§ Mr. JOHN JONESThe subject I have the honour to raise is one which may not be so important as the question of the police, but I think it is one upon which a great amount of feeling exists in the country. Those connected with the Labour movement know that hardly a day passes without we receive some communications from the trades councils and other bodies asking what is going to be the policy of the Government in connection with the food situation, which is serious and important so far as the great mass of the people are concerned. At the present time we are gradually relaxing, if not altogether abolishing, control. Whatever may have been said against Government control in other Departments, I believe all hon. Members will agree that so far as 2503 food control is concerned, if it had not been for the amount of control established in connection with our food supplies we should never have won the War, and we certainly would not have been able to maintain civil peace inside our own country.
Throughout the length and breadth of the country thousands of people gave splendid voluntary service in the direction of carrying out the Regulations laid down by the Food Minister, and as soon as ever the Armistice was signed an agitation began in the country—I do not know where it started—for the immediate abolition of all forms of control, including food control. We of the Labour party are generally being charged by those opposed to us with being supporters of bureaucracy, and with being out for collectivism, but nothing can be further from the truth. We object to the control of men in the interest of things, and we want to see the control of things in the interest of men. When we are dealing with the food problem we are bound to recognise that in a country such as ours, dependent upon foreign sources for our food supply, it is absolutely essential in the public interest that we should have some means of controlling the position with which we are likely to be brought face to face. At the present moment we are informed on very good authority that some of the wholesale suppliers of food are rationing their customers in the amount of supplies they allow them to have, the idea being that there is a fear that as soon as ever the final Peace terms are signed the scramble for food will mean the possibility of getting greater prices. Consequently those who have control of supplies are taking time by the fore-look and organising for the future in that respect. I am not blaming those people. They are in business, not for the good of our health, but they are in business for profit, and nothing else matters to them. Consequently, whatever they may do in their own interests only makes it all the more justifiable that we should do something in our own interests.
At the present moment, according to a Report presented by the Committee appointed by the Minister of Reconstruction, we have, practically speaking, a very important section of the food supply, not merely of this country, but of the world, dominated by the American Meat Trust. That trust, during the four and a half 2504 years the War lasted, made £39,500,000 extra profits over and above the amount of profits made in a similar period previous to the War. They have practically been able, by the exercise of their power, and through their control of the meat supplies of the civilised world, to exact this extortion. So far as this country is concerned, and other countries have been dependent upon them, they have paid practically nothing towards the taxation consequent upon the War. If I were inclined to be facetious, I could make some fun out of the names connected with this trust. Evidently we have not defeated all the Germans yet, because an inspection of the names shows that some of the gentlemen who control this trust are special representatives of German-America. Now that America has decided to separate herself from the international buying of supplies for the Allies, this German influence might be exercised in a direction which might be to our disadvantage when Peace is finally signed.
We not merely have the fact that we have this monopoly, but practically in all our important industries, including food, we have in our own country the same system developing by means of trade combines and syndicates dealing with most of our material means of existence. Whilst we are not anxious to have the State become a policeman merely to interfere with everybody's rights and liberties, we claim in the essential matter of food supplies that there ought to be maintained such a system of control as will enable us to exercise the power as a nation to protect the people against exactions upon an extortionate scale. During the past week in Scotland no less that five boatloads of fish have had to be thrown into the sea; and why? The fishermen have been demanding that, in return for the great risks they run of coming across derelict mines and risking their lives, they shall be paid sufficient to enable them to live decently. One would imagine from the reports that it would hardly pay the men to go out to sea and catch the fish, and yet we know that fish is four times as dear as it was before the War, and that almost in every shop ordinary cheap fish, which used to be one of our cheapest foods, is now entering into competition with the dearest. What system can we adopt of seeing that people have the advantage of any harvest of the sea, or any means of production or distributing food economically, if we have no system which will stop the possibility of 2505 people taking advantage of our national necessity. I agree with the Home Secretary when lie said that it was not the right of a policeman to hold the State to ransom. The policemen are not the only people who hold the State to ransom, and, although their services are very desirable in the interests of the community, there are other people who also do a great service to the community and whose duties are equally essential for the maintenance of all civilised life.
