CLAUSE 6.—(Provisions applicable to the sale of bread.) (Hansard, 13 December 1926)

§ Mr. WOMERSLEY
I beg to move, in page 3, line 14, to leave out the words "have in his possession" and to insert instead thereof the word "expose."
This provision is in connection with the sale of bread, and if the Clause remains as drafted a baker may be convicted of having a loaf of irregular weight on his premises at some period of its preparation, notwithstanding the fact that there is no intention on the part of the baker to offer it for sale. Take the case of a small baker who is doing what is known as public baking. People send their dough ready in tins to be baked. They do not trouble at all what the weight is. The man bakes it, and it is on his premises. It is just possible, if this Clause goes through as drafted, that an inspector may come along and level a charge against that man of having bread not of the required weight on his premises. The opinion of those in the trade is, that the term "expose for sale" ought to be sufficient, and merely the fact of having a loaf on his premises should not render a man liable to prosecution.

§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister)
I hope the Committee will not accept this Amendment. It was a specific recom- 2638 mendation of the Food Council that the Bill should be in this form, and, indeed, the Sale of Food Bill, as drafted, was submitted to the Bakers' Association, and, as appears from the evidence, was accepted by them. My hon. Friend has proposed this Amendment in order that a man who has bread which is of improper weight, but which, in fact, he has no intention of selling, may not be convicted. I cannot conceive in such a case that a prosecution would ever be brought, and, of course, if it were brought, it would fail. If the Bill went through in the form which my hon. Friend suggests—I am sure he has not this in his mind—the only bread which would come within the purview of the Bill would be bread exposed in front of the shop. A man might have a cupboard full of bread or a room full of bread from which he was delivering in the ordinary course of his business, but if it were not actually exposed for sale, that would prevent prosecution. I am sure that was not in the mind of my hon. Friend when he moved this Amendment, but it was just the kind of case that was considered by the Food Council.

§ Mr. REMER
I am afraid that I cannot accept either the Food Council or the Bakers' Association as being final on this particular subject. I think we have to consider some other things besides their points of view. There is, for example, the health of the people, and I am informed by a number of eminent medical people that the bakers, in order to get over such a Clause as this, could add a certain amount of water in order to bring the weight of the bread up to the required amount, and so produce a spongy kind of bread—

The CHAIRMAN
This cannot be relevant as to whether the word "exposed" should be put in this Clause.

§ Mr. REMER
I was going to submit that a baker might have a loaf of bread partly cooked, and, finding it slightly under weight, add water in order to bring the weight up to that required under the Bill.

The CHAIRMAN
The question is whether the words "have in his possession" or the word "exposed" should be in the Bill. I do not see what else can arise out of this.

§ Mr. REMER
This Bill having come from the House of Lords, we have not really had an opportunity to get to know what the words mean, and I would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman, with respect not only to this Amendment, but to other Amendments which come up, that we ought to be given time to consider the Bill.

§ Mr. JACOB
I beg to move, in page 3, line 17, at the end, to insert the words Provided that it shall be competent for any local authority to authorise the sale of loaves of one and a half pounds weight where such local authority is satisfied that there is a demand for loaves of this weight within the area of its authority. The provision in this Amendment is a very modest one and, further, is permissive in character. The local authority can give this authorisation if there be a demand for 1½ lb. loaves in any part of the country. The 1½ lb. loaf was a very great favourite in Yorkshire before the War, but that size was done away with owing to the operations of the Defence of the Realm Act, and it seems to be only reasonable that bakers should again be allowed to make a loaf which was so popular in that part of the country. We are rather tired of D.O.R.A., and I think we should like to get rid of her.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I hope my hon. Friend will not press this Amendment. For the last 10 years the law has been that people are to bake loaves in pounds or multiples of a pound, and I think the Committee will realise that in a Bill the whole purpose of which is to insist on rather stricter conditions with regard to weight it would be an impossible thing to go back on what has been the law for the last ten years. It is not the case that this Regulation has been kept on under D.O.R.A. Each year in the Expiring Laws (Continuance) Act the House has advisedly and unanimously continued the provisions of the Order, and every party in turn has been committed to enshrining the provisions of the Order with regard to bread in a permanent Bill.

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy)
Does the hon. Member withdraw his Amendment?

§ Mr. JACOB
Yes.

§ Sir CYRIL COBB
I beg to move, in page 3, line 27, to leave out the words "in Scotland."
This Amendment has to be taken in conjunction with another Amendment later which inserts the words "in Scotland." I think if we make this change we shall be doing exactly what is desired by the President of the Board of Trade.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I agree with my hon. Friend. I think this Amendment makes better drafting, and, therefore, I am prepared to accept it—of course, on the understanding that the words "in Scotland" are put in the Bill further on.

§ Mr. BARNES
I should like to understand where we are. Does this Amendment bring the English system under the same exemptions as apply to Scotland?

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
No.

