asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now make a further statement, following his inquiries from the British Ambassador in Washington, as to the alleged insertion of advertisements into the television broadcasts of the Coronation service.

No information has been received from Her Majesty's Ambassador in Washington that would lead me to modify the reply given by my hon. Friend the Joint Under-Secretary to my hon. Friend the Member for West-bury (Sir R. Grimston) on 17th June.

As the right hon. and learned Gentleman now knows that his hon. Friend misled the House on 17th June in seeking to whitewash the American companies and to criticise the B.B.C., would not it be more handsome if he was candidly to withdraw the previous statement?

I do not accept for one moment that my hon. Friend misled the House. This Question deals with the views of the British Ambassador in Washington.

But does the right hon. and learned Gentleman deny that his hon. Friend has in fact, admitted, whatever the Ambassador said, that the statement made in the House on 17th June was incorrect and unfair to the B.B.C.?

I do not think that that is the position at all. Dealing with the wider aspects of the case, the fact is that the Ambassador said that the treatment of the Coronation in the United States was a most profound manifestation of sympathy and good will towards Britain, and we had much better leave it at that.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say whether they compared notes with the B.B.C. in the light of the statement of the Ambassador? Has he not seen the reports in reputable American newspapers, such as the "New York Times" and the "New York Herald-Tribune," which were critical of the way in which a number of American networks handled the Coronation? Is it fair that the Under-Secretary should have condemned the British Broadcasting Corporation when there is heaps of evidence the other way? Why does not the Government be really impartial and fair when dealing with the B.B.C? Ought not the Minister of State to impress upon the Ambassador in Washington, or upon the Embassy in Washington, that it is very important that they should give fair and impartial reports?

The suggestion that the Ambassador in Washington does not give fair and impartial reports is hardly worthy of the right hon. Gentleman. My hon. Friend, in his statement, admitted that there had been one or two isolated instances that might be regarded as lapses of taste. So far as representations to the B.B.C. are concerned, the right hon. Gentleman himself on the last occasion said that the Government should be very careful how they made such representations.

I appreciate that the right hon. and learned Gentleman wants to do his best to preserve Anglo-American relations, but should not the truth have precedence in this matter? The Under-Secretary said that there had been one or two isolated instances, yet the very reputable "New York Times" and other reporters made the categorical statement that they were callously repeated throughout the day in the interjection of "commercials."

I do not accept that for a moment. I think that the episode has to be taken as a whole, and the view of Her Majesty's Ambassador is one which appears to be justified by the evidence. Taking the thing as a whole, I think it was very well treated.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman admit that it is possible that the Ambassador may be mistaken? Are we to take it that, whenever an ambassador says something nobody may question it in the slightest degree?

The Question was with regard to the inquiries made of Her Majesty's Ambassador, and I am quite certain that he did make inquiries of the very important public officials present in the United States before coming to that conclusion.

rose——

Order. We have spent a long time on this Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that Mr. Cedric Belfrage, a British subject long resident in the United States of America, though released from Ellis Island on bail, is still subjected to various disabilities, including limitations on his freedom of movement out of New York and the obligation to report at Ellis Island every fortnight; and if he will now make representations to the United States Government on behalf of this man, who has committed no crime and is being victimised for his political opinions.

As I stated on 24th June, proceedings in this case are being conducted in accordance with United States law and judicial processes.

I am advised that the disabilities to which the hon. Member refers are not unusual under the circumstances and that it is open to Mr. Belfrage's legal representatives to make application for their relaxation. I do not, therefore, consider that it is a case in which Her Majesty's Government should make official representations.

Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman any information about how long this procedure will continue? Is he, or the Consulate, providing any legal advice or assistance?

I do not know how long these proceedings will take, but it is true that Mr. Belfrage has the advantage of being represented by a lawyer, with whom certain contacts have been made. There has been no request for legal assistance from Her Majesty's representative.

Would it not be more in keeping with the dignity of British citizens if Her Majesty's Government tried to get reciprocity so that there would be similar arrangements on both sides of the ocean? Are not the Government aware that before British citizens go to America they are subjected to the indignity of having their fingerprints taken and all kinds of other measures? We do not do that with Americans who come into this country and I think that we are putting up with a little too much.

This Question deals with a British subject who has been resident a long time in America.

