asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the progress of his discussions with the brewing industry with respect to the European Economic Community draft directive on brewing.

Our discussions have enabled us to identify the points we would consider with the European Economic Community should developments on the draft directive make this appropriate.

The Minister will be aware that nothing has yet been settled by the Europeans as to what they will do on this subject. Is he making any representations to the Europeans about this in the interests of British beer drinkers?

We do not regard it as possible at this stage to get E.E.C. action on the draft postponed as it is a matter for the E.E.C. There have been discussions.

In the course of these discussions, is the Minister bearing in mind the need to abolish the tied house system in this country?

That is entirely outside the scope of the E.E.C. draft directive.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what would be the advantages to Great Britain in an enlarged Community of the relatively large average size of farms in Great Britain.

The country will benefit as a member of an enlarged Community by increased agricultural production and, generally speaking, large farms should be more efficient producers than small ones.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that the average size of the British farm is much larger than that of Continental ones and that larger farms than the average should do better with the higher prices which will accrue to this country after we join the E.E.C.?

Yes, my hon. Friend is absolutely right. Because of the structure of our industry, the scale of our enterprises, the size of our farms and the skill of our farmers, our farmers need have no fears about the Common Market.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that it is no secret that many farmers, especially small farmers, will have to go out of business if we enter the E.E.C.? Obviously, he has made calculations with regard to the numbers involved. Will he now be candid and tell the House what his calculations are in this matter?

For one thing there is no secret, and, for another, I think that the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is complete and utter nonsense.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to what extent the newly introduced farming levy will prove an advantage to Great Britain when it comes to adapting to Community farm policy.

The interim import levy schemes will, when introduced, provide some of the mechanism that will be required to implement the common agricultural policy and will give valuable experience in operating it.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that in order to take full advantage of joining the E.E.C. and the higher level of import levy, farming capital is required, and that this is gravely short at the moment?

This is tending to edge towards a question about the Farm Price Review, about which negotiations are about to begin. I think that I had better not comment.

Would my right hon. Friend care to comment on the speech by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the Guildhall on 1st February, when he said that if we enter the Common Market we shall provide a large and expanding export market in agriculture for the Common Market countries?

That is just facing up to facts, as my right hon. Friend always does. There is no doubt that there will be increased exports from Common Market countries to this country if we join, but that is another reason why British agriculture should also expand.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food at what level he is holding discussions with the National Farmers' Union on matters affecting British agriculture during the negotiations on British entry into the European Economic Community.

The National Farmers' Union has been kept fully in touch with the progress of the negotiations. I and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster met the President of the union on 5th February for cordial and useful talks.

I am confident that my right hon. Friend is making every effort to obtain the best possible terms, but is he aware that the horticulturists feel that they have been left out in the cold, especially the apple growers? They want further discussions and more information, because they want to plan their own future.

I am well aware of what I know to be a serious problem, particularly for apple and pear growers. At the same time as we saw the President of the National Farmers' Union we saw the Chairman of the Central Horticultural Committee of the N.F.U. There are regular meetings between my officials concerned with the negotiations and those gentlemen. If there is anything further that I can do, I shall certainly try.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that at the N.F.U. annual conference very recently the farmers forecast the worst slump since the 1930s, with many bankruptcies and a great deal of unemployment among farmers and farm workers, and on explosive rise in food prices? What has he to say about that?

Two things: first, this has nothing to do with the Common Market; second, it is an apt commentary on hon. Members opposite.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give details of the decline in the numbers of agricultural workers in the European Economic Community and in the United Kingdom over the past 10 years.

Between 1959 and 1969 the number of agricultural workers in the United Kingdom declined by 286,000. There is no comparable figure for the European Economic Community.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the decline in the number of workers in agriculture in this country and the increased output that has taken place over the period augurs well for the British farmer competing against agriculture within the Six?

The fact that despite that fall in agricultural manpower productivity has been rising by between 5 and 6 per cent. a year is an excellent testimony to what my hon. Friend has just said.

Can the Minister explain why both he and his right hon. Friend can never give any facts and figures concerning the E.E.C. when they are of an adverse character but can always give them when they are pro-E.E.C? To what extent has he discussed these matters with the agricultural workers' union as well as the N.F.U.?

I should not have thought that what I have just said would necessarily reflect at all badly upon the E.E.C. Therefore, I reject the hon. Gentleman's premise.

Will the introduction of factory farming into this country not reduce the number of agricultural workers still further? What will the Minister do about that?

I have a suspicion that the hon. Gentleman has not realised that we have moved on from the last Question.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will require the brewing industry to indicate the minimum alcoholic content that their draught and bottled beers possess at the time they are put in bottle or cask.