I might point out that at the present moment, the workers, so far as food is concerned, are placed in a very difficult position. Unfortunately, since the Armistice was signed, things have slackened off not merely in those trades where munition workers were engaged but also in the trades dependent upon them. People have not had the same amount of money to spend, and consequently there has not i been the same demand for the commodities which were essential for their use or enjoyment. Although their earning power has declined and there are over 1,000,000 people living upon the donation benefit, the prices of food practically remain at the same level as when, the Armistice was signed. Promises were made to us. if control were removed and if the State did not keep its paralysing hand upon those who were anxious to supply us with food, that we should be able to enjoy cheap food and that plenty would exist throughout the land. We know by bitter experience that such has not been the case. we know that the Ministry of Food has been the most successful of any Department of the State since it was established. We know what the queues meant in 1915–16. Consequently, those of us who belong to the Labour party are anxious, if we cannot have a complete system of food control—we do not desire the people to be rationed, and to be put to inconvenience—that in the main essential articles of food there should be some relationship between the cost of production and distribution and the price charged to the people. We ought not to allow monopolist concerns, whether home or foreign, to take advantage of the needs of the people, and to exploit them to the extent that they are doing to-day.
What is happening now, for instance, with regard to margarine and feeding-stuffs for cattle, which constitute to a great extent the raw materials for the production of margarine? We were promised reductions almost immediately. To begin 2506 with reductions did take place. The prices now, however, are beginning to go up again. During the past week the prices of these raw materials have jumped to-double that which they were before. Consequently, we have a right to know if the Government have any intention of protecting the interests of the community and of seeing that the prices which we have to pay for foodstuffs are not forced up to a famine extent merely because of the shortage which is bound to occur when the world comes into competition once more for supplies. We ask that in this particular case Labour should be consulted, and that in any machinery that may be necessary—I believe that machinery will be necessary—if we cannot have the old Consumers' Council and the local food control committees, we should at least have committees representing the big areas, so that the people in the localities can be taken into consultation
High prices of food exist side by side with less chances of earning money. Overtime is practically stopped in most of our trades Large numbers of workers have been thrown out of employment. All these things mean that, if something is not done to protect the interests of the people of this country, you will have a greater amount of industrial unrest after Peace has been signed than you have had before. The workers are certainly determined not to go back to the old conditions. At present we are receiving from employers' organisations applications that we should submit to arbitration requests for reductions in wages. If arbitration takes place and wages are reduced, and if prices do not materially go down, then the industrial troubles that we have had in the past will sink into insignificance compared with the industrial troubles that we may have in the future. We therefore ask the Government to give us some assurance that we can take to our members in the great organisations we represent, and also to the great mass of the people outside, that in this great scramble that is bound to take place—the whole of Eastern and Central Europe has been devastated, and there is bound to be a food shortage—some international steps will be taken to protect the community against these trusts and combines which have already extended their tentacles beyond the limits of the civilised world, and to prevent this game of beggar-my-neighbour.
2507 We hope that the Government will give us some assurance, apart from that given by the Food Controller the other day, that the interests of the people are going to be protected. The right hon. Gentleman then said that tonnage was the solution of the problem. As a matter of fact, the shipping of the United Kingdom is almost as much a trust as the American Meat Trust, and the demand for shipping will be so great when the blockade is removed that there will be a great possibility of charging even higher freights, and, as a consequence, a chance of food prices going up even higher. Therefore, it is absolutely essential that the interests of the people should be protected, and I hope. the Minister of Food will be able to give us some assurance that the interests of the people are going to be protected and that, he will be able to announce the definite steps that he is taking in that direction.
§ Lieut.-Colonel MEYSEY-THOMPSONI have listened with great interest to the speech that has just been made, and I wish to put in a plea for the consumers of a very valuable form of food, namely, malt extract, commonly known by the name of beer. I have had very strong representations, not only from my own Constituents but from all parts of the world, with regard to the removal of the restrictions on the sale of beer. The working man considers, and I quite sympathise with him, that his beer is a very valuable portion of his food, and he wants, not only cheap beer, but beer of a good quality. At the present time he is asked a high price, he is restricted in the beer that he can consume, and he is sold beer of a very low quality. We all know that one most valuable tonic—I do not call it medicine—that is recommended by doctors to invalids who are run down is malt extract. Good Queen Bess used to consume, I believe, a glass of beer every morning, and it was considered very wholesome for her, and it was certainly largely consumed, and very beneficially consumed, by her subjects. There can be no excuse for a continuation of these restrictions.
