HC Deb 26 April 1934 vol 288 cc2004-14

9.48 p.m.

Dr. BURGIN

I beg to move, That the Bacon (Import Regulation) Order, 1934, dated the sixth day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-four, made by the Board of Trade under the Agricultural Marketing Act, 1933, a copy of which was presented to this House on the ninth day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-four, be approved. I think very few words will be necessary to satisfy the House about this amending Bacon Order. Hon. Members will recollect that an Order was made in November last restricting the importation of bacon. To that Order there was a Schedule containing the list of countries to which the Order applied. The Order provided that if at any time the Board of Trade were satisfied that bacon was being imported from any other country to the extent of more than 400 cwt. a week the Board of Trade could limit such importation. Imports from other countries, not being of any significant quantity, were not regulated. Unfortunately, there was a way of evading the Order of November, 1933. Pigs could be exported from a country even though bacon could not, and so certain countries which had a surplus of pig production exported their live pigs to countries not named in the Schedule, and bacon made there from those pigs, exported from one of the 11 scheduled countries, began to arrive here in quantities of less than 400 cwt. a week. As the list of countries to which the Bacon Order applied was only 11, the House will appreciate that this method of evasion, had it been allowed to continue, would have entirely defeated the scheme. Imports at the rate of just under 400 cwt. a week from a very large number of countries would have produced a most serious state of affairs. As a matter of geography the House would be very much amused, I think, if it knew some of the countries which have begun sending us bacon. It is probably politic that I should not mention some of those countries, which are associated with anything but bacon.

Mr. HOLDSWORTH

Is there any from Palestine?

Dr. BURGIN

The amending Order comes into existence to stop the evasion. I want hon. Members to realise that all they are being asked to do in this amending Order is to carry out something which the House has already decided and to prevent evasion through a loophole. Substantially, the Order is in the same terms as the earlier Order. I will tell the House what the alterations are, because if the two Orders are looked at side by side it will be difficult for hon. Members, unless they have an underlined copy, as I have, to detect the difference between the two. On page 2 the first two paragraphs in the preamble are new, being necessary references to the old Order, which is revoked, and may be called recitals. Paragraph 1 is completely new, and I will explain its purpose in a moment. Paragraph 2 incorporates the old paragraphs 1 and 2 of the old Order. There are slight changes in paragraphs 7 (b) and 8 dealing with proof of origin. There is a new definition of "foreign country" in paragraph 10 (a), and paragraph 11 is a revoking paragraph.

Of these alterations the only one on which the House will desire information is paragraph 1. People cannot now import into the United Kingdom bacon produced in one country from pigs bred in another. The pig growing and the bacon curing must go on in the same country. After all, that is what the earlier Order was intended to deal with, and the possibility of and the consequences of evasion had not been appreciated. The new paragraph 1 will effectively put an end to the state of affairs which I have described. I am sure that with this explanation the House will desire to show its disapproval of an evasion of its own clearly expressed intentions and will give me approval of this Order.

9.54 p.m.

Mr. WILMOT

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on the lucidity of his speech on what is, to me, a somewhat complicated matter, but I must draw attention to the fact that this amending Order places still further restrictions on the supply of bacon. I beg the hon. Gentleman to have regard to the effect which this artificial scarcity is having on the poorer sections of the urban population. We have a new doctrine of artificially created scarcity, because this new attempt to deal with under consumption due to low wages is nothing less than the creation of an artificial scarcity. This Order is intended to tighten up the regulations and to make that scarcity somewhat more acute. I do not think that I am exaggerating when I say that the effect of this action is that bacon has become an unobtainable luxury for the poorer sections of the community. I cannot speak of the price levels outside London, but in my own constituency the price of bacon during the last 12 months has risen by many pence per pound, and I know from the statements made by grocers and provision merchants in the retail trade that each restriction in production results in a smaller quantity of bacon being produced. Bacon will shortly become a luxury to which only a small proportion of the population will have access.

I beg of the Minister that, in pursuing this policy, he should have regard to its effects upon the consumer. My own view is that it would be very much better if the policy of the Government were directed towards raising the purchasing power of the consumer rather than towards creating an artificial scarcity in the product. That is too wide a matter to be debated now, and I would leave it where it is. I ask the Minister to be for ever vigilant as to the effect of these restrictions on the price and the effects of the price upon the volume of consumption.

9.52 p.m.

Mr. JOHN WALLACE

The hon. Member for East Fulham (Mr. Wilmot) has spoken of bacon; I shall refer to ham. I am not prepared to give a scientific definition of the difference between bacon and ham. Very strong representations have come from Scotland about the scarcity of ham for the processing ham industry in that country. I asked a question a short time ago of the President of the Board of Trade regarding this matter, because there is quite a serious position in Scotland so far as the processing of ham is concerned, and the President was kind enough to promise to make an inquiry into the matter. I shall be very glad if my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade has any further information to give upon the subject.