No, Sir. Such a declaration could be misleading.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in a supplementary answer by one of his colleagues just before Christmas I was told that the only objection was one of practicality, the reason being given that some brews continue to ferment in the bottle or cask. This question takes care of this problem of practicality. There is no reason at all why— —

Order. The hon. Member for Dudley (Dr. Gilbert) must not make observations; he must ask questions.

It is wise that we should look at the experience of other countries which have tried this. In Canada the declaration of alcoholic content is prohibited as it is thought that it might lead to increased drunkenness. The Netherlands require it as a means of encouraging temperance, but it is said to have had precisely the opposite effect.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his estimate of the effect of the increase in oil prices over the last six months on retail food prices.

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to hydrocarbon oil products. Any such effect would be very small, but all increased costs militate against stable prices.

Since we are told that there are about six months' oil supplies in the country, can the right hon. Gentleman assure us that when prices are increased, as they will be, he will not allow profiteering on the existing supplies, which would mitigate against the consumer and increase the cost of living?

It is not for me to give that sort of assurance. The increase in prices which will result from any increase in oil prices will be very small.

In his capacity as Minister of Food, will my right hon. Friend consider whether differential taxation in respect of transport, rates, selective employment tax or anything else that he can think of can bring relief to food retailers, who need help?

I agree with the last part of my hon. Friend's question. The first part of it is not a matter for which I am responsible, but I will draw it to the attention of my right hon. Friends.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now make a further statement on the level of food prices and how much they have risen compared with the general level of incomes since June, 1970.

Between June and November, the latest date for which comparable figures are available, the Food Index increased by 0·6 per cent. and the Index of Average Earnings by 3·4 per cent.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that there is still a good deal of concern about retail food prices? Will he step along his corridor, see the Chancellor of the Exchequer and ask him to abolish selective employment tax in his next Budget, since it makes such a significant contribution to all retail food prices?

As I have said already, these are matters for my right hon. Friends. But we are pledged to abolish S.E.T. within the lifetime of this Parliament, and, unlike right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite, we keep our election pledges.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Bexley Housewives' Protection League is gravely concerned at the way in which food prices are soaring? If he receives representations from that body, will he undertake to give them proper consideration?

That was a supplementary question which the hon. Gentleman wished to ask on the previous Question. But, of course, I will always give due attention to the Housewives' League or any other body which contacts me.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the percentage of its income spent by the average family on food has decreased over the past 12 months?

Yes, Sir. That is perfectly true. The process has been going on now for a number of years.

Is not the price of manufactured food products likely to go up by at least 10 per cent. in 1971? In view of that, would not the Government be in a better position to secure the co-operation of sections of the community like the Post Office workers if they acted directly to restrain increases of this order, as they said they would originally?

I do not want to be tied to any figure that the hon. Gentleman offers as being the likely increase in the prices of manufactured food products. However, it is true that by far the largest element of costs in manufactured food products is the price of labour. If we can get inflation under control, we shall be able to reduce these prices.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what analysis he is making of the effects of competition in stabilising food prices.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Bagier) on 8th December.—[Vol. 808, c. 59.]

While the claim that competition will stabilise prices may be an important part of the Government's new philosophy, to which the Minister frequently refers, is it not the case that it has little relationship to the realities of the food marketing situation at present? The trade itself is forecasting a likely increase of 10 per cent. on the retail price of manufactured food products during 1971. Will the Minister tell us what has to happen to prices before he is prepared to act directly to restrain increases of this order?

We hear all this talk about acting directly on food prices. This is what the previous Government tried to do by the early warning system, but prices rose during the last five years more than twice as fast as in our last five years.

I accept my right hon. Friend's contention that competition will affect prices. However, will he ask his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services to look at the case of the old-age pensioners, who have been hit particularly hard by food price increases in the last 18 months?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The old-age pensioners and those on fixed incomes suffer most as a result of inflation. As we deal with inflation, we shall help to get the position under control.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the operation of the information service on essential key food prices, which he has introduced in place of the previous early warning system.

The purpose of the new arrangements is to keep me informed of prospective movements in the prices of certain major products with which I am concerned. I am circulating a full list of the products in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The industries concerned have agreed to co-operate.

Will the Minister also circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT, or let us know, what information is being asked for from the firms concerned? As the Minister is so pleased that he has dismantled my right hon. Friend's warning system, may I ask what is the point of getting this information? What will he do with it when he has got it?

I consider that it is important that I should know what is happening to the prices of important items. That is the main purpose of obtaining the information. The early warning system did not stop prices rising. We shall stop prices rising in this country only if we do not pay ourselves more for doing no more work.