4.0 P.M
During the War, when there was a shortage of barley, there was a good excuse for saying that it should not be used for brewing instead of for food in other forms. But that necessity now exists no longer, and there is an immense demand throughout this country for beer of good quality 2508 and in sufficient quantity, and to be consumed at a time when the worker wants it, and not at a time when somebody else lays down that he ought to want it. There are only one or two reasons given why these restrictions are not removed. One is the plea of the revenue to the Government, but I think it will be generally agreed that that is a distinct case of profiteering, and that clearly the restriction ought, to be removed as soon as possible. The other plea is that these restrictions are continued in response to the demands of a certain small section of the community. As the hon. Member (Mr. J. Jones) said, the whole nation should not be controlled by one small section; it is the great body of the public that ought to be considered. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that there is an immense feeling throughout the country that these restrictions ought now to be removed, and that the workman has a perfect right to demand really good sound beer, at a reasonable price, and at the hours when he wishes to consume it.
§ Lieut.-Colonel MEYSEY-THOMPSONThe temperate people feel it most of all, I quite agree. They are forced very often into drinking beer or spirits at a time when they do not require it, because they cannot obtain it when it is most beneficial to them. At the same time I would urge that the restriction on spirits should be removed. What happens now? I have had these cases brought before me over and over again. I have here a letter from one of my Constituents, pointing out a case in which an old man has been accustomed to take every day a small quantity of spirits, ordered by his doctor. He is now ill and feeble, and without a medical certificate he cannot get the spirits be needs, and it is exceedingly difficult for him to obtain them even if be does get a medical certificate. The Government now allow whisky of inferior quality, adulterated and watered down to be sold at an enormous profiteering price, and have also limited the quantity very much, so that often those people who urgently require it are quite unable to obtain it. I should be very glad to hear what are the reasons for keeping these restrictions on: I do hope that the right hon. Gentleman will see that they are removed immediately. The summer is now coming on, 2509 and people have a perfect right to demand that they shall be able to quench their thirst with a wholesome beverage at the time when they feel it to be necessary. Arising out of that there is the question of housing. We want to remove all restrictions on trade. Everything that tends to annoy and interfere with the comfort of out traders should be removed as soon as possible. The great hotels have been closed all this time owing to their occupation by Government Departments. The reasons for that no longer exist, and they could be at once set free, so that trading people can come up here and find decent lodging and decent food and drink and carry on their business so as to restore the trade of the country as soon as possible. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will not merely give me an answer which he hopes will satisfy me, but will really direct his serious attention to the removal of those restrictions at the earliest possible moment.
§ Mr. WALLACEI wish to express my full agreement with my hon. Friend who introduced this subject. I am not quite sure that I agree with his ideas about the reimposition of control, but it is quite clear that matters cannot be allowed to remain as they are at present. I noticed in a London paper this morning that in an interview the Parliamentary Secretary to the. Ministry of Food stated that a big gamble in linseed oil had begun. I happen to have been closely associated with the linseed oil position for some years, and his statement does not exaggerate the present position of the question. A big gamble is taking place, and, as he says, it not only affects linseed oil, but it will have a very serious effect on the price of margarine. Linseed oil was decontrolled on the 31st March of this year, and, according to information which I received personally from the Director of the Oils and Fats Section of the Ministry of Food, the Government stock at that time, delivered and undelivered, of linseed and linseed oil amounted to 100,000 tons, which was rather more than a full year's supply. Very properly the Oils and Fats Section of the Ministry of Food offered this stock first of all to manufacturers who used linseed oil, and after their wants had been supplied, the remainder, I understand, was sold to the seed crushers and oil refiners. When linseed oil was decontrolled as at the 31st March, the price was £58 per ton. and that price was charged by the Oils and 2510 Fats Section of the Ministry of Food both to the manufacturers who used the oil and, as I understand, to the seed crushers and oil refiners. That was about three months ago. The price of linseed oil in this morning's "Times," is £106 per ton. It has gone up £48 per ton in three months. