HC Deb 25 January 1937 vol 319 cc707-23

10.39 P.m.

Mr. A. V. Alexander

I beg to move, in page 1, line 15, after "shall," to insert: until the fifteenth day of December, nineteen hundred and thirty-seven. This is not new, because we discussed a similar principle in dealing with the Financial Resolution. In dealing with the passage of the Bill through the House it is equally important that the matter should be debated now. There can be no question at all as to the need for taking every possible step to safeguard consumers in this matter after reminding ourselves of the speech of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on 15th December. He said then that, The line the Government are adopting is the only one that can be taken to preserve our overseas trade and at the same time to give a measure of assistance to our home producer in such a way as not to damage the consumer's interest unduly."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 15th December, 1936; col. 2306, Vol. 318.] The adding of that qualification largely gave away the whole case and completely justifies our Amendment to-night to limit the period of the operation of these duties, so that we may then judge, at the end of the 12 months' experience, whether the "unduly" which was in the mind of the Financial Secretary is or is not a substantial injury to the interests of the consumers. At any rate, it will be for the Financial Secretary to the Treasury or the Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department to-night to give a little more information on this point than we have yet had. Certainly I was disappointed when I opened my OFFICIAL REPORT last Friday and read the speech of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade with regard to the trend of prices since these duties were put on. It is true that in the course of cross-examination, as it were, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade gave a number of excerpts from a schedule of figures which he had in his hand at that Box, but he did not fulfil what I understood was a promise, that he would circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the actual schedule on which he had all the prices, so that we might judge for ourselves what had been the movement in beef prices since the imposition of the duty. If we had had those figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT we might almost have been saved the necessity of moving the Amendment to-night to limit the period, because we should have had something like an intelligent presentation of the movement of prices during the last five or six weeks.

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Lieut.-Colonel Colville)

Perhaps I may save the right hon. Gentleman the necessity of saying anything more. It was only because of a technicality that these figures have not been printed. In examining the report of the Debate, I understand that it was found that it technically required a question to enable my hon. Friend to print these figures. I have his authority for saying that if the right hon. Gentleman or any of his friends will put down a question, a list of figures will be given.

Mr. Alexander

I do not for a moment intend any reproach to the Parliamentary Secretary, that there was any deliberate withholding of promised information, although I suggest that the Parliamentary Secretary might easily have asked his Parliamentary private secretary to have put him a question for Friday, and the information could have been in the OFFICIAL REPORT which is available to-day. There would have been no difficulty about it. However, I have made my point, and I do not want to harass the Parliamentary Secretary unduly on such a small matter, but if we had had the figures we could have formed a better judgment. In the course of his speech on Thursday, I noticed that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade was very careful not to make any reference at all to the movements in the price of canned beef. He pointed out, comparing certain days with the corresponding days in the year before, that there was no actual increase in the price of Argentina chilled beef, but if you turn to the subject of canned beef, there is no doubt at all that ever since the duty was imposed in December, there has been charged to the consuming public the full 10 per cent, increase of the duty on these commodities.

When my hon. Friends on this side of the House are always charged with making too much of the case of the poorest of our consumers, surely, the supporters of the Government ought not to forget that canned beef is a very important item in the diet of many of our workpeople. To those who cannot afford to get other meat, or those engaged in occupations where canned beef is the quick and available thing, it becomes very important. I have the prices in my possession, and they have gone up consistently by 10 per cent, since the duties were imposed. If that is likely to continue throughout the period of the duty it will always be a hardship to those people, and if we can to-night by limiting the period of the operation of the duty to 12 months, so that we can judge of its effect in the case of chilled and frozen beef, we shall have done as much as we can, having regard to the Government in power, to protest against our being committed to this policy of protection at the expense of the food of the people. We shall have done what we can to safeguard the consumer. When we look at some of the details of the position in regard to the canned goods subject to the duty, we can see how enormously the consumer is being affected by the raising of prices. Take the case of 12 oz. tins. In December, 1933, the price was 4s. 6d., and at the present time, 6s. 4½d. Take the case of 6 lb. tins. In December, 1933, the price was 23s. 6d., and to-day, 38s. 6d., an increase of 60 per cent. Ten per cent, has been imposed by the extra taxation in the last few weeks. In view of these prices we cannot be charged with labouring the case, which is a good one, for the proper safeguarding of the consumer.

