HC Deb 30 April 1931 vol 251 cc1800-1
43. Mr. LEES

asked the Minister of Health whether his Department is satisfied that chemical substances of secret formula, known in the baking trade as improvers, and used for causing flour used for bread making to absorb more water, are not deleterious to public health?

Mr. GREENWOOD

I would refer my hon. Friend to the report made in 1927 by the Departmental Committee on the Treatment of Flour with Chemical Substances. The committee's view was that most of the substances known in the baking trade as improvers are unobjectionable on grounds of public health in the quantities in which they are used, but they expressed the opinion that the use of chlorine and nitrogen trichloride is undesirable. I may add that the committee did not accept the view that so-called improvers generally enable the flour to absorb more water than it otherwise would.

Mr. LEES

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last week in reply to a question of mine he admitted that out of 280 lbs. of flour 100 4-lb loaves of bread could be made, and is he aware that according to an advertisement that I have, by adding 1 lb. of this improver to 280 lbs. of flour it produced 471 lbs. of bread?

Mr. GREENWOOD

I cannot be responsible for public advertisements.

Mr. BROCKWAY

Does this bread come from Russia?

Several HON. MEMBERS

rose

Mr. SPEAKER

We have taken up a great deal of time over individual questions.

Mr. LEES

On a point of Order. Are not supplementary questions to be allowed on a question like this?

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member has asked me a very unreasonable question, seeing he has already asked a supplementary question.

Mr. LEES

On a point of Order. You have not given me an opportunity of asking a question, and you have no right to say that it is unreasonable.

Mr. SPEAKER

I cannot allow the hon. Member to address me in that manner.

Forward to