Is it not true that other countries can do what they please with British subjects now since the Tory Government came to power?

I believe that each country is rather proud of having its own judicial processes not tampered with overseas. I think that that is the position of the United States in these proceedings. I am sure that we should resent it very much if we were interfered with when we were dealing with anyone in our courts.

Does the Minister consider that there is anything to be proud of in a judicial process which victimises a man for his political opinions?

We would be much wiser not to comment on the judicial processes involved in another country.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will arrange for the publication of the agreement reached between Mr. Robertson, on behalf of the United Nations Command, and President Synghman Rhee on the truce negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will now make a further statement on the message he received on 22nd July from Mr. Dulles concerning the attitude of President Synghman Rhee to the truce negotiations in Korea.

I would refer the hon. Members to the answer given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the hon. Member for Aston (Mr. Wyatt) on 22nd July, and to the speech of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary in the foreign affairs debate later on the same day, to which I have nothing to add.

Would the Tight hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House whether Her Majesty's Government themselves know the details of this agreement, whether the agreement was committed to paper, and, if not, how any claim that it has been violated can be dealt with in the event of neither of these things?

We do know the substance of the agreement, which has been submitted to us, but these were negotiations between the United States Government and the Government of South Korea, and, therefore, the publication of the details is a matter for these two Governments.

Does that mean that the Government have no idea at all of the detailed information? Are we to take it that they do not intend to ascertain exactly what is contained in the document?

We do know the nature of the assurances given, but I think that, today of all days, it would be better to leave the matter where it is.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has now received full reports on the various recent official statements made by President Synghmam Rhee and the South Korean Foreign Minister, on their attitude to a truce; if he will publish in HANSARD, or as a White Paper, the full texts of these statements and of the communications on this subject which have passed between the South Korean and the United States Governments; and what steps Her Majesty's Government have decided to take in the event of the infringement of a truce by the South Korean Government.

The recent statements by the President and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Government of the Republic of Korea on their attitude to a truce have been published already in the Press, and no useful purpose would be served by repeating them in the form of a White Paper or in HANSARD. The question of the publication of communications which have passed between the South Korean and United States Governments is one for those Governments to decide.

Her Majesty's Government hope that the South Korean Government will abide by the assurances which they have given that they will respect an armistice. If these hopes were, unhappily, to prove false, the steps which would be necessary to restore the situation would depend so much on the circumstances at the time that it would not be profitable to hazard any forecast of them in advance.

While there is, naturally, profound relief and thankfulness at this morning's news of the cease-fire, would not the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that that news in itself makes it all the more urgent and important that there should be a fairly exact record of what has been said and agreed between those two Governments? In this matter are the United States Government not acting on behalf of the United Nations? If so, have we not a right to know what has passed?

I do not think that in this matter the United States Government were acting on behalf of the United Nations, and I believe that, so far as the President of South Korea is concerned, the situation has to be taken as it develops. All I can say is that we hope that his assurances will be kept and that we shall do all in our power to see that they are kept.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what decisions were reached at Washington with regard to the peaceful unification of Korea.

I would refer the hon. Member to the sentence in the communiqué issued on the 14th July, which says:

"They (that is, the three Foreign Ministers) agreed to pursue every effort to assist the stouthearted and sorely-tried Koreans to reunite peacefully under institutions of their own choosing."

While no one in the House would disagree with what the right hon. and learned Gentleman has expressed as the hope of H.M. Government, would he not agree that it is rather dangerous to give President Syngman Rhee the idea that the United Nations Command will be able to achieve this reunification, and, in the event of it not being possible, give Mr. Syngman Rhee the opportunity to restart the war should he choose to do so?

I do not think that the peaceful reunification of Korea will be a matter for the United Nations Command at all. It will be a matter for the political conference which, we hope, will be set up as a result of the meeting of the General Assembly.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the present position reached in the Korean truce discussions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a further statement on the truce negotiations in Korea.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a further statement on the truce negotiations in Korea.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is in a position to make a further statement on the Korean truce talks.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a further statement upon the Korean truce negotiations.

On a point of order. I put Question No. 23 to the Prime Minister because we were asked to put down Questions on Korea to the Prime Minister. These Questions have now been transferred. While the Prime Minister has the right to transfer Questions if he pleases, would it not be more convenient for the House, Sir, if we knew for certain whether we were to put down a Question to the Prime Minister or to the Foreign Minister?