It was said during the fairly long Debates on the Livestock Bill and on the Bill for the imposition of these duties, that it is not the home consumer who is going to pay, because the Argentine Government, by means of a subsidy arrangement, are going to help to meet the bill. It is suggested that perhaps up to £1,000,000 or more will be provided by the Argentine Government to their side of the industry out of the £3,000,000 or thereabouts which will be the total bill which will have to be paid as a result of the imposition of the duties. But the Minister of Agriculture, in dealing with this matter on the Second Reading of the Livestock Bill, would not make any statement of a committing character as to whether the Argentine Government was going to give any sum. We do not know. It is essential in these circumstances that we should pass the Amendment and limit the operation of the duty to 12 months, and perhaps then we shall be able to say whether the foreigner is going to pay the tax.

10.49 P.m.

Lieut.-Colonel Colville

I do not wish to stifle discussion on this very important point, but it is right that at this stage I should state the Government's position in regard to the Amendment. The right hon. Gentleman will not be surprised to hear me say that it is an Amendment which we cannot accept. On all the stages of our discussions in connection with this Measure, on the Money Resolution and the Second Reading, we made it plain that this Bill was an essential part of our long-term beef policy. Moreover, right back to the time when the Emergency Provisions Act was introduced we made it plain that it was our intention in passing our long-term beef policy to finance a part of our requirements for that policy from a levy on foreign imports. The Government could not possibly accept an Amendment which would limit the operation of the duties to one year, because it would be wrong to single out part of the whole policy for annual review.

I wish to stress to the Committee that this is an integral part of our policy. We have never made any secret of that, and to accept this Amendment would be to break faith with the House of Commons and the electorate, who have had quite plainly before them the intentions of the Government in regard to this matter. It is a general condition of all measures that are passed by any Government that their effect is watched and the need for their continuance considered in the light of events. Naturally the effect of our livestock policy as a whole will be so watched, but to accept an Amendment which would call for an annual review of this part of our long-term meat policy would not be in line with the Government's intentions. We had this in mind all along. We had it in mind in our negotiations with the Government of Argentina. The present agreement runs to the end of 1939 and can then be terminated only on six months' notice being given. That agreement does not stipulate any reduction of duties or any annual review of these duties.

In regard to the Dominions, arrangements are now in course of completion for the orderly regulation of supplies from them, and in considering the preference which we wish to accord to our Dominions on these products we do not intend that that should be a short-term preference. We spent some seven hours to-day in discussing an important matter in relation to the Empire—Empire settlement—and I think the Committee will agree that it is no use discussing Empire settlement unless at the same time we consider all lines of policy for assisting our Empire countries to be in a position to offer employment to those who go there. The question of affording a preference is an essential factor. Both in our negotiations with foreign countries and our discussions with the Dominions we regard this duty as part of our long-term policy. The right hon. Gentleman has spoken of the effect this may have on consumers. I am sorry the House has not got those figures which the Parliamentary Secretary promised. It was entirely for a technical reason, which I have explained to the right hon. Gentleman, and as soon as a question is put down they will be given. For that reason, although I have the figures with me, I will not quote them. The right hon. Gentleman did not have them. They are figures which speak for themselves and they will shortly be in the possession of the House. He spoke of the increase in price of canned beef. Although these figures, both of chilled beef and canned beef, are interesting, and although they may be some pointer to the effect of the duties, it is far too early yet to judge effectively what the incidence of these duties will be. They are some pointer, but no more. We on our side may take comfort from the fact that in the case of chilled beef, by far the largest import, prices do not seem to be affected.

The right hon. Gentleman took courage to put forward his argument because the price of canned beef has shown a rise. It is really much too early to say. On the Second Reading of the Bill I stressed the point that in view of the various stages which beef goes through before it reaches the consumer in this country it is probable that only a small portion of the duty reaches him. But time will show. Many factors affect the price of beef. The right hon. Gentleman in speaking of canned beef said that since 1933 there had been an increase of 60 per cent., 10 per cent, of which he said came from the duty. Where does the other 50 per cent, come from? So many factors affect the price of beef that it is difficult to say that an increase of 10 per cent, is solely due to the application of the duty.

Mr. Alexander

My argument is that the 10 per cent, just put on is entirely due to the last duty and that the previous 10 per cent, increase was due to the previous duty. To put 20 per cent, increase of duty on an important food commodity in a time of rising prices is folly from the point of view of the consumer.