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will give the explanation of his Department for this abnormal and, to my mind, unjustifiable rise in the price of this commodity. I happen to be connected with an industry which consumes linseed oil very largely. There are similar industries in Scotland, and also very largely in England. A month or two ago our position was that we thought that the tendency of prices for raw materials was downward, and we, arranged to reduce at an early date the price of our commodity to the consumer. But the rise in linseed oil has made that absolutely impossible, and has made an advance in the price much more likely than a reduction. We as manufacturers are absolutely satisfied that deliberate profiteering is taking place somewhere and, while I do not favour the adoption of any kind of Government restrictions on business, we must remember that we are passing through a very difficult transition period, and it is for the Minister of Food to say whether, within some well-defined limit of time, the reimposition of some method of control is not desirable. I am quite aware that bound up with this question is that of shipping tonnage, and I hope that the Minister of Food will use his great influence to get as much tonnage for linseed and other edible oils as he possibly can, because I think that that is one of the factors which possibly will ease the situation. The hon. Member who introduced this subject touched upon the question of food. A gamble in linseed oil means also a gamble with the food of the people, and that is a gamble which a famous statesman at one time very strongly deprecated in this House. I hope the Ministry of Food will take some definite action, and take it soon, because, if not, I am afraid that the prophecy of the Prime Minister regarding a reduction of 4s. a week in the price of the working-man's food will not be realised. It is much more likely that there will be a rise, possibly of more than 4s. a week. If that be the case, I am afraid we cannot look forward to the coming winter without the gravest misgivings and apprehension. I trust that this matter will be taken seriously by my right hon. Friend and that 2511 he will give me here his own explanation of this extraordinary rise in the price of linseed oil, having regard to the price on the 31st March.
§ THE MINISTER OF FOOD (Mr. G. Roberts)I certainly agree that no more important question could be discussed than that of food, and I make no complaint of the fact that my hon. Friend the Member for Silvertown (Mr. J. Jones) has raised it this afternoon. We have to remember that we are passing through a transition stage, and that there must necessarily be a good deal of unsettlement before we are able to get back to anything like normal conditions. While I am not going to argue against the continuation of control, I venture to point out to my hon. Friend that control, now Peace is near, is not so easily possible as it was during the War. During the War a system of inter-Allied purchase was carried on, but as soon as the Armistice was signed the Powers who were parties to the arrangement naturally desired that the trade conditions of their respective countries should be freed as soon as possible. It is not suggested that we possess the power or that we should seek to coerce them into doing what they do not desire. Moreover, during the War the operation of the blockade and the fact that the Allies controlled the major portion of the shipping of the world placed us in a favoured position to buy. Since the Armistice was declared, at the desire of the other countries, the system of inter-Allied purchase has ceased. America is very keen that trade should be free, and my hon. Friends are aware that America is our chief market at the present time. These considerations point to the fact that control is not so easy now as it was during the War. Moreover, as the blockade is relaxed, and of course in greater measure when Peace is signed, there is certain to be an accentuation of competition, a scramble as my hon. Friend has designated it. The Ministry I represent and those associated with me appreciate all these facts. We are anxious to do all we can and all that is possible to secure that supplies shall be forthcoming and that prices shall be kept down as far as practicable. Of course it is very difficult to influence prices in foreign markets. The mere fact that we are compelled to go into foreign markets, make us dependent on those sources and puts us very largely at the mercy of 2512 those who control them. The question of bacon has been instanced this afternoon. We were advised, both in America find by experts in this country, that decontrol would result in a fall in price. When we decontrolled, the tendency was downward for a short while, but then very soon neutral countries entered into the markets and prices steadied and then moved upwards. Parenthetically, it is an extraordinarily interesting fact in connection with the question of bacon—I wish my hon. Friend the Member for Silvertown had been here to have heard this—that since decontrol the consumption of bacon in this country has substantially increased. If consumption had remained at anything like the normal we are of opinion that the situation would be much easier in respect of price. But the fact that consumption has increased exhausted our supplies more rapidly. That is apparent to those, who control the supplies in other countries and it has had the effect of producing the rise with which we are faced.
