§ MR. CHIOZZA MONEY (Paddington, N.)To ask the President of the Local Government Board if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Paddington Borough Council have abruptly terminated, an arrangement whereby the retail meat traders of Paddington had the protection of the daily inspection of their meat purchases before the same was exposed for sale, so that they are now open to the risk of criminal prosecution, confiscation, and fine, notwithstanding the fact that they have taken all precautions in their power to purchase sound 1401 meat; and whether he proposed to take any action in the matter.
§ MR. FIELDTo ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to a circular letter under date of March 31st, 1906, issued by the Paddington local authority to all meat purveyors in their district, notifying the withdrawal of the protection, which prior to the date of the letter had been accorded meat traders, whereby the latter on submitting carcases of pork for inspection prior to exposure thereof for sale were immune from the institution of criminal proceedings should any carcase so submitted be found affected with tuberculosis; and whether he will make such representations to the Paddington Borough Council for the continuation of the system of inspection.
Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Perhaps I may be allowed to answer these two Questions together. I have made inquiry and am informed that the Public Health Committee of the borough council have felt themselves obliged to abandon the arrangement referred to by the hon. Members, and to give instructions for the inspection of meat to be carried out strictly in accordance with Section 47 of The Public Health (London) Act, 1891. The arrangement was a tentative one, and I am informed that the results have been disappointing. I think the practice which has been followed by the borough council had advantages, but it was optional with them to determine whether they would continue it, and I have no authority to require them to do so.