That is not a point for me. I have frequently dealt with this matter and have said that Departments are responsible for the transfer of Questions.

Could not the Leader of the House tell us?

A statement will be made on the Korean situation at the end of Questions. There are personal reasons why the Chancellor of the Exchequer asked to be excused attendance today.

May I ask whether the statement in answer to these Questions will be made on a Motion for the Adjournment?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what representations he has received following the report of the United States Senate sub-Committee with regard to United Kingdom trading with China; and whether he will make a statement.

No representations have been received. The report adds little to the allegations already made public during the Committee's hearings and dealt with in the answer given by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary on 17th June.

The important facts are that, whereas Her Majesty's Government welcome the development of trade with China in non-strategic goods—and there must be ships to carry these goods—they have taken energetic measures to prevent strategic goods reaching China, either from the United Kingdom or Colonies or in our ships.

Her Majesty's Government are, of course, only responsible for United Kingdom and colonial flag ships. They do, however, deny bunkering facilities to ships of other nations carrying strategic goods, and co-operate vigorously with other friendly countries to prevent the circumvention of the controls recommended by the United Nations.

In view of the widespread publicity which this report received in the United States, and of the attempts of Senator McCarthy to inflame American opinion against this country, would the right hon. and learned Gentleman consider issuing a White Paper and, in any event, taking every possible step to ensure that the British case receives as much publicity as possible in the United States?

I will certainly consider further the question of a White Paper, and I entirely agree that it is very important that the British case should be circulated widely in the United States. I have no doubt that in the debate on foreign affairs which is to take place during the next few days in another place further reference will be made to this matter.

What representations have the Government made to the United States about the purchase by the United States of 28 million dollars' worth of Chinese goods during last year, in view of the fact that dollars in the area concerned can be used to buy arms in any quantities and must be a very valuable strategic weapon in the hands of the Chinese Communists, who are probably buying arms in Formosa with them?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is certainly one of the facts in this controversy which ought to be well-known.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on what basis the financial subscription of Nationalist China to the International Civil Aviation Organisation is based; and what discussion took place on this matter at the last assembly of this organisation.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when China's membership of the International Civil Aviation Organisation was held to have lapsed; on what date she was readmitted; and whether she is now a fully-paid member.

As my hon. Friend told the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Beswick) on 20th July, this is a very complicated subject and he has sent him a full explanation in writing. He has also sent a copy to the hon. Member for Rossendale (Mr. Anthony Greenwood).

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that I am very grateful to his colleague for the very full letter which he sent to me, but that that does not alter the fact that the original answer given by he Minister was misleading? Would it not have been better if he had stated that Her Majesty's Government made no attempt at the Brighton meeting to point out the absolutely absurd and anomalous position of Nationalist China in this matter?

The matter has been frequently pointed out. We do not accept the position that China is not a member of this body now, while the majority of people who are members say that that is the situation.

Put very broadly, do not the difficulties derive from the fact that Her Majesty's Government accept the Republican Government of China as the real Government of China while other Governments do not take that view? Are Her Majesty's Government losing no opportunity to impress upon other countries the desirability of following the example of Her Majesty's Government?

Without going as far as that, I hope that, in the wider settlement of the Far East which we hope will result from present circumstances, that will be a matter which will be discussed and possibly changed.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has completed his inquiry into the allegations concerning the participation in Nazi activities of Herr Boemcke, an official in the German Ministry of Labour; and if he is now in a position to make a statement.

I take it that the hon. Gentleman is referring to the allegation in a German newspaper that a Herr Boemcke had attended a meeting in 1951 with persons then or subsequently connected with Naumann and his associates.

Her Majesty's Government have no responsibility for this newspaper article, nor have they any evidence that Herr Boemcke was, in fact, present at the meeting in question.

Will the Minister make it clear that the article in question derived from information supplied by the Secret Service to our own authorities, which was then sent back to Germany, and that there has been a leak in that information, the consequence of which is that Herr Boemcke is now suffering in his work in the Ministry of Labour at Bonn because of his relationship with a trade union? Will he make it clear that, as far as the Foreign Office is concerned, Herr Boemcke had no relations with Naumann?