§ Major-General Sir NEWTON MOOREIs "that the result of the bacon being much inferior to pre-war bacon?
§ Mr. ROBERTSNo. I am talking of pre-war normal consumption. I appreciate that for some time the quality was not at all desirable; in fact, I believe when we were unloading it almost involved us in some international complication. I am aware that the improvement in quality may have contributed to the increased consumption, but we are trying to compare, as far as may be, with normal prewar consumption, and our estimates, based on that principle, have been upset so largely that our supplies have been exhausted much more rapidly than we had anticipated, and the necessity of going into other markets has, in fact, contributed in some measure to the enhancement in price. I am going to ask the people of this country to help the Ministry in this matter. If they would for a time exercise economy in consumption. I believe we should be able to get over the next four weeks, which are the most difficult, with a minimum of trouble. After all, we have to work very largely on estimates. I can assure my hon. Friend that, even if we call in experts, we get the most diversified advice. I have consulted one set of experts, who tell me that if we get over the next few weeks then there must be a considerable fall in. 2513 price. Others tell me that we cannot contemplate any reduction in price until the winter. We have to form the best estimate we possibly can in this regard. I can only say that I share most thoroughly the apprehensions 'which afflict the mind of my hon. Friend, therefore we are watching the situation very closely. We have not entirely decontrolled bacon. The control is simply suspended, and if it appears necessary, when we are able to see the situation with greater clarity in the course of the next few weeks, to reimpose control in the interests of the consumers, then we shall not hesitate to do it. I am further advised that when we go into the market, the fact that we have to buy as a Government also helps to harden prices and to keep them up. These are facts it is necessary we should ask hon. Members when criticising us to bear in mind.
I appreciate what the hon. Member for Silvertown said with respect to the operation of great trusts. Those, of course, are one of the great trials of any Food Controller, but here again, so long as we are compelled to go into a single market, we are certainly at the mercy of those who control that market. As I have stated in previous Debates, this country is now suffering for its sins of omission in the past. We neglected home production to such an extent that when the war came upon us, our dependence on over seas supplies certainly did cause the people of this country not only to be confronted with probable scarcity, but with the fact that prices would rise considerably. We are now investigating the possibility of other sources of supply within the Empire, and I am at least hopeful that we shall be able to effect something in that direction, for I believe, at any rate, there is a very strong sentiment of attachment as between the Overseas Dominions and our country, and I am sure they would be willing to help us to the utmost in this regard.
§ Sir N. MOOREIs it correct that accumulated supplies spreading over two years are now lying in Australia, awaiting shipment, and if arrangements were made for freight would not that relieve the situation very considerably?
§ Mr. ROBERTSIt is quite true there are supplies lying in Australia. Our great difficulty has been to lift those supplies. We have done a good deal since the Armistice was signed, but it is true that the 2514 tonnage problem is one of the most important in relation to the food question, and we are endeavouring to secure that as much shipping as possible shall be used for the purpose of bringing in food and such essential things as are referred to by the hon. Member (Mr. Wallace)—linseed and other oils. In fact, I believe it-is the most practical contribution which can be made to the problem at the moment, and it is receiving our very serious consideration. It appears to me that the only way to relieve ourselves of dependence on a great trust in another country is the opening up of now avenues of supply, and that is the form of inquiry that we are prosecuting; but, of course, it all takes time. Just as we have to suffer because of our neglect of home production, we are bound to suffer because of our neglect of proper understanding and arrangement in respect of foods within the Empire.
My hon. Friend, in introducing the discussion, referred to the allegation that catches of fish have been dumped into the sea. The illustration he gave, I believe, was from Scotland. We have caused inquiries to be made into all these allegations, and I have to admit that there is some substance in them, but I am not convinced on the evidence so far submitted to me that it has been done for the purpose of keeping up prices. We have power, and we intend to retain and exercise it, to take proceedings against any person or firm who destroys food for the purpose of the easier manipulation of markets. The catches of fish of late have been so heavy, and of course our transport system has not yet got back to full efficiency, and it has been impossible to bring those large supplies into the inland markets as rapidly us is necessary, because fish has to be transported very rapidly, especially during the hot weather with which we have recently been favoured. But I want to make it clear on behalf of the Ministry that if any cases are brought to our notice of any parties destroying food, whether fish, milk or anything else, we shall certainly with great promptitude take action against them because there is no greater wrong that can be done to the community to-day than to destroy that which is essential, and in respect of which there is a shortage.