Will my right hon. Friend tell the House whether under his revised system he will be able to detect the influence on food prices caused by such intangible but very important price advances as the proposed 6d. a gallon increase in the price of petrol?

Yes, Sir. We have a very full department looking at this type of problem the whole time, and we are able accurately to assess that type of increase, and a good many others too.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in many parts of the country it is becoming impossible for retirement pensioners and others living alone to buy less than six eggs, large packets of pre-packed cheese and large packets of pre-packed bacon? Has the Minister any instructions for retailers and others about how they can help people in this predicament?

The hon. Lady has raised a very important matter. I should like to look into it to see whether there is anything which I can do to help. Certainly I feel that retail shops should do everything in their power to be of assistance in this kind of matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the early warning system was a deterrent over a long period? If the Minister finds that increases are not justified, what steps will he then take?

The early warning system was a singularly ineffective deterrent, because it resulted in prices going up 25·9 per cent. in the last five years compared with 11·4 per cent. in the previous five years. I am not prepared to come to the House and introduce what I consider to be merely public relations measures which have no bearing on the problem.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information he has received from food manufacturers and distributors about price policy after decimalisation; and whether he will make a statement.

Pricing policy is a matter for the firms concerned, but I see no reason why decimalisation should affect their price policies.

and betrayal amongst a wide cross-section of the British public, particularly those on small and limited incomes, at the Government's doctrinaire refusal to intervene on price increases? Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that the Government will deal remorselessly with anyone who tries an inflationary and anti-social process by profiteering following decimalisation?

There are two parts to that question. On the part dealing with decimalisation, I am quite certain that vigilance and publicity of cases where perhaps retail shops are putting up their prices are extremely important and are the best safeguards. I have already covered the other part of the hon. Gentleman's question.

Does my hon. Friend agree that decimalisation is not really the problem at the moment regarding increased prices? It is the Transport Act and all the other Measures which the previous Government brought in. They are the guilty people and they have a real nerve to come to this House and say what they do.

Order. That sounded more like a comment than a question.

It was an excellent comment, Mr. Speaker, and one with which I agree.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether he is taking any special precautions or making any examination of the trend in prices in the period immediately following decimalisation? Is the Minister aware that in New Zealand three or four weeks after decimalisation there was an upsurge in prices? Should not the right hon. Gentleman be doing something about it of commending the efforts of the Young Liberals in this sphere?

I thought that the Liberal Party found it difficult to commend the efforts of the Young Liberals; so I should not be expected to do so.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what action he will take before, not only after, decimalisation? Is he aware that particularly in some supermarkets Marvel Milk, for instance, costs as much as 10d. more for the same size of tin and that when such matters are referred to his Department nothing is done? Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what he is going to do about it?

It ill becomes hon. Gentlemen opposite to make this row now about decimalisation. After all, they dragooned their members through the Lobby for a Bill which they did not want, and now they are having to pay for it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will publish a full explanation of the assumptions and calculations supporting his estimate of the likely increase in food prices as a result of changing over to the levy system.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 7th December.—[Vol. 808, c. 39–40.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many people feel that he is deliberately understating the effect which his new policy will have on food prices? In view of his repeated claims for his new policy, does he not accept that he has an obligation to the House to publish a full and detailed explanation of the basis for these estimates?

I will, of course, consider what the hon. Gentleman has said. Since we are only in the process of introducing an interim levy system which is designed to limit Exchequer support, rather than go further than that, it would be premature to go further than I have been able to go at the moment. My assessment at the moment is that the levies which we propose would, over the next three or four years, add perhaps up to 5–6 per cent. to the cost of food during that time, an increase in the cost of food of just over 1 per cent. per year.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent representations on matters for which he is responsible he has received from the Housewives' League; and what reply he has sent.

As I have previously told the hon. Member and other hon. Members, this type of information is not readily available and cannot be obtained without disproportionate cost.—[Vol. 809, c. 239; Vol. 808, c. 59–60.]

The right hon. Gentleman has answered the wrong Question, I believe.

No; I have answered No. 4.

rose—

rose—

Order. The hon. Member for Midlothian (Mr. Eadie) must make up his mind whether he wants to ask a supplementary question.

I thought that the right hon. Gentleman could not make up his mind. I was trying to assist him. Are we to take it from his answer that we must regard the Housewives' League as a Tory front organisation which protests only when Administrations other than Tory ones are in office?

It is obvious from that supplementary question that I gave the right answer. We get a large number of letters on a variety of subjects. Although they are all answered, an immense cost would be involved if we attempted to tabulate them all so that we knew exactly the organisations from which they came and the topics which they raised.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now make a further statement on the dangers of brucellosis, to humans and animals.

