HC Deb 29 June 1928 vol 219 cc934-44
Sir W. PERRING

I beg to move, in page 1, line 6, to leave out the words shall forthwith", and to insert instead thereof the word "may". This is the first Amendment of a series of Amendments which I have felt it my duty to place on the Order Paper, with the object of securing that this Measure shall have serious consideration by Parliament. Many hon. Members may not be aware that this Bill secured a Second Reading on Wednesday evening after Eleven o'Clock without discussion. They may not have been aware that such a Bill was on the Order Paper, and it is because it went through Second Reading so rapidly that I think it is all the more important we should examine it very carefully during the Committee stage. It provides that the Minister shall make a series of orders of a general or special character forthwith. The implication in this Clause, if Parliament sanctions it, is that the Minister of Health will be expected to make these orders forthwith whether they are required or not. I hope to show that many of the Clauses of the Bill are not only unnecessary and impracticable but that some of them re-enact provisions already in the Statutes. If my Amendment is accepted it will give a discretionary power to the Minister as to whether these orders shall be issued or not, a discretion which is usually given in measures dealing with food control.

Mr. EVERARD

Perhaps I may be able to shorten the discussion on this particular Amendment. It is practically the wording of the Milk and Dairies Consolidation Act, 1915. This Bill is framed on that Act, and we shall be glad to accept the proposal of the hon. Member.

Sir W. PERRING

In that case I will not detain the Committee further.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER

Before we part with this Amendment I think we ought to know the view of the Government. Obviously, this Bill will impose considerable duties on the Ministry of Health and the Committee, therefore, should not be without some guidance from the Department. Registration in connection with concerns of this kind is desirable. If it is necessary to register ordinary milk producers and distributors, it is also necessary to register these firms as well. I have not nearly as much sympathy as I should have had with the Bill because of the very serious handicap under which large portions of the trade in actual milk and cream are suffering because of the operations and regulations of the Ministry of Health with regard to the use of preservatives. The position of many farmers is being seriously prejudiced. We are having to consider the closing down in the hot summer months of certain creameries to which the farmers brought much of their summer milk for conversion into cream. The very fact of the closing of the creamery means that a large proportion of the trade are forced to the use of synthetic cream. Therefore, I feel very much averse to helping anything which is intended to restrict the development of an alternative product instead of raw cream, and which is only made really necessary by the operation of restrictive regulations issued by the Ministry of Health. Before we accept any Amendment, we ought to have the official view of the Minister on the matter.

Sir WALTER GREAVES-LORD

Before we accept quite so readily the Amendment that has been moved, we should consider one point of view. There are, I understand, two matters dealt with in this Bill. One is what is known as reconstituted cream and the other is a substance which is known as synthetic cream.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN

I do not think that we can go into that question on this Amendment, which merely says that the Minister "may" issue orders and not that he "shall" do so. There is a subsequent Amendment on which the hon. and learned Member can raise this point.

Sir W. GREAVES-LORD

My point was whether there should be any power to make regulations with regard to the two substances referred to in the Bill. It seems to me, with respect, that it would be impossible to consider that question, which is involved in the use of the word "may" or the word "shall", unless we considered what are the two substances with regard to which regulations can be made. Therefore, one has to consider that the Bill deals with two substances, one reconstituted cream and the other synthetic cream. Reconstituted cream apparently is something which has an analogy with cream, because it contains no fat other than milk fat, whereas synthetic cream means a preparation in which fat other than milk fat is used. In these circumstances synthetic cream, as far as one can gather, may contain any fat other than milk fat, and therefore may be entirely foreign to the nature of cream. Yet if you give the Ministry power to make regulations with regard to this preparation, you are recognising the sale as cream of something which no one in his wildest moments would ever dream of designating as cream. It is a very serious thing to give the Ministry of Health power to make regulations for the preparation and distribution as cream of something which is not cream and something which may be title grossest possible deception of the public.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN

The hon. and learned Member is referring now to synthetic cream. There is an Amendment later to leave out the word "synthetic". The hon. and learned Member cannot argue his point at this stage.

Sir W. GREAVES-LORD

Of course I bow entirely to your ruling. Meanwhile I oppose the insertion of the word "may", because I think it would be very much better to say "shall not".