My hon. Friend (Mr. Jones) made no secret of his desire. It is that control shall be permanent in character and thoroughly comprehensive. I agree with him to this extent, that control in days of 2515 peace, to be effective, must be complete. You have to control the whole system. That, of course, opens up a great question of political and public policy. It is not one for me to determine. The Ministry of Food, of course, was established under a special Act of Parliament with a restricted duration. We can keep in existence, I believe, for twelve months after the signing of peace, and we shall determine our existence accordingly as the food problem makes it desirable. I have now come to the conclusion that we must not expedite the closing down of the Department. I share all the apprehensions respecting the coming winter. I am advised that there will not be a shortage of supplies except in the case of fats. In any other matters the situation will be quite satisfactory. Our problem will be mainly that of prices. I realise how dangerous it would be to the State if queues again came into existence, if there was grave shortage throughout j the land, and if prices were inflated. I understand as clearly as my hon. Friends that the very existence of the State might be menaced if these things occur, and, therefore, we shall keep sufficient organisation in existence capable of rapid expansion in the event of such contingencies arising as to make it necessary that we should renew control in any direction. I am glad my hon. Friend admits that we cannot impose many restrictions upon the people. He is opposed to rationing. He wants people to have perfect liberty of purchasing where they will. Therefore, we are not in very wide difference in respect to the immediate phases of the problem. We are watching it closely. I have suspended control, but if the circumstances render it necessary I shall have no hesitation in resuming control. In respect of bacon, I have some evidence that there has been undue speculation in the trade. I feel that those who have operated in that fashion are rendering their own j trade the greatest possible disservice, but if I am compelled to resume control I will make it perfectly well known to them that the markets, both wholesale and retail, will be more strictly regulated than under the previous form of control. I should prefer that the trade itself should appreciate the difficulties of -the situation and would accept the necessity of co-operating with the Government in this matter, and would so organise as to make it impossible for anyone asso- 2516 ciated with the trade to be charged with profiteering in this very critical stage of our history.
I do not know that it is necessary or desirable that I should go into great detail, because we had a discussion quite recently. Moreover, I am ready day by day to give particulars on any matter in which anyone is interested. But the question directly addressed to me by the hon. Member (Mr. Wallace) requires a word or two of observation. Undoubtedly there has been a good deal of speculation going on. We are concerned with these commodities only from the point of view of food, and when he represents to us that a number of manufacturers have been affected by this, that rather leads me into a sphere which is not exclusively my own. Nevertheless I feel the prices have been unduly manipulated and that it may be necessary for us again to resume control. I hope not, because it is an extraordinarily heavy task to control oils and fats. Moreover, the Ministry is very largely maimed by experts from outside. I have on previous occasions paid the highest tribute I could with the language I can command to these men who have worked so splendidly, even to the detriment of their own interests, and certainly to the detriment of their personal well-being, in the interests of the Ministry and the country as a whole. These men are naturally anxious to get back to their own businesses, and they are constantly pressing me to allow them to be released. A number of them are only remaining at the urgent request I have made to them in the name of the Government. Therefore, it is difficult to keep together the staff requisite to carry on control. My hon. Friend is aware that this particular question is so highly technical in character that it would be extremely difficult for it to be dealt with by the ordinary Civil servant. It is not exclusively a question of food, but it enters into so many of the trades of the country, and those trades are anxious. that they should be free as far as possible We are watching the situation very closely. My hon. Friend is right in this, that this matter is very largely depending upon shipping. We are told that there are supplies available in the world, and if we were able to provide the tonnage and bring them over here it would have the effect of reducing prices.