Lieut.-Colonel Colville

Is the right hon. Gentleman certain that the increase is caused directly by the duty? If so, he has only accounted for 20 per cent, of an increase of 60 per cent, in price. Where does the other 40 per cent, come from? The right hon. Gentleman's argument is capable of being disputed. There is, of course, a difference between ourselves and hon. Members opposite, but I make this point. The hon. Member for Newton (Sir R. Young) who wound up for the Opposition earlier this evening spoke of encouraging agriculture at home and said that in view of the international situation there was a need to increase the supply of home-grown food. He also said that no naval convoy was required for food grown at home. Surely that is true of the livestock industry of the country and when the right hon. Gentleman and his friends show great interest for the welfare of the consumer, is not the consumer's welfare bound up to a great extent with the livestock industry being on a firm basis? This moderate duty on imported foreign meat is an essential part of our long-term policy, and I ask the Committee to reject the Amendment.

10.59 P.m.

Mr. Dingle Foot

I wish to associate my Friends and myself with the Amendment, and I hope hon. Members above the Gangway will carry it to the Division Lobby. The Financial Secretary has entirely failed to meet the case put by the right hon. Gentleman. He said that this was an essential part of the Government's long-term policy, and led us to infer that this long-term beef policy would be carried through during the years to come whatever the effect on the consumer might be. That was the only inference it was possible to draw from his speech. He said that it would be watched by the Government, as of course any policy of this kind has to be watched. Is it unreasonable to ask that machinery should be inserted in the Bill to make sure that it will be watched by the House of Commons, and that we shall be able to review after 12 months what is an entirely new departure, as far as beef is concerned, in our fiscal policy, a departure which, until quite recently, in our political history would have been condemned, and was condemned, by eminent Members of the Government, for it is only five years ago that the President of the Board of Trade was telling his constituents that he would not be in favour of a tax on wheat or on meat. We were told that the Government would watch the operation of this policy, but we were given no assurance that the policy would be modified if it turned out that the tax should bear unduly hard upon the urban consumer. There is no safeguard to the consumers in this Bill or in this set of proposals. I do not wish to elaborate the point, but there are some hon. Members who represent urban consumers. We think their point of view is entitled to be heard just as much as that of the agricultural producers. This House has spent a great deal of time in the last few days in voting considerable sums of money, at the expense of taxpayers, to the pro- ducers, and it is not unreasonable that the consumers should have, at any rate, the small safeguard represented by the Amendment.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 92; Noes, 159.