My right hon. Friends are fully aware of the brucellosis risk to both human and animal health, and are determined to expunge the disease from our cattle population as soon as practicable. Introduction of the new Brucellosis Incentives Scheme has speeded up progress in this direction, and the first compulsory eradication areas are to be announced in the spring.

While commending my hon. Friend on his choice of words, which precisely fits my needs in this context, may I ask whether, although progress is being made towards the desirable state of totally expunging brucellosis in humans, it would not be better to regard brucellosis as a prescribed industrial disease?

; This is under consideration by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services. I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to the right hon. Member for East Ham, North (Mr. Prentice) on 20th November last.

Will my hon. Friend draw the attention of my hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro) to the fact that this disease in humans has recently been rechristened "The Kissing Disease"?

While congratulating the Minister and his hon. Friend on adopting the scheme that we introduced for the eradication of brucellosis, may I ask whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that it is vital now to get on with the area eradication schemes? He promised us a date some months ago. Can he say when area eradication schemes will be announced, because farmers are waiting for this information?

We are awating the final results of the screening tests being carried out by the Milk Marketing Board. I hope to be in a position to give the House this information in the next few weeks.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he expects the Essex and Kent River Authorities will have progressed far enough with their technical investigations to enable him to publish an estimate of the cost of the flood defences in Essex and Kent arising out of or associated with the Thames Flood Barrier.

The problems associated with raising the estuarial flood defences in Essex and Kent are extremely complex and are likely to have a material effect on cost. Ministry engineers are in close consultation with the two river authorities, but it is too early to forecast when reliable cost figures will be available.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the grave concern amongst ratepayers and riparian owners in Kent and Essex about the possible financial burden arising from these works? Will he take an early opportunity to publish his proposals for financing them?

As soon as we have got the rather complex problems worked out, I will endeavour to do as my hon. Friend asks. The question of grant aid has been agreed in principle for the river authority works. It is true that the actual financial arrangements have still to be agreed. I will endeavour to ensure that they are agreed as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to ensure for the home farmer an increasing share in the home market.

It is the Government's intention to change the system of agricultural support and we have already taken steps to that end. When a full and comprehensive levy system has been introduced, it will help the expansion of an efficient agriculture by preventing low-priced imports from undermining the market.

Has my right hon. Friend's attention been drawn to the answer given to me on 18th January in which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry said that he saw no prospect of any reduction in the level of agricultural import quotas? In the circumstances, can my right hon. Friend explain how he expects to secure a larger proportion of the market for our farmers, and, as this is an area of policy in which farmers think that the Minister of Agriculture is able to represent their interests, what is he doing to show them that that is his policy?

I assume from my hon. Friend's remarks that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry was speaking in terms of Eastern European quotas, since the only commodities that we import under quota come from Eastern Europe. Levy schemes as such will raise prices in this country, so that the farmer will get his return from the market. This should enable him to expand production and compete favourably with other countries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the House is becoming concerned about the progress of his negotiations on these levies with overseas exporters? Can he say what progress he is making and when he will be able to give us details? It is said that New Zealand and Australia are especially concerned about the levies that he is seeking to impose. Can he be a little more precise and say what will be the effect of levies on imports of foodstuffs, especially of such commodities as beef, butter and cheese?

Talks are still going on. They are of a confidential nature. I am not yet in a position to make a statement to the House, but as soon as I am, I will do so. In the meantime, the negotiations are proceeding, and they cover the commodities which the right hon. Gentleman has just mentioned.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what are his proposals to ensure that the rabbit population does not increase.

I propose to leave it almost entirely to farmers and other occupiers of land to take the appropriate steps, in their own self-interest, to keep their rabbits under proper control as the law requires.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that policy was adopted during the period when there were very heavy losses from an enormous rabbit population and that the rabbit clearance societies enabled the less responsible farmers to have their land as well as common land cleared of rabbits? What is the Minister going to do about it?

Grants will continue for the clearing of scrubland. My Department will be responsible for common and derelict land where responsible persons are unknown. I believe that it is right that an animal which can cause an immense amount of damage to a farmer's growing crops should be tackled by the farmer who will suffer the loss if he does not do so.

The policy being put forward by the hon. Gentleman failed in the past and its failure was the reason for the rabbit clearance societies. It having failed in the past, may I ask why the hon. Gentleman thinks that it should succeed in future?

I do not think that spending £500,000 of public money doing something which farmers ought to do for themselves is justified.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimate he has made of the course of potato prices for the remainder of the current season.