I do not know how this matter came to be published in the German Press, but I am very pleased to be able to say that we have no evidence at all that Herr Bomcke was present at the meeting in question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the representative of Her Majesty's Government during the Washington talks declined, at first, to agree to the proposal that there should be a meeting of Foreign Ministers to discuss the future of Germany.

The hon. Member's Question seems to be based on a complete misunderstanding of the facts. Such divergencies of view as there were between the representatives of the three Governments on this subject arose from my noble Friend's advocacy of the Prime Minister's proposals of 11th May.

Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman seen the reports which appeared in the American and French Press, and can he give a firm assurance that at no stage during those conversations the Marquess of Salisbury opposed the conference of Foreign Ministers on Germany on the ground that it was going too far at that stage?

I adhere to the terms of my original answer, that my noble Friend advocated throughout those talks the proposal put forward by the Prime Minister on 11th May.

If the right hon. and learned Gentleman adheres to the terms of his original answer, why cannot he say "Yes" to the question I put to him just now?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement about the work of the Disarmament Commission of the United Nations the mandate of which was continued by the General Assembly at its recent meeting.

The Disarmament Commission has not met since its first report was considered by the General Assembly in April. I expect it to reconvene next month.

Is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that, on 11th May, he said that we were ready to go ahead and summon the Disarmament Commission to negotiate on this important subject, and, since it appears that the Russians are ready to do the same, is it not regrettable that Her Majesty's Government have taken no steps to convoke the Disarmament Commission during all these months?

I think the House will agree that it is necessary to wait until we are certain that the surrounding circumstances are favourable. I believe that, on balance, we were wise to wait. We hope that the Commission will meet next month.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the United Kingdom delegate to the United Nations Economic and Social Council abstained from voting on a resolution urging the implementation of the principle of equal pay for equal work, which has been approved by this House during the present Parliament.

I assume that the hon. and learned Member is referring to the resolution on the subject of equal pay put forward in the Report of the Seventh Session of the Status of Women Commission for adoption by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.

The resolution urges increased efforts towards wider implementation of the principle of equal remuneration in all countries. Her Majesty's Government have accepted the principle of equal pay in relation to their own employees and have already announced their intention to give effect to it as soon as the economic and financial situation of the country makes it possible to do so.

It was the view of the Government that as we are not yet in a position to implement this principle ourselves, it was more appropriate for us to abstain on this particular resolution. Our support for the principle, however, was made clear in the debate.

Was there anything in the terms of that resolution which called upon this country to abstain, when the resolution was passed without any opposition and with only three dissentients, of which this country was one? Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that, in May, 1952, the House passed a resolution saying that there was no justification for any further delay in the implementation of this principle?

This country did not dissociate itself from or vote against this particular resolution. On the whole, a more straightforward way to take was the line which was taken, that of abstention.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the nature of the discussions which took place between the representative of Her Majesty's Government and the United States Secretary of State during the Washington talks on the policy to be adopted towards Chinese representation in the United Nations.

No, Sir. There is nothing I can add to the answers given by my right hon. Friend to the hon. Member for Aston (Mr. Wyatt) on 16th July.

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman give an assurance that the policy of Her Majesty's Government remains the recognition of and the exchange of ambassadors with the Peking Government, and that the fact that the Marquess of Salisbury is on record as being opposed to Chinese recognition does not in any way affect Her Majesty's Government's policy on that matter at the moment?

The position of Her Majesty's Government is exactly as was explained during the foreign affairs debate. We recognise the People's Government of China and we propose to continue to recognise it. So far as its recognition by others is concerned, that is a matter which will have to be dealt with in the course of or after the political conference.

Have the Chinese Government of Peking yet recognised us?

The actions they have taken are of a somewhat equivocal nature.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman has said that recognition of the People's Government of China is a matter which will come up in the course of or after the political conference. Is he now going back on the Washington Conference, which made it clear that the three Ministers there would not discuss this matter until there had been a satisfactory completion of the political conference?