Sir WILFRID SUGDEN

I accept fully the position which the Mover of the Amendment and those of us who support him have taken in this matter, but there seems to be some question in the Committee as to whether the Amendment should be permitted. There are some of us who have some little knowledge of milk and cream, its need for purity, etc., and I think it proper that we should be very exact as to how far we should give a certain Government Department power to say, "Thou shalt" or "you may." I have in mind the inspectors representing officialdom, who come into some of our factories and deal with manufacturing processes, and who give us orders on behalf of the Department so ably presided over by the Minister of Health which are absolutely impossible of application. Accordingly I desire to give my support to this Amendment. "May" in this Bill is preferable to "shall." Some of us here have sat at the feet of Sir Watson Cheyne, who will be remembered as having addressed us on more than one occasion on the subject of the manufacture, storage, sale and use of this vital commodity, namely, cream. It is presented to the people of this country, I am glad to say, in the cheapest form by the larger wholesale buyers, but it is sometimes exposed for sale in a manner which does not add to its purity or to the quality of or the retention of purity.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN

There are Amendments down to leave out nearly every paragraph in the Clause, and the question of purity must be discussed on the appropriate Amendment.

Sir W. SUGDEN

I entirely agree, Sir, and I submit I am addressing myself to she question of "may" or "shall" I am showing why we should consider these words in relation to the various uses of cream by different classes of the community. I shall at all times obey the ruling of the Chair and, with my humble experience, if the need should arise, I shall welcome your guidance, Sir. I was coming to the position in regard to cream sold in those emporiums which are patronised by the élite section of the Party above the Gangway and also those which some of we humbler members attend at luncheon time. I am seeking to emphasise the point of difference as between "may" or "shall". [HON. MEMBERS: "Agreed!"] I know that those responsible for the Bill agree but the hon. and learned Member for Norwood (Sir W. Greaves-Lord) has intimated that he may not even permit those who have presented the Bill to accept that we desire them to accept. Therefore I must give such thoughts as I have on this matter to the Committee in order that they may be rightly guided. I have referred already to the speeches which we have heard on this subject from Sir Watson Cheyne—one of the greatest medical authorities in this country—and I could quote those speeches but I want to help this Bill forward. If my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Norwood is leading a group with the object of torpedoing this Measure I shall stand by the Measure. I support those who are backing the Bill in this matter and I hope the Committee will not be misled by the hon. and learned Member for Norwood but support the promoters who accept our Amendment.

Major SALMON

I submit that it is a very dangerous procedure to put upon a Government Department the duty that falls upon Members of this House of saying whether they shall or shall not make an order. It is important that the House itself should make up its mind as to whether the word "may" or the word "shall" shall be in this Clause, The method of legislation as the present day seems to be to delegate all the powers to Ministries, which, I think, is a very bad procedure. Whenever Bills come before this House we see Clauses which say that the Ministry "may" make a particular order, which, in effect, might alter the whole intention of the House, and I do hope that we shall make a move for the future not to give such powers to any particular Department, but that we should on the Floor of the House be able to argue the merits or demerits of a particular Measure, and settle once and for all whether it shall be "may" or "shall." In those circumstances, I feel that we ought to hear a little more as to the desirability of the words that are proposed in this Sub-section.

I am not permitted, I understand, to discuss the general merits of the Bill itself, but I would like to say this. It is rather unfortunate that this Bill originated in the way it did. By passing unnoticed a couple of nights ago it has not had time to receive the attention that so important a Measure deserves from the House. There are many industries in the country that are seriously concerned as to what power the Ministry may or shall have to issue certain regulations, and I do hope we shall pause before we agree to pass the word "may" or the word "shall."

Mr. SKELTON

I would suggest that it is a bad principle in a matter so important, if indeed it be of importance, to leave it entirely to the Ministry of Health whether the vital act operating executive action shall or shall not be taken. I can well understand the House coming to the conclusion that both these remarkable substances should be immediately dealt with by legislation, but if the House thinks it is a matter of importance to deal with this subject, why leave it in the hands of the Ministry of Health, and in Scotland in the hands of the Board of Health, to take executive action? I think the House ought to make up its mind. If we are going to make a dead set against these things, we should have the courage of our convictions, and say to the Ministry, "You shall make the appropriate regulations." It seems perfectly proper that the House should delegate to a Government Department the making of the detailed arrangements in regard to a matter of which the House has approved, but for the House to leave it in the hands of a Department whether it shall do so or not seems to leave the House in this absurd position, that it cannot make up its own mind on the subject. Therefore the substitution of the word "may" for "shall" seems to be an admission on the part of the House that it refuses to make up its mind as to the importance of this.