There is a considerable processing ham industry in Scotland and since the restrictions were introduced supplies have been affected. I am not criticising the policy of the quota which in many industries is essential, but quotas can only be satisfactory in this case if supplies can be met by the pig industry at home. The people engaged in the industry find it impossible to get supplies of ham from the agricultural interests at home. It is perhaps not generally known that Scottish interests in this matter have been rather neglected. During the Great War, the allocation from Scotland was as to 85 per cent. ham and 15 per cent. bacon, so that while England is a bacon-and-egg country Scotland is very largely a ham-made country. It is most unfortunate that Scottish interests have—I am sure not wilfully—been overlooked. The anomaly is that the important place hitherto occupied by ham in the Scottish provision market, in contradistinction to that occupied by bacon, has not been sufficiently recognised in the form of quota restrictions which govern imports into Great Britain under the scheme. I beg the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade to take this matter into serious consideration, because the present position is threatening a very important industry in Scotland.

10.0 p.m.

Mr. HOLDSWORTH

I know that the Order is one of machinery and that if you are to have the machinery you must stop evasion, but the point that I want to make is in regard to paragraph 10, which furnishes a definition of bacon. I do not want to read out the whole of the definition, but simply the last two words in line 4. The paragraph says: For the purpose of this Order, 'bacon' means"— then it goes on, and finishes with the two words: includes ham. I have a letter in my possession from one of the biggest firms in Liverpool pointing out that, during the month of February, the market price of raw ham from the United States of America reached 100s. and over per cwt.; that price compares with 54s. and 64s. in February of last year. The quota commenced on the 1st March and since that date supplies have been more plentiful than they are to-day, when the price is from 81s. to 87s. per cwt., compared with 70s. to 74s. on the corresponding date last year. Everybody acknowledges the increase of prices in this country, but the point which I wish to make now is that there was a tremendous export trade in ham coming to this country, being cured here and made up and sent abroad. The letter points out how we are placed at a tremendous disadvantage in the various Continental markets because of the import restrictions upon bacon which, in the definition, includes ham. We are cutting off a very essential part of our export trade, so far as hams are concerned, by this artificial restriction of supplies. The matter ought to be put to the Minister of Agriculture that some other definition should be laid down, other than the one which is in the Order and is being carried out. I daresay that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade will see this letter and that he will note the serious effect which is being produced. I shall be very much obliged if he will hand over the information to the Minister of Agriculture, to see if an alteration can be made in the definition in a way that will assist the export trade.

10.4 p.m.

Mr. DAVID GRENFELL

It is strange that some; of the agricultural Members who were vociferous and persistent in their demand for these Orders, have lost their interest in them once the Orders have been given to them. One is unable to elicit either word or sign from them. They give me an impression of having very much more intelligence than I had credited even them with. They appear to be alone in the House in thoroughly understanding these wonderful documents which appear from time to time with interesting legal verbiage and wonderful definitions of the things of which we never knew until this Government came along with its Orders in regard to such things as bacon. This is a masterpiece document, of very great use. I am sure that the agricultural Members must be interested to know what is bacon and what is ham, and from what animal bacon is manufactured. All these things are contained in the document, and yet there is not a word of thanks to the Minister from hon. Members opposite for the information that is supplied.

Sir JOSEPH LAMB

He has not asked for it.

Mr. GRENFELL

I am glad that hon. Members opposite, at last, share in the pleasure that I feel in having this wonderful information. It is very important that we should know what the Order means. It does not mean half that is printed in the document. The meaning can be put in a few simple words. It prohibits, under the Bill from which it is drawn, the importation of bacon except under certain conditions. The Government were given authority to regulate the importation of foreign bacon and other foreign food products; but there is not a word about regulation in the Order, although it very definitely lays down conditions under which bacon from foreign countries is to be prohibited from entering this country. The first prohibition says: It shall not be lawful to import into the United Kingdom any bacon produced in any foreign country being the product of pigs bred in another foreign country. That may be simple, but I do not know, without a map of Europe or a map of the world in front of me, what it exactly means. The bacon may come from Holland. That is foreign bacon, and it is not illegal foreign bacon. It it not illegal to import foreign bacon coming from Holland, unless that foreign bacon manufactured in Holland has been manu- factured from a pig born and bred in, say, Germany. There is a term in common use the meaning of which I now know for the first time. I assume that in future any Dutch bacon that is not made from a pig born and bred in Holland will become double Dutch. Bacon is doubly foreign if it is made from a pig born and bred in another foreign country.