§ Mr. BARNES
In this case England is in advance of Scotland—that is the point I wish to emphasise.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
The intention of the Clause as it stands is to leave the English position exactly where it is, and I think it makes it plainer to put the words "in Scotland" in the Clause three lines lower down.

Mr. H. EDWARDS
I wish the President of the Board of Trade would explain to the Committee what is the difference, and whether Scotland is getting an advantage on this occasion. I have every regard for Scotland but, with all due respect to Scottish Members, I think Scotland has been getting advantages all along the line lately. If the right hon. Gentleman is giving advantages to Scotland, why leave out Wales?

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I am only maintaining the law where it stands at the present time. I do not wish to argue the idiosyncracies of Scotland in relation to bread—I beg pardon, I do not wish to argue the tastes of the people of Scotland in relation to bread.

Captain BENN
I think I must rise to protest against the remarks of the bon. Member for Accrington (Mr. Edwards), and also the strange use of the word "idiosyncracies" by the President of the Board of Trade.

§ Mr. PALING
I beg to move, in page 3, to leave out lines 27 to 34 inclusive.
We do not quite understand why this provision in regard to 1¾ lb. loaves should apply to Scotland any more than to England. We cannot see why what is good enough for England should not be good enough for Scotland, and we think that if this Bill is for the benefit of the English people it should be for the benefit of the Scottish people also. I am now given to understand there are special circumstances applying to Scotland which explain the reason for this Clause.

§ Mr. T. HENDERSON
I hope the right, hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade will not agree to accept this Amendment. Scottish customs in regard to the baking of bread differ from those of England. We have always had the 2 lb. batch loaf, and the housewife in Scotland did not buy this bread because of its weight, but because it was the loaf which she desired. This Clause has been agreed upon by all concerned in Scotland, and it will be of immense advantage not only to the bakers but to the people themselves, because for the first time they will have the weight impressed upon the loaf.

§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Major Elliot)
I think the few words of the hon. Member for the Tradeston Division (Mr. Henderson) have shown the Committee clearly that no party question is concerned here, that we desire simply to allow, so far as possible, a long established trade custom to prevail, if it is made quite clear that justice is to be done to the housewife. Provision is made for seeing that justice is done to the housewife in that we shall now have impressed on the loaf or the wrapper what the weight of the loaf is. The just weight will be established and clearly laid down, so that there can be no mistake about it; and if anyone desires to change that system I think the onus of proving that a change is desired must rest upon them. We desire to allow the present custom of making 1¾ lb. loaves to remain, while safeguarding the housewife by letting her know the weight of the loaf she is purchasing. This has been agreed upon by all interests, and particularly by the great co-operative societies, and I hope the Mover of the Amendment will not further press it.

§ Mr. PALING
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

§ Mr. WOMERSLEY
I beg to move, in page 4, line 6, at the end to insert the words () In every case in which bread is weighed by an inspector, either in a shop or in the course of delivery, the inspector shall deliver a notice or certificate signed by him as to the result of such weighing, whether or not any deficiency is alleged. This Amendment is not designed to weaken the Bill in any way, or to affect the protection which it gives to consumers. The sole object is to provide a reasonable protection for the baker. All that the baker asks is that when his bread is weighed by an inspector a certificate shall be given to him stating what the weight of the bread is, and then he will know if there is to be a prosecution or if his loaves are all right. We recognise that the general body of inspectors are very reasonable men, but here and there one gets a certain officious type of man who can make himself very objectionable. In many towns what is asked for by this Amendment is already in operation, the local authorities having felt that it was a right and just thing to give a certificate. It is done in the great city of Birmingham. We think that in the interests of the trader, and of the honest trader in particular, this Amendment ought to be included in the Bill.

§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER
At first I was inclined to think these words were reasonable and helpful, but there are two reasons why I think we ought not to carry them. If a provision of this kind is to be inserted at all, it ought to be inserted in regard to all articles, and not bread only. That consideration would not affect the proposal on its merits, but on its merits there is also this objection to it. It has been represented to me that it might easily happen that some trader might be visited by an inspector because of complaints that he 2643 was not delivering full weight, and if it was found at the time of inspection that the particular loaves inspected were up to weight he would then have to be given a certificate to that effect. The result would be that this man, who was really a less reputable trader than hundreds of others of whom no complaint had been made, would use the certificate of the inspector to give his shop a cachet, as it were, and it might be represented that the really reputable trader was the one who had got the inspector's certificate. That has been represented to me as a practical difficulty, from the point of view of the majority of traders. Quite obviously we do not want that sort of thing to happen. If a local authority, after consulting with traders, finds that the proposal suggested in the Amendment is desirable, there is nothing to stop them from doing it; but for all the reasons I have given, it would not be in the interests of traders generally to make it compulsory.

§ Mr. REMER
I would like—

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
The hon. Member is too late: The Question has already been put.

§ Mr. REMER
I was standing when you rose to put the Question.

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
I thought the hon. Member was rising to move an Amendment on another Clause.

§ Mr. REMER
No, I was rising to speak on the Question "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

§ The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN
I am afraid it is too late now.