For my part, I shall certainly support the use of the word "shall." Speaking for myself, and with a great personal friendship for the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, I do not believe that he knows enough about either of these substances, or that his honoured chief does, to decide whether or not these regulations should come into force. I cannot, of course, appeal to English Members to exercise the courage that I am urging, but I can appeal to my fellow Scottish Members to take, if I may say so, the bull by the horns. [Laughter.] At any rate, let us who are Scottish Members take the cow by the horns, and say that, if we are to deal with this vital matter at all, it is for us to make up our minds that, so far as Scotland is concerned, we refuse to leave it in the hands of my hon. Friend on the Front Bench, and to give him the power of saying whether these two vital substances shall have regulations made about them. I urge my Scottish friends to insist on this House making up its own mind.

Mr. ALEXANDER

I would ask the Government to give us some reply, for we shall have something more to say about this Amendment unless we are satisfied.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood)

The sole matter to which I have to address myself is whether the words "shall forthwith" shall be continued in the Bill, or whether the word "may" shall be inserted. As I understand it, this is rather a matter of drafting than anything else, and I do not otherwise desire to deal with the merits of the various matters which have been raised by the hon. Gentleman opposite. This is not, of course, the occasion to discuss the merits of our preservative Regulations, but the question whether "may" or "shall" is to form part of the Bill. I shall probably on an appropriate occasion be prepared to defend these Regulations. As regards the other point which has been put to me in regard to the Regulations under this particular Clause, and whether they were necessary or desirable, that may be discussed when we reach the appropriate part of this Bill, but, on a mere drafting Amendment of this kind, I do not see any necessity to make an important statement about Government policy. On the question as to whether "may" or "shall" shall appear, the general course is to insert the word "may" in a Clause of this sort, and I should be inclined to advise the promoters of the Bill to insert the word "may," rather than the words "shall forthwith."

These are extraordinary words to put into an Act of Parliament, and it might lead to considerable argument as to the meaning of the word "forthwith." If the Minister of Health did not issue these Regulations, say, within seven days from the passing of the Bill, and he failed to comply with the terms of the Bill, it might be possible that no Regulations could be issued at all. It is certainly a very unusual thing to find in a Clause of this kind the words "shall forthwith." If, on the other hand, the word "may" were inserted, it means that some Regulations are necessary, and that it is the Minister's duty to provide suitable Regulations. I am doubtful as to what exactly would be regarded as the meaning of the phrase "shall forthwith," and on the whole I think it would be better to insert the word "may." At this stage of the Measure I do not want to deal with matters which, though important in themselves, do not arise on this question of draftsmanship.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER

The speech of the Minister has just made me realise what I expected was the position. I do not think the Ministry of Health want this Bill. There is such a rapid growth in the manufacture and distribution of these two substances that it is of the greatest importance that it shall be an instruction from the House to the Minister to make Regulations for this purpose, and I therefore propose to divide the Committee in favour of retaining the words "shall forthwith."

Amendment negatived.

Sir W. PERRING

I beg to move in page 1, line 7, to leave out the words "such general or special."

I understand that it is not necessary to have those words in the Clause, and that it will be quite sufficient for the Minister to have power to make Orders. That is the reason why I am moving the deletion of these words. We must realise that this Bill proposes that the Minister should make a series of Orders dealing with something like 32 different sides of questions including manufacturing, grading, lighting and a variety of other matters. I suggest that the Minister will have very great difficulty in making Orders of any kind under this Bill, inasmuch as many of the subjects which are dealt with are already provided for in other Acts of Parliament. A good many of these subjects are provided for under the Public Health Act.

I think the Debate we have had on the previous Amendment shows how important it is that Amendments to this Bill should have been put down in order to prevent this Measure being rushed through. Had it not been for one or two Amendments put down by myself and other hon. Members we should not have known anything about the provisions of this Measure. I am determined that this Bill shall be carefully discussed. It is a Measure which has been very loosely drafted, and the promoters do not seem to have realised the importance of the words contained in the Bill which will interfere seriously with trade and business in a way which will be detrimental to the general interests of the community.

Mr. EVERARD

I accept the Amendment.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER

May I ask for some reasons why the Amendment has been accepted?

Mr. LANSBURY

I should like someone to tell us something about this Measure. An appeal was made to Scottish Members on another question to have the courage to declare their opinions, and now we are talking about something that is to be special or general and I would like to know whether it is to be general or special. It is usual to give some reasons why an Amendment is accepted. I want to know why we are getting no guidance in regard to this Bill from the Government. The hon. Member in charge of the Measure is leaving the House of Commons without any sort of guidance——

It being Four of the Clock the CHAIRMAN left the Chair to make his Report to the House.

Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Tuesday next, 3rd July.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 3.

Adjourned at One Minute after Four o'Clock, until Monday next, 2nd July.