All this wonderful instruction is being given to us, but behind the mysteries of this involved formula there is an attempt to prohibit the importation of foreign bacon. It means that no bacon produced under these conditions is to be allowed to come into this country, whatever the state of the market or whatever the price of bacon may be here. It will be illegal to allow bacon produced under those conditions to come into this country. This is the first time that we have been treated to such a prohibition. We fear very much the possibilities that may arise from this course of action. Orders of this kind mean interference with our food supply, and they betoken something of which we are afraid. Paragraph 2 says: It shall not be lawful to import into the United Kingdom except under licence any bacon produced in any foreign country named in the Schedule to this Order or in any foreign country in respect of which a declaration made by the Board of Trade under paragraph 3 of this Order has come into force. It shall not be lawful to import." How far we have gone from the Free Trade profession of the Parliamentary Secretary and his chief. It is no longer a case of, "it is not convenient," but it is no longer lawful to import certain commodities into this country if they do not meet with the approval of the hon. Members who sit in magnificent silence on the benches opposite, while this work is being done on their behalf. There is eloquent dumbness on the part of hon. Members who sit behind the Government, while their interests are being so well served, and while the interests of the consuming public are being so neglected and prejudiced. Those are two of the provisions with regard to imports of foodstuffs into this country, and the House would do well to mark the introduction of these proposals. We consume very large quantities of bacon in this country. It is a very important part of our daily diet. The aggregate quantity of bacon imported into the country in 1931 was 13,000,000 cwts. There was to be a regulation to 80 per cent. of that aggregate quantity, the intention being to limit the annual imports to about 10,500,000 cwts. A certain number of agreements were made with the intention of regulating the quantities of bacon to be imported from abroad, and there are 11 countries named in the Schedule from which bacon can be imported by agreement, the quantities being known in advance and licences being issued to the exporters in those countries. All the bacon imported from those countries named in the Schedule comes in under licence.

So long as the bacon comes in under licence it is legal and it will be legal under this Order, but the hon. Member says that if any country with whom we have not an agreement sends bacon into this country in excess of 400 cwts. a week, or in excess of 20,000 cwts. per annum, or in excess of 1,000 tons per annum, it shall be no longer legal, and the authority of the law is to be used to prohibit further imports from such a country. It is now only legal, except to a very limited extent, for bacon to come into this country from the 11 countries named in the Schedule, with whom we have more or less definite agreements regarding quantities. This goes a very long way further than any of us anticipated when, 12 months ago, we discussed the Marketing Bill under which this Order has been framed. The average consumption per man, woman and child in this country runs to half a pound of bacon per week. The average adult in a family consumes about 1 lb. of bacon per week and the other members of the family will consume a smaller quantity. When we remember that the price of bacon has gone up in the last 12 months from 50s. per cwt. to 85s. and 90s. per cwt., or an increase of 6d. per lb. retail, it is a serious matter. Many people cannot buy 1 lb. of bacon at a time. There are large numbers of people who buy bacon by the quarter and half pound. When the subdivision has been made it will be found that the increase in price averages about 2d. per quarter pound. That is a very serious thing.

The Parliamentary Secretary and those responsible with him for the introduction of these Orders for the regulation and now for the prohibition of imports of this food commodity ought to keep a very close and vigilant watch on this question and ought to take the House into their confidence. We have not been given their full confidence to-night. We excuse the Minister from giving us the whole of the figures of importation from the several countries, but we do say that from time to time those of us who disagree with these Orders are entitled to the fullest information; and those at whose instigation these Orders have been produced have also the right to know whether their remedy is as efficacious as they desire it to be. Because we are not satisfied that these Orders are designed in the public interest in the fullest sense, we enter our protest here to-night, but we shall refrain from going into the Division Lobby. We simply desire the Minister to take note of what we have said in making our protest.

10.16 p.m.

Mr. CROOM-JOHNSON

We all appreciate the ingenuity and fair-mindedness of the hon. Member for Gower (Mr. D. Grenfell), and those of us who sit on these benches would feel very sorry indeed if his rest in the night season were disturbed by any sort of idea that we were not grateful to the Minister for having attempted, by this Order, to stop up a hole in the previous Order which has been made. I rise simply for the purpose of thanking the Minister on behalf of the pig producers and the bacon producers in the West of England, in order that the hon. Member may go to his night's rest undisturbed by any qualms. I should like to add one other word on behalf of the consumers in the West of England, who realise that their best hope for security and for the promotion of trade in the West Country is that the farming industry should be in a prosperous condition.

Resolved, That the Bacon (Import Regulation) Order, 1934, dated the sixth day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-four, made by the Board of Trade under the Agricultural Marketing Act, 1933, a copy of which was presented to this House on the ninth day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-four, be approved.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

    cc2013-4
  1. ADJOURNMENT. 49 words
Forward to