The position so far as the political conference is concerned is that Koreas is quite definitely the first item on the agenda of that conference. If that is successfully concluded, we hope that the conference will broaden out and deal with wider issues.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement as to the results of Her Majesty's Government's discussions with M. Markezinis, the Greek Minister for Economic Affairs.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor has already informed the House that he had a most useful conversation with M. Markezinis and that he was sure that his visit would benefit "the close and, indeed, historic relations between this country and Greece." I cordially endorse this sentiment and so, I am sure, will all my colleagues and also Opposition Leaders who had the pleasure of meeting M. Markezinis.

The talks were purely exploratory. They ranged over the whole field of economic and financial questions of mutual interest. We were not negotiating or aiming at specific results. M. Markezinis gave us an account of his country's difficulties, and of the bold and resolute measures which the Greek Government are taking to overcome them. I understand that M. Markezinis was also able to get into touch with banking and commercial circles interested in the Greek economy.

While thanking my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer, may I ask whether he will try to persuade Her Majesty's Government to tackle our domestic problems with the same vigour as that with which the Greek Government tackle theirs and to carry out the advice given by the Greek representative to remove all barriers to international trade as soon as possible as the only hope of world recovery, before it is too late?

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that we in this country are losing great opportunities of economic development with Greece and that these opportunities are being seized with very great alacrity by the Germans?

The question of the contribution by this country to the economic development of countries overseas depends very much upon the resources that are available.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the continued imprisonment by the Greek Government of certain of their nationals for political offences, he will take steps to withdraw from all treaties and obligations under which Her Majesty's Government are committed to render assistance to the Greek Government.

No, Sir.

Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that he has received representations from trade unions in this country calling for action by the Greek Government to release persons whose only crime is to hold opposite political views? Would he further agree that the existing Greek Government will go up in the estimation of trade unionists in this country if they cease to put in prison people of other political views?

I quite agree with the hon. Gentleman that what really counts in this matter is action, but the number of people held for political offences in Greece have decreased by more than one-third, from 9,200 in July, 1952, to 6,000 in 1953. [HON. MEMBERS: "Scandalous."] I think that that is a very welcome improvement which we hope will be continued.

While appreciating that, may I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman to take the next opportunity, when discussions are taking place with representatives of the Greek Government, even on economic matters, to intimate that those discussions would be welcomed far more widely in this country if the Greek Government released the remaining political prisoners?

The Greek Government is a friendly Government, and one has to observe a certain caution about advising a friendly Government on matters which are within their domestic jurisdiction.

asked the Minister of Food whether he is now in a position to authorise the marketing of branded margarine.

I have nothing to add at present to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Willey) on 6th July.

asked the Minister of Food when he expects to be in a position to end the rationing of margarine and cooking fats.

As my hon. Friend is aware, derationing depends on our ability to pay for substantial extra imports of materials, a high proportion of which must be bought for dollars. I cannot say exactly when this will be possible.

Will my right hon. and gallant Friend bear in mind that the sooner he finds it possible to let the law of supply and demand govern the sale of butter and margarine the better value the people will get and the more of both commodities they will get at a reasonable price?

I agree with my hon. Friend, but the initial steps in getting sufficient quantities to meet the situation depends upon foreign exchange.

Do I understand that the problem is not now what it was stated to be formerly, that the late Government did not send out enough business men to scour the markets of the world, but is inability to pay for the goods?

The supply position proves that what we said then was right. The right hon. Gentleman is well aware of the currency situation. I have never suggested that there was no difficulty about currency, and when, owing to the policy of this Government, currency became available, we were able to deration sugar.

asked the Minister of Food whether he has satisfied himself that supplies of sweets in the holiday resorts will be sufficient this summer to meet the anticipated demand from visitors.

Yes, Sir.

Thank you very much.

asked the Minister of Food whether he is aware that the allocation of sweets to the holiday resorts this year is being made at the expense of other parts of the country; and what steps he will take to remedy this.

No, Sir. There are enough sweets for all areas, and there is no need for me to intervene.

Is the Minister aware that shops in country districts have inadequate supplies of sweets while in the towns and cities adequate supplies are on show, as a consequence of which the people there are able to buy a better class of confectionery than those in the country districts? Will he do something about it?

I see no reason why I should do anything about it, because no complaints at all have been received from the general public. While it may be true that in such districts as the Highlands of Scotland there may be shortages from time to time, taking the country as a whole supplies are greater today than before the war.

