CLAUSE 18.—(Interpretation.) (Hansard, 13 July 1931)

§ Dr. ADDISON
I beg to move, in page 20, line 4, to leave out the words "a horticultural product," and to insert instead thereof the words: any product of agriculture or horticulture and any article of food or drink wholly or partly manufactured or derived from any such product, and fleeces and the skins of animals.

§ Captain CROOKSHANK
The Minister of Agriculture says that this is merely a consequential Amendment, but I would ask him to be good enough to give a definition of the words "or drink." I should like to be quite certain that they are necessary. In the case of another Bill, now passing through the House, the First Lord of the Admiralty has told us that the word "drink" in 158 legislation only means water or drugs and that everything else which most of us call drink is included in the term "food." If the First Lord is right, the Minister of Agriculture is wrong—and vice versa. And on this particular occasion both may be wrong. In the case of the other Bill to which I have referred the words "or drink" were not included when the Bill was read a second time; it was merely a question of food. I say that the words "or drink" in this Amendment are perfectly unnecessary, and it is one of the canons of legislation that we should never put in unnecessary words. Therefore I ask him to take them out. If the First Lord is right the word only means water or drugs, and I cannot imagine any of the authorities set up by this Bill wishing to interest themselves in the sale of water or drugs. If, on the other hand, the word "drink" means what most of us think it means, then there are various other commodities, alcoholic and nonalcoholic, which may be included and I should like some explanation of the kind 159 of drinks which the Minister of Agriculture has in mind should be dealt with by Agricultural Marketing Boards. If it is not too late I should like to move to leave the words "or drink" out of the Amendment.

§ Sir B. PETO
Was my hon. and gallant Friend's Amendment to the proposed Amendment in order?

§ Mr. SPEAKER
I did not select it.

§ Dr. ADDISON
This Amendment I have moved after discussion with the other parties in order to come to an agreement on a definition of "agricultural product." Whatever may have taken place upstairs, I am not responsible for it. I dare say it may have happened in the course of the discussion of an Amendment moved by the hon. and gallant Member.

§ Captain CROOKSHANK
No.

§ Dr. ADDISON
I have the reference to the statement here, and it appears to have been in the course of a discussion in which the Food and Drugs Act and other Acts were mentioned. I do not propose in this Bill to appropriate the Food and Drugs Act or anything of that sort. This is a definition of "agricultural product." It ought to include milk. Milk is an article of drink. [Interruption.] At any rate you drink it. It is necessary to have these words in a definition of "agricultural product" so as to include milk.

§ Sir PHILIP CUNLIFFE-LISTER
I think the speech of the Minister is one of great importance. I certainly have always thought that milk was a drink, but I and an hon. Friend were precluded on the other Bill which is now going through Standing Committee, and is intended to be at least as wide as this Bill, from putting in the word "drink," although milk was one of the articles that we wished to cover. We were then informed, on the full authority of the Government after consultation with their leading advisers, that it would be quite improper to include the word "drink," because the word "food" already covered it. I only take note now that the further consideration which the Government have given to this important question of definition leads them to find it necessary, when they mean drink, to say drink. I sincerely hope 160 that in future, in other Bills, the Government will be equally specific, and that we shall at least have some consistency in Government legislation.

Mr. R. W. SMITH
There has been much talk about the manufacture of power spirit—[Interruption]. The Amendment contains the words: Any product of agriculture or horticulture and any article of food or drink wholly or partly manufactured or derived from any such product, and fleeces and the skins of animals. Power alcohol can be derived from potatoes, but that would not be included, because it is not an article of food or drink. Surely there is some mistake. Surely the same may be said with regard to starch? The Amendment mentions "fleeces and the skins of animals." There is a well known thing called goose down. Surely goose down would not come into the definition, for it would not be included under "fleeces and the skins of animals."

§ Major MUIRHEAD
I beg to move, in page 21, line 15, at the end, to insert the words: 'Substitutional scheme' means a scheme which revokes one or more existing schemes, and is such that at the time when it comes into force—

(a) every person is entitled to be registered as a producer thereunder who was entitled to be registered as a producer under the existing scheme or one or more of the existing schemes; and

(b) no person is entitled to be registered as a producer thereunder who was not entitled to be registered as a producer under the existing scheme or any of the existing schemes."

This is one of the major Amendments of a series of Amendments dealing with substitutional schemes. In suggesting special machinery for setting up substitutional schemes it was thought desirable that the interests of any persons who might be affected should be adequately safeguarded. This Amendment aims at specifying very closely the conditions under which special machinery for setting up substitutional schemes may be invoked and it lays down that every person who is entitled to be registered as a producer under either of the schemes which are being merged into the substitutional scheme shall be entitled to be registered under the substitutional scheme, and no 161 person who is not entitled to be registered under either of the previous schemes, shall be entitled to be registered under the substitutional scheme. Within those strict limits it is thought that the interests of any person which might possibly be affected by facilitating the procedure for setting up substitutional schemes, is adequately safeguarded.

§ Captain CROOKSHANK
I beg to second the Amendment.

Brigadier-General BROWN
I beg to move, in page 21, line 17, after the word "kind," to insert the words: other than pedigree stock registered in a recognised herd book. I move this Amendment because I do not think it wise to include pedigree stock under any of these schemes, as it will be the tendency under schemes of this kind to treat such stock as ordinary stock and not as pedigree stock. I need not remind hon. Members that our pedigree herds constitute a valuable asset to this country—perhaps the most valuable asset in our agriculture—and I am sure that the Minister, having just attended the Royal Show, appreciates the importance of our pedigree stock. The market for them is very often abroad and they are in a very different category from the kind of production which is intended to be regulated, as to marketing, under this scheme. I hope that the Minister, even if this Amendment does not meet with his approval, will be able to deal with the point in some other way.

§ Viscount WOLMER
I beg to second the Amendment.

§ Dr. ADDISON
I appreciate the point of the hon. and gallant Member who has moved this Amendment but I am sure he realises that the words which he proposes would not be appropriate. There may be animals registered in recognised herd books of which not all the offspring could be regarded as pedigree stock. These animals may be put into ordinary herds for breeding purposes and if this Amendment were adopted it would exclude the possibility of such cases being dealt with and I do not think that would be desirable. The Amendment in this form would exclude a very large number of animals which would otherwise be dealt with under the scheme and I am afraid 162 I could not accept these words. I shall consider whether I can meet the hon. and gallant Member's point in any other way but I am sure that these words would not be suitable.

§ Viscount WOLMER
When this Bill gets to another place, I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will be well advised to consider whether he cannot find words to meet this point. I think he is right in saying that the words of the Amendment do not entirely meet the point, but I am sure it will commend itself in many quarters if the right hon. Gentleman can make it clear that he does not propose to deal with pedigree stock. You could not possibly find a more unsuitable subject for this Bill.

Brigadier-General BROWN
On the assurance of the Minister that he will look into the matter, I will withdraw my Amendment, with the leave of the House.

§ Dr. ADDISON
I beg to move, in page 21, line 17, to leave out the words "who keeps," and to insert instead thereof the words "whose business it is to keep."
This and the next two Amendments are moved in accordance with undertakings already given.