a magistrate;

(3) if he is aware that the new Regulations relating to criminal proceedings which have been promulgated in Kenya designed to reduce delay in executing capital sentences there, prejudice the right of convicted persons to appeal; and if he will make a statement on the subject.

I am aware that the procedure permitted by the Kenya Emergency (Criminal Trials) Regulations, under which a preliminary hearing before a magistrate can be dispensed with by a certificate from the Attorney-General, Solicitor-General or Deputy Public Prosecutor, is a departure from the normal practice of British law. The hon. and learned Member is, however, wrong in thinking that this is contrary to the principle of English law since it is open to the Attorney-General of England, by virtue of his office, to file a criminal information which would bring an accused into the Queen's Bench without an inquiry prior to commitment.

The intention in making the Regulations is to shorten the period between the apprehension and sentence of persons convicted for offences arising out of the present emergency in order that the full deterrent effect of the sentence may be felt. The trial of accused persons by the Supreme Court will follow the same procedure as if a preliminary inquiry by a magistrate had been held, and the accused will be supplied at least seven days before the date fixed for the trial with a list of the prosecution witnesses and a statement of each witness's evidence.

I recognise that the defence will lose the advantage of cross-examination of prosecution witnesses and of adducing evidence in a preliminary hearing, but I am satisfied that no miscarriage of justice will result from the Regulations. The Law Officers of Kenya will obviously not issue a certificate for trial under these Regulations unless they are satisfied that there is at least a prima facie case against the accused.

The Regulations reduce the time taken in proceedings only by shortening the period before the hearing of the case by the Supreme Court. The period between sentence and execution remains as before and the right of appeal is thus not affected.

A copy of the Regulations has been placed in the Library.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that during the present emergency one of the most essential things in Kenya is to inspire in the Africans an appreciation of British law and justice? Does he not think that making changes of this kind in the middle of the emergency, ad hoc, is calculated to inspire the very reverse feelings in the Africans and to make a settlement in Kenya still more difficult?

The hon. and learned Gentleman's law is a little rusty. As I have already told him, there is nothing contrary to the principles of English law in what is being done. It is contrary to the practice, but Kenya has an emergency which does not exist in this country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that where a defence is deprived of the opportunity to see the witnesses it is at a tremendous disadvantage, and if the statements to be supplied to the accused have to he taken from the witnesses, why should those statements not be taken in the presence of the accused and his advisers? Why does it cause delay?

Delays have been very great. I have nothing more to add to the reply that I have already given.

Mr. Sorensen.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The right hon. Gentleman has made an imputation upon my knowledge of law and I should like to put a question arising out of that point. I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman—

I do not think that any lawyer would take very seriously an imputation upon his knowledge of law.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that Africans in Uganda and the Cameroons are being seized by slave traders and sold into slavery in Arabia; what information he has to show whether slave trading has increased or decreased since the statement on this matter by the right hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Eden) on 22nd September, 1943; and what are the measures in operation against slave trading and slave raiding, particularly as affecting British administered African and other areas.