§ "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £1,250,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1930, for a Subsidy on Sugar and Molasses manufactured from Beet grown in Great Britain."
§ Resolution read a Second time.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
§ Sir ERNEST SHEPPERSON rose—
808§ Mr. C. WILLIAMSMay I be allowed to ask how far the Government intend going to-night?
§ Sir E. SHEPPERSONI rise to protest against this Supplementary Estimate being brought before the House on the Report stage at this hour. This is the one and only Measure for the benefit of agriculture introduced by this Government since it came into office in June, and I protest against them taking this action at one o'clock in the morning. Apart from that, I do desire, as an agriculturist, and on behalf of the agriculturists, to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture (Dr. Addison) 809 upon having at least brought forward an agricultural Measure. I do not desire to embarrass him. I can realise what a unique experience it must be to him to receive the congratulations at all of an agriculturist, and particularly an agriculturist on this side of the House. I do assure him that this Supplementary Estimate for the sugar-beet industry has, to a very large extent, saved a large number of arable farmers from what would otherwise have been absolute ruin. We are voting a very large sum of money.
This Supplementary Estimate is due to one or all of three causes. It may be due, in the first case, to an increase in the yield of beet per acre. To the extent to which it is due to an increase in the acreage, it shows that the producer and farmer has improved his methods of cultivation, that he is enabled to increase the yield of that sugar-beet per acre. I congratulate the Minister on that, because that was the one purpose on which the whole principle of assistance to the sugar-beet industry was founded—that the grower should, in a period of years, receive such education in the cultivation of the crop as would enable him to increase his yield, and therefore his ability to make the crop pay.
This increased subsidy may be due to a second cause, and that is the increase in the sugar content of the beet. The increase in the sugar content is due. I may say, merely and almost entirely to Providence, because last summer we had an extraordinary amount of sunshine. The sugar we consume is energy, and energy is indestructible and unbeatable. [Interruption.] The energy of that sugar is obtained from the sun, and last year we had an extraordinary amount of sunshine. It increased the yield of sugar, as it increased the yield of wheat and of other crops. Providence that year was kind to agriculture. Providence was helpful to us. May I suggest this morning that the Minister should take some example from Providence. Next year he should be as kind to us in giving help to agriculture as Providence was last year.
There is another cause of the increase of this Supplementary Estimate, namely, an increase in the acreage under beet. That increased acreage is a direct in- 810 dication of the value that this crop has been to the arable farmer. Agriculturists throughout the country, owing to the low prices of their crops, have had to turn to sugar-beet to save them from ruin. I do not know whether the House realises the position of arable agriculture and that the large proportion of the crops the farmers are growing are making less money than before the war, and that, at the same time, the farmers are paying labour costs 100 per cent. greater than before the War and charges 65 per cent. greater. That is the position of the arable farmer to-day. On those crops he has lost in money, and he has turned to sugar-beet. I should like to inform the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture that next year he will find that he will have as great an increase for this sugar-beet industry. Sugar-beet is a root crop and an alternative to another root crop—the potato crop—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is getting off the lines again.
§ Sir E. SHEPPERSONThis increased estimate this year is due to the same cause. It is an alternative to the potato crop, and the potatoes are not a paying proposition. Therefore, the farmer has turned to sugar-beet. I would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that every ton of foreign potatoes he admits to this country this spring will mean that a ton of potatoes is being replaced by a ton of sugar-beet. Not only will the farmer suffer loss of money, but he will suffer loss of the subsidy on that sugar-beet. I have congratulated the Minister on bringing forward this Estimate. I will congratulate him again upon the opportune time in which he has brought it forward. I will congratulate him upon the fact that he is sitting on these benches. There is the absence of the President of the Board of Trade, and there is the absence of the First Lord of the Admiralty, who is quite properly prevented from being present.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Gentleman has got off the line now.
§ Sir E. SHEPPERSONI was endeavouring to show that the absence of these two right hon. Gentlemen was a cause by which the right hon. Gentleman 811 obtained the advantage of this Measure without opposition from his own Front Bench. Two years ago when a similar Vote was before the House—
§ Mr. SPEAKERWe must confine ourselves to this year.
§ Sir E. SHEPPERSONI bow to your Ruling. In conclusion, I do want to say very seriously to the House that they need not grudge the expenditure of this money, because this Estimate for the purpose of sugar-beet has to my knowledge saved a large number of farmers all over England. Agriculture is grateful to the Minister. I only hope that, when our time comes, we may have the sympathy of the other side of the House for this great industry.
§ Mr. KEDWARDI want to address a question to the Parliamentary Secretary. I have received complaints from a number of farmers who grow sugar-beet concerning the shortage of by-products.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member must raise that on another occasion. It would not be relevant at this particular moment.
§ Mr. KEDWARDI have every desire to obey your Ruling. I was only going to suggest that it will affect my Vote if the factories are going to export the byproducts.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat would not justify a Supplementary Estimate in excess of the original Estimate which is the only question under discussion now.
§ Mr. KEDWARDThat being so, I will get into touch with the Minister of Agriculture.
§ Mr. MANDERI rise to protest against the whole policy of the sugar-beet subsidy.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat does not arise on this Vote.
§ Mr. MANDERAnd, particularly, I protest against this Supplementary Estimate. I think it is a great pity that this Estimate should be brought forward, because, if you can make out a case for subsidising sugar—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat does not arise on this Vote. The question of policy was settled long ago.