I have sent correspondence to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman's Department pointing out the shortage of supplies in the country districts.

I shall be very glad to look into it.

asked the Minister of Food what percentage of meat imported from Australia was ewe mutton in the years 1951, 1952 and 1953, respectively.

Approximately 3 per cent. 1 per cent. and 10 per cent. in the financial years ended in March, 1951, 1952 and 1953 respectively.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that it was reported in the week-end Press that butchers last week failed to sell the increased allocations made to them? In view of that, will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman withdraw this mutton, or, failing that, see that ewe mutton is not concentrated in districts where people were unable to buy the meat ration because it was too dear? Housewives of working men cannot afford to pay money for stuff they cannot eat.

They managed it very well under the late Administration. The percentage of ewe mutton in the ration today is, I think, the lowest it has ever been. It is about 3·5 per cent. The fact is that there has been difficulty today because butchers have, for the first time since the war, to sell this meat when there is more good meat available than there was before.

asked the Minister of Food what arrangements he is making for the importation of Canadian apples during the coming winter.

asked the Minister of Food how many boxes of Canadian apples he anticipates will be imported into the United Kingdom in 1953.

Owing to our shortage of dollars, I am not at present in a position to buy apples from North America.

Is it not a fact that we spent nearly as many scarce dollars last year in buying American apples as we spent on Canadian apples, and would it not be better to use the scarce dollars in buying food from Canada rather than films from the United States?

One has to be careful, of course, not to lay oneself open to charges of discrimination, but the question does not now arise because the money is not there to buy this food.

asked the Minister of Food when the report of the committee, sitting under the chairmanship of the Duke of Northumberland, to investigate the slaughter of horses, will be published.

The report will be published as a White Paper towards the end of August.

asked the Minister of Food why, during the year 1952–53, liquid milk consumption in Stoke-on-Trent rose by 100,000 gallons, whereas in the country as a whole it fell by 33,000,000 gallons.

I am not in a position to account for relatively small local changes in milk consumption which may be due to many variable factors.

Has the Minister any information to show whether this situation might be due to the increased use of liquid milk in industrial canteens, which would, of course, help adolescent boys and girls, particularly in view of the fact that this is a fairly substantial rise at a time when there has been a fall in other areas? Will not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman congratulate this most progressive city in Britain?

I shall be very happy to do that, but I think that one of the reasons is that sales of pasteurised milk have gone down whereas those of sterilised milk have considerably increased. That may be the explanation.

asked the Minister of Food whether he will give the number of gallons of milk imported from Northern Ireland in the last financial year, together with the value and the amount of food subsidy in respect of it paid to Northern Ireland farmers, reckoned upon a population basis.

Four million four hundred thousand gallons. As regards the second part of the Question, I regret that it is not possible to allocate the benefit of the liquid milk subsidy as between producer and consumer.

Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider that we are getting sufficient milk from Northern Ireland to justify the higher cost to this country?

I think that at certain times of the year, particularly when there are shortages in this country, it affords a very great advantage to us.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that on numerous occasions in the past, during temporary shortages of liquid milk in this country, the importation of this commodity from Northern Ireland has been of the utmost benefit to consumers, especially in the large industrial towns in the North-West of England?

Speaking from my own experience, I can say that on more than one occasion, and particularly during the war, it has been of tremendous advantage to us.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman do his best to increase supplies of liquid milk from whatever source he can so that he can destroy the stores of powdered milk as a result of the use of which children have been poisoned?

asked the Minister of Food whether he is aware that the Midland Area Committee of the Retail Fruit Trade Federation has complained to his Department concerning the weights of Italian apples; that these packs are marked one bushel which is accepted by the trade as 40 lb., but in few cases exceed 37 lb. weight of fruit; and what reply has been sent to the Midland Area Committee.

I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the reply sent by my Department to the Committee.

I think I have heard what is in that letter and it will be helpful, but is the Minister aware that at a recent meeting of Birmingham wholesalers and retailers they complained of short weight in the sacks of Canary potatoes and of Spanish apricots and plums? Is the Minister further aware that evidence was submitted showing that the 72 lb. sacks of potatoes weighed only 60 lb.? Can he also deal with that matter?