The hon. Member for the Handsworth Division (Lieut.-Colonel Meysey-Thomp- 2517 son) introduced the very interesting question of beer and spirits. I can assure him that for the past few weeks there has been no question which has caused us more concern than that of beer and spirits; but here again the responbility and power of the Food Ministry is very limited. I am only concerned with the question of beer from the standpoint of cereals. So long as there was a shortage of cereals we naturally restricted the manufacture of beer. So far as I am concerned, and the Ministry generally, when we were able to ascertain early in the year that cereals were in adequate supply, we had no longer reason for imposing restrictions on the manufacture of beer, and I represented that to the Government and stated my views. But this again is a question of policy, and is not one for my Department. I cannot blind myself to the depth of feelings that exist throughout the country in regard to the restriction on bear, and whatever may be our speculative opinions on temperance and allied questions, nobody of responsibility could ignore the very profound feeling that exercises the minds of our people in respect to this matter. I found it out when I was at the Ministry of Labour, and I have found it even more acutely at the Ministry of Food. Therefore, I have represented to the Government the desirability of increasing the production of beer. Sanction has been given and it will be remembered that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in introducing his Budget, announced the intention of sanctioning an increase from 20,000,000 to 26,000,000 barrels of beer. We have done our best to deal with the complaint respecting quantity. I think my hon. Friend knows that the prewar production was 36,000,000 barrels a year. For considerations of policy the Government has restricted the average gravity of beer allowed to be produced, and the barrelage which has now been sanctioned, and which are not to exceed an average gravity of 10.40, gives, approximately, 37,000,000 barrels. Therefore, in actual liquid, if they have the labour and material, there is nothing to prevent the brewers brewing even a greater bulk of beer than before the War. The hon. Member has referred to the question of quality. There is considerable feeling on this point, and we are taking steps to induce the brewers to improve the quality. There are certain technical matters which have to be considered. When you change the gravity it means that those who brew high 2518 quality beers have, in order to keep within the average, to brew a large quantity of inferior beer at the other end. We are now engaged in discussing this with the parties concerned in the hope and anticipation of being able to give the public a better and more drinkable beer.
§ Lieut.-Colonel MEYSEY-THOMPSONWhat about the extension of hours?
§ Mr. ROBERTSI am not at all responsible for those restrictions. It is a matter of Government policy operated throughout the Liquor Control Board, and as I have said repeatedly in this House, I am not responsible for and have no power over the Liquor Control Board. It appears to be a widespread feeling outside that the-Minister of Food controls this matter completely. Our concern with beer is simply in relation to food. It is true that the existence of the Ministry has been made use of as a vehicle for issuing Orders, but apart from that we have no control whatever. My hon. Friend also directed attention to the question of whisky. I am painfully aware of the complaints that are made respecting the quantity and quality of whisky. I am advised that it we took the restrictions off entirely no largo supplies would come on the market. Supplies must be short, because for two years distilling was suspended entirely. Moreover, under Act of Parliament whisky cannot be put on the market until it is three years' old. Therefore, apart from control, there would of necessity be some stringency in the market. I have no authority beyond that which I have stated, but I can represent to the Government the dissatisfaction which is conveyed to me. I think the better plan would be to free the distilling trade altogether, and then put the onus upon those in the trade; whereas to-day the Government have to carry it, and it is not a very popular thing to carry. We are always glad of discussions in this House which reveal to the Government the feelings of Members who desire to represent their constituents in these matters. My hon. Friends may accept the assurance that we are not going to be rushed out of business, and on the other hand that we are not going to keep on control simply for the gratification of keeping in existence a large and expensive. Department. 2519 with its administrative staff. We cannot defend the retention of bodies throughout the country involving a great deal of expenditure, but we intend to keep in existence such an amount of machinery as will allow us to operate rapidly and we hope efficiently. We are watching the problem with very keen interest, and it is my view that the Ministry ought to be kept in existence at least through the coming winter, and I am planning accordingly. I trust that will give sufficient assurance that we are watching matters, and we should like to co-operate 2520 with my hon. and right hon. Friends in order to safeguard the interests of the consumer, and to keep our people content as far as practicable.
§ Mr. CLYNESI will not stand long in the way of those who wish to bring for ward other subjects—
§ Notice taken that forty Members were not present; House counted, and fort? Members not being prevent,
§ The House was adjourned at Seventeen minutes before Five o'clock, till Tuesday, 24th June, pursuant to the Resolution of the House this day.