§ 12. Mr. HURDasked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state who are the members of the Central Profiteering Committee, and on what principle and by what method they were selected?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANAs the number of members of the Central Committee is very large, I am sending to my hon. Friend a list of their names. The Committee were appointed by the Board of Trade after inviting the Associated Chambers of Commerce, Associations of Employers, Representatives of the Cooperative movement, and Representatives of Employees, including Trade Unions, to suggest the names of persons suitable for appointment as members of the Committee.
§ Mr. HURDWould it be possible for the hon. Gentleman to give the proportion of the various representatives?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANThere are over one hundred and fifty of them, and I cannot work it out in my head, but I will try and find out if the hon. Gentleman wishes.
§ Mr. PEMBERTON BILLINGIs his Department satisfied with the administration of the Profiteering Act, having regard to the enormous increase in prices throughout London and the country generally, and is it proposed to take any action?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANThat is a very big Question affecting the success or failure of the Profiteering Act, and I do not think it is one that can be dealt with by Question and Answer across the floor.
§ Mr. BILLINGWill the right hon. Gentleman undertake to represent to this Committee that their attitude should be a little more severe in the interests of justice?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANI think justice is most important.
§ 13. Mr. HURDasked the President of the Board of Trade what is the number of the staff employed on the Profiteering Act branch of the Board of Trade; what has been the expenditure to date; and what is the estimated expenditure for the coming financial year?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANA staff of 48 is employed by the Board of Trade in the administration of the Profiteering Act, in addition to which the Central Committee employ a staff of 92. The expenditure of the Board of Trade to the 29th February last was approximately £15,000. This figure includes the expenses of the Central Committee and 109 Appeal Tribunals, but does not include the cost of housing and lighting of the Profiteering Act Department or the Central Committee, or of stationery and printing. Provision has been made in the Estimates for 1920–21 to be presented to Parliament of £35,000, on the basis of the duration of the Act at present in force.
§ 23. Mr. W. R. SMITHasked the President of the Board of Trade when a Bill to make the Profiteering Act more effective is to be introduced?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANI am at present unable to make any statement on this matter.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEIs the hon. Member correct in describing the Act as "effective"?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANYes, I think so.
§ 24. Mr. WILLIAM CARTERasked the President of the Board of Trade what number of complaints relating to wholesale dealers have been lodged with the Central Committee under the Profiteering Acts; how many of these have been dealt with; in how many cases the profit shown has been declared unreasonable; and what is the amount of fines imposed in respect of wholesale transactions?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANOne hundred and sixty-nine complaints of alleged profiteering by wholesale traders have been lodged with the Central Committee by retailers. One hundred and sixty-one of these cases have been determined; the profits sought or made being held to be unreasonable in 1779 seven cases. No wholesalers have been convicted of profiteering and fined by the Justices.
§ 63. Mr. DAWESasked the President of the Board of Trade whether representations have been made in his Department by profiteering committees urging that they should have power to inquire into cases of alleged profiteering by wholesalers; and whether it is the intention of the Government to give effect to such representations?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANResolutions have been received from between thirty and forty local committees urging that they should be empowered to inquire into cases of alleged profiteering by wholesalers. It is not proposed to adopt this suggestion, partly because wholesale trade which extends over the whole country, can only be examined satisfactorily by a central body; partly because local committees have not at their disposal the skilled technical staff required to conduct these complicated investigations; and partly because of the inconvenience, expense and interference with business which would be caused if wholesale traders or manufacturers were liable to be called upon to appear before any one or all of the nineteen hundred local committees.
§ 64. Mr. DAWESasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to three cases of alleged profiteering by wholesalers which were referred to his Department by the Southwark Profiteering Committee on the 13th November, 1919, 17th December, 1919, and 19th December, 1919, respectively, and inquiry into which cases was promised by the Department, but of which nothing has been heard since; and whether the cases have been inquired into and with what result?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANI am afraid my hon. Friend has been misinformed. Three cases of alleged profiteering on the part of the wholesaler have been referred to the Board of Trade by the Southwark local committee, namely, on the 13th November a case relating to the sale of certain lamp glasses; and on the 19th December a case relating to Sunlight soap and a case relating to coffee. All three cases were referred to the central committee for investigation. The case 1780 of Sunlight soap is being investigated by the sub-committee at present investigating soap. The investigations into the price of the lamp glasses and the coffee have not yet been completed, and the Southwark committee were so informed as recently as the 3rd and 4th March.