I will certainly look into the matter, but the difficulty is that the bushel is a unit of measure, and with very large apples one could get a very substantial shortage in weight. My information is that the apples are marked in bushels and not in weight. I will look into the other question raised.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that Worcestershire is in the Midlands, and would he deprecate the habit of buying Italian apples and buy British instead?

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that the rapid transport of fish from Brightlingsea, Essex, is being restricted as a result of the closing of the branch railway line; and, in view of the importance of these facilities to the fishermen of Tollesbury and other places, what representations he will make to the British Transport Commission on this matter.

I understand that the future of the railway line is being considered by the East Anglian Transport Users' Consultative Committee under the machinery provided by the Transport Act of 1947, and that the interests of the fishing industry are being closely watched by the White Fish Authority.

If a decision is taken—as we hope it will not be—not to reopen the branch line, and if the Minister finds that this is affecting the transport of fish, would he regard it as his responsibility, as Minister of Food, to intervene?

Since the control of fish was removed from my Ministry in 1950, my Department have had nothing to do with the day-to-day work of the fishing industry. The responsibility for this was transferred to the White Fish Authority, who, I am informed, are now consulting the interests concerned, including the fishermen.

asked the Minister of Food for the latest available period, the non-take-up of rationed foodstuffs, given separately for each foodstuff, and expressed both as percentages and in numbers of rations.

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

As there is clearly a relationship between price and consumption, will the Minister give an assurance that there will be no further price increases this year in subsidised foods?

I do not altogether accept the hon. Gentleman's remarks, because where there is a larger non-take-up with a much larger ration the actual amount consumed is greater.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman answer the latter part of the supplementary? Can we have a definite assurance that there will be no price increase in subsidised foods?

It is quite impossible for anybody to give a definite answer on that, and I pray in aid the experience of the hon. Gentleman's own Government.

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand has officially said that his Government had authorised the Meat Producers Board to discuss, when in London, a meat purchase contract with his Department to take the place of the present seven-year contract which expires in September, 1955; and whether he will give an assurance that no agreement will be reached which will tie the hands of private traders after the expiry of the present contract.

When the occasion arises, I will certainly keep in mind the consideration mentioned by my hon. Friend.

Are we to understand that the occasion has not yet arisen?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the existing agreement ends in 1955. We are now negotiating prices up to 1954, so there are two years before it comes to an end.

Will the Minister make sure that when these discussions are taking place with the Prime Minister of New Zealand he will do nothing to jeopardise the supply of meat coming to this country? Does he not agree that past experience has proved that a long-term agreement based on bulk purchase at a reasonable price is the best for this country?

I would not agree with the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary, though I certainly support the first part of it.

asked the Minister of Food what percentage of Scottish beef has been included in the meat ration in Aberdeenshire during the past six months.

Approximately 57 per cent.

Can the Minister say how this compares with the percentage over the country as a whole?

On the whole, I should say that it is rather better.

If this ridiculously small percentage is due to the inadequate and expensive transport from Aberdeen to the South, will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman get in touch with the Minister of Transport with a view to rectifying the situation?

As a matter of fact, the percentage over the country as a whole is rather good. Aberdeen happens to be doing rather better.

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware of the concern felt by housewives at the continued rise in the price of food, particularly since October, 1951; and what action he proposes to take to restore the price of food to such a figure as to enable the poorer sections of the population to take up their full rations.

I am confident that housewives appreciate our success in checking the increase in the cost of living, which rose over twice as fast in 1951 under the late Government as it did in 1952 under the present Administration.

As regards the second part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given to him on 15th July.

Is the Minister aware that the figures he has quoted are misleading, because when the Korean war was at its height world food prices were rapidly rising while the cost of living in this country rose far less rapidly than in any other country in the world? In fact, the reverse is now the case. World food prices are dropping, but prices here have been rising far more rapidly than in any other place. Is the Minister further aware that at the last Election the Government promised that it would bring down the cost of living to make the £ worth something, and bring down the price of food? Is he further aware that the purchasing value of the £ has now reached the lowest level ever, and that housewives are completely fed up with this Government?

I could not, in two minutes, possibly cover the points which the hon. Gentleman has raised. I must, however, call his attention to his own question, in which he refers to the

"rise in the price of food, particularly since October, 1951."

Since October, 1951, the index has risen at exactly half the rate at which it rose before.