COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 22 November 1954)

VISCOUNT WOOLION
My Lords, Section 29 of the 1950 Act which deals with reconstituted cream and imitation cream, left a loophole for the sale of substances not falling within either of these categories under some such description as "mock cream." Section 29 1719 made it an offence to sell under a description including the word "cream" any substance purporting to be reconstituted cream or imitation cream. This left a large loophole. Reconstituted cream and imitation cream are both closely defined, and in Section 29 (as proposed to be amended by Clause 11) it would have been open to a person to manufacture some utterly worthless substance and sell it as mock cream or artificial cream or, with little regard for the use of the English language, to call it "Dairikreem" and avoid the penalties of Section 29 by maintaining that this did not purport to be either reconstituted cream or imitation cream.
This clause closes that gap in the law. It does three things. First, it ensures that the word "cream," whether appearing alone or as part of another word and even if spelt differently, shall not be used unless the substance is either cream, reconstituted cream or imitation cream, the last two being defined. Secondly, it ensures that where the substance is described by an expression including the word "cream" and is either reconstituted cream or imitation cream, it shall be described as such. Thirdly, it extends these provisions to apply not only where the substance is sold by itself but also where it is sold as part of another article; for example, strawberries and cream or cream buns. Provision is made to ensure that the clause will not catch such substances as salad cream or cream crackers, since it only applies where the substance sold or incorporated in some other food resembles cream in appearance. I think this clause will help in the work which we had in mind when we originally discussed this matter. I beg to move that the House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment.

§ LORD SILKIN
My Lords, the object behind this new clause is wholly laudable, and no one would wish to oppose it in any shape or form. I only wonder whether it will, in fact, do what the noble Viscount says it will do. Looking at subsection (4) I know the intention is that however the word "cream" is spelt, if it 1720 is calculated to lead a purchaser to suppose that the article contains either cream or a substitute for cream when it is not, the seller is committing an offence. But the very fact that it is spelt differently would make it possible to argue that it was deliberately spelt differently in order not to mislead a purchaser into thinking it was cream. It may well be that what is happening here is that the noble Viscount is "buying" a series of court cases, rather than making the matter completely clear. I must confess that I do not know what could be done completely to achieve what is wanted, but I must say that I have some doubts as to whether subsection (4) will do it. I am sure that the intention is there, and if the intention could be used in evidence in court, of course there would be no doubt about it. But the words of the noble Viscount will, I am sorry to say, however weighty they may be in this House, carry no weight in a court of law. Therefore, this subsection will have to be interpreted, and it can be interpreted in the way I have indicated.

§ VISCOUNT HUDSON
My Lords, I should like to detain your Lordships for one moment in thanking the noble Viscount and the Government for introducing this clause. I was concerned at an earlier stage in your Lordships' deliberations in trying to find a form of words which would prevent the public from being misled by the use of the name "cream." I am bound to say that I think the Amendment which is now before us is a great improvement on the words that your Lordships were kind enough to insert at our instigation at an earlier stage. The Bill has passed through another place and has met with a considerable amount of difficulty. Those of us who have the interests of farming at heart are deeply grateful for the efforts made by the officials of the Ministry of Food to secure what I hope, despite the fears of the noble Lord, Lord Silkin, will be an effective deterrent. One thing to which I shall look forward with considerable pleasure when the cream season starts next year is to see on the menus in some of the expensive restaurants in London, "Strawberries and imitation cream," because the main difficulty with which we met when it was called artificial cream was that there was little difference in the mind of the public between artificial and re-constituted 1721 cream. I hope that by the use of the word "imitation" the public will definitely be protected and will not be provided with methyl cellulose, which looks very much like the real thing. I am glad to hear that the provision extends to the sale of so-called cream buns. I am most grateful, and I am sure all the farmers of the country and the purveyors of cream will be equally grateful.