I expect producer prices for maincrop potatoes to show their usual seasonal increases, helped by the success of the Potato Marketing Board's support buying programme. There will be some consequential increases in wholesale and retail prices, but they should remain well below last year's levels.

Could my hon. Friend give an assurance that prices will be reasonable towards the end of the season in May, but that, at the same time, the early potato crop in June from Scottish areas will not mean dumped imports from abroad?

On the first part of that Question, prices are expected to rise by some £10 a ton from their present level by the end of the season. But, as I have already said, retail prices should even then be below those of last year. On the second part of the question, it is a little early, when one does not know what sort of planting season we shall have apart from anything else, to forecast the position there.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if the fall-back guarantee price envisaged in the proposed new system of agriculture support will be guaranteed by deficiency payments.

Fall-back guarantee will not be required under the proposed interim levy schemes since the present guaranteed prices will continue. The precise form that the fall-back arrangements should take under comprehensive levy schemes is still being considered. They will need to be adapted to the needs and considerations of each commodity.

Is the Minister aware that prior to the General Election the agricultural industry was under the impression that, inevitably, a Conservative Government would back up the fall-back price with a deficiency payment, so that that fall-back price was a reality? If that is no longer the Minister's position, will he explain to the industry that the deficiency payments system may be removed completely?

No, we have never maintained, and no one has ever said, that the deficiency payments system would continue once we reached the stage of fallback guarantees. What we have made abundantly clear is that in the transitional period—in other words, for the next three or four years—the guaranteed prices system will continue as it is now, and during that time we shall have consultations with the National Farmers' Union and other interested bodies to see how best to implement the fall-back guarantee and at what level.

Would the Minister be more precise on a very important point? Will he confirm that the fall-back guarantee will be a safety net, and a very low one, and that it will be used only in case of some emergency, which could well happen?

I do not want to get drawn into a discussion of the level of the fallback guarantee at this stage, because no decision has been reached and no consultations have yet taken place. Certainly, the fall-back guarantee will be set at levels lower than the existing guarantee, but we shall be moving more towards target prices than we have done at the moment.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the regulations governing the nutritive values of foodstuffs.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will introduce regulations to ensure minimum nutritional standards, and to regulate nutritional claims, in food.

There are 27 regulations laying down compositional standards which ensure a minimum nutritive value for specified foods. Nutritional claims for all foods are controlled by the Food and Drugs Act, 1955, and by labelling regulations.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Would he not accept that the general public are becoming disturbed about the apparent deficiencies in our regulations compared with those of countries like the United States and Canada? Will he institute a survey in his Ministry of the comparison between our regulations and those of the United States and Canada to see whether we can tighten them up in view of other products which are coming on to the market?

I am aware of the recent review in the United States. I think that conditions are entirely different there. There is no shortage of essential nutrients in this country; the nutrient content of the nation's diet as a whole is satisfactory. I am prepared to look at this, but not, I think, to embark on a great exercise in depth.

What further studies have been made by the hon. Gentleman's expert advisers since the regulations were made last year to take into account the ever-growing number of processed foods and the lack of adequate nutrition among elderly people and other groups? When he is considering this matter further, would he undertake to review those regulations in the light of these developments?

I can assure the hon. Lady that these matters are kept under continuous review.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to abolish the use of sow stalls in which the animal spends its life and in which it can neither walk nor turn round.

The Pigs Code provides that where sows are housed individually they should be able to feed and lie down normally and that if tethers are used they should not cause injury or distress. My right hon. Friend does not feel justified in banning the use of sow stalls.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the code is advisory only, that there is nothing mandatory in it, and that unless restrictions are imposed in these matters there will be considerable cruelty? If my hon. Friend feels so strongly about this, will he see that the code is observed?

With great respect to my hon. Friend, neither he nor I knows whether cruelty will be caused. This is a matter of opinion. The right hon. Member for Anglesey (Mr. Cledwyn Hughes) when he was Minister, with our support, asked the Farm Animal Welfare Committee and the State Veterinary Service to go into the matter. They have done so, and have laid their findings. We have placed them in the Library. That is more expert advice than my hon. Friend or I are capable of giving.

Is the Minister aware that there is profound feeling in the country about some aspects of factory farming, notwithstanding the technical reports to which he has referred? If he is so confident that he can rest his argument on those reports, would he be prepared to see a deputation from the National Society for the Abolition of Factory Farming, which consists of a good cross-section of the community, to put some other facts before him?

I am perfectly aware—no one could fail to be—of public thinking upon the matter. I am always ready to see people who wish to discuss such matters with me. But I return to the fact that we cannot do better than accept the advice of those who know more about this than we do.