Division No. 53.] AYES. [11.2 p.m.
Acland, Rt. Hon. Sir F. Dyke Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel) Potts, J.
Adamson, W. M. Harris, Sir P. A. Pritt, D. N.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.) Henderson, J. (Ardwick) Rathbone, Eleanor (English Univ's.)
Anderson, F. (Whitehaven) Henderson, T. (Tradeston) Richards, R. (Wrexham)
Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R. Hills, A. (Pontefract) Ridley, G.
Barnes, A. J. Hollins, A. Riley, B.
Batey, J. Jagger, J. Ritson, J.
Bellenger, F. J. Johnston, Rt. Hon. T. Roberts, W. (Cumberland, N.)
Benson, G. Jones, A. C. (Shipley) Rowson, G.
Broad, F. A. Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) Seely, Sir H. M.
Bromfield, W. Kelly, W. T. Sexton, T. M.
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (S. Ayrshire) Lathan, G. Silverman, S. S.
Burke, W. A. Lawson, J. J. Simpson, F. B.
Cassells, T. Leach, W. Sinclair, Rt. Hon. Sir A. (C'thn's)
Chater, D. Lee, F. Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)
Cluse, W. S. Leslie, J. R. Smith, E. (Stoke)
Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton) Logan, D. G. Sorensen, R. W.
Day, H. Lunn, W. Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)
Dobbie, W. Macdonald, G. (Ince) Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)
Dunn, E. (Rother Valley) McEntee, V. La T. Tinker, J. J.
Ede, J. C. McGhee, H. G. Viant, S. P.
Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty) MacMillan, M. (Western Isles) Walkden, A. G.
Evans, D. O. (Cardigan) Mainwaring, W. H. Walker, J.
Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H. Maxton, J. Watkins, F. C.
Foot, D. M. Messer, F. Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)
Frankel, D. Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.) Williams, T. (Don Valley)
Gardner, B. W Oliver, G. H. Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke) Owen, Major G. Young, Sir R. (Newton)
Green, W. H. (Deptford) Paling, W.
Grenfell, D. R. Parker, J. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth) Parkinson, J. A. Mr. Charleton and Mr. Whiteley.
Hall, G. H. (Aberdare) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
NOES.
Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G. Duggan, H. J. Leckie, J. A.
Albery, Sir Irving Duncan, J. A. L. Leech, Dr. J. W.
Apsley, Lord Dunglass, Lord Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Aster, Hon. W. W. (Fulham, E.) Edmondson, Major Sir J. Liddall, W. S.
Barclay-Harvey, Sir C. M. Ellis, Sir G. Llewellin, Lieut.-Col. J. J.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. Elliston, Capt. G. S. Loftus, P. C.
Beaumont, M. W. (Aylesbury) Elmley, Viscount Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Blindell, Sir J. Emrys-Evans, P. V. Lyons, A. M.
Boyce, H. Leslie Entwistle, C. F. Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)
Briscoe, Capt. R. G. Erskine-Hill, A. G. MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Everard, W. L. Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight)
Bull, B. B. Fleming, E. L. McKie, J. H.
Campbell, Sir E. T. Fox, Sir G. W. G. Maclay, Hon. J. P.
Cartland, J. R. H. Fremantle, Sir F. E. Macnamara, Capt. J. R. J.
Cary, R. A. Fyfe, D. P. M. Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.
Castlereagh, Viscount Ganzoni, Sir J. Markham, S. F.
Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester) Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir J. Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.
Channon, H. Gluckstein, L. H. Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.
Chapman, A. (Rutherglen) Graham, Captain A. C. (Wirral) Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)
Christie, J. A. Gridley, Sir A. B. Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)
Clarke, Lt.-Col. R. S. (E. Grinstead) Grimston, R. V. Morris, O. T. (Cardiff, E.)
Clarry, Sir Reginald Guy, J C. M. Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H.
Clydesdale, Marquess of Hanbury, Sir C. Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)
Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston) Hannah, I. C. Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A. J.
Colville, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. D. J. Hannon, Sir P. J. H.
Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.) Haslam, H. C. (Horncastle) Munro, P.
Courtauld, Major J. S. Heilgers, Captain F. F. A. Nall, Sir J.
Courthope, Col. Sir G. L. Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P. Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.
Cranborne, Viscount Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan- Orr-Ewing, I. L.
Craven-Ellis, W. Hills, Major Rt. Hon. J. W. (Ripon) Patrick, C. M.
Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page Holmes, J. S. Peake, O.
Crooke, J. S. Hope, Captain Hon. A. O. J. Peat, C. U.
Crookshank, Capt. H. F. C. Hopkinson, A. Petherick, M.
Cross, R. H. Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.) Pickthorn, K. W. M.
Crowder, J. F. E. Hudson, R. S. (Southport) Plugge, Capt. L. F.
Davies, C. (Montgomery) Hunter, T. Porritt, R. W.
Denman, Hon. R. D. Keeling, E. H. Procter, Major H. A.
Denville, Alfred Kimball, L. Ramsay, Captain A. H. M.
Donner, P. W. Lamb, Sir J. Q. Ramsbotham, H.
Duckworth, W. R. (Moss Side) Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.) Ramsden, Sir E.
Rankin, R. Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A Wakefield, W. W.
Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin) Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st) Walker-Smith, Sir J.
Rayner, Major R. H. Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich) Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan
Reed, A. C. (Exeter) Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen) Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)
Remer, J. R. Somervell, Sir D. B. (Crewe) Warrender, Sir V.
Rickards, G. W. (Skipton) Southby, Commander A. R. J. Wickham, Lt.-Col. E. T. R.
Ross, Major Sir R. D. (Londonderry) Spens, W. P. Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Rowlands, G. Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd) Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)
Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A. Storey, S. Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.
Russell, A. West (Tynemouth) Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F. Wright, Squadron-Leader J. A. C.
Salmon, Sir I. Sutcliffe, H. Young, A. S. L. (Partick)
Salt, E. W. Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)
Selley, H. R. Touche, G. O. TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar) Tree, A. R. L. F. Lieut.-Colonel Sir A. Lambert
Shepperson, Sir E. W. Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C. Ward and Major Sir George Davies.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

11.10 p.m.

Sir Reginald Clarry

I do not wish to detain the Committee more than a few moments, but I must refer to a comparatively small matter on the administrative side of this Bill. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] Under Sub-section (2, b) sweetbreads are exempted from duty. They are exempted primarily because they are essential to the medical preparation of insulin for diabetes, and I wish to draw the attention of the Government to something which is equally important, but which is omitted from the Bill, namely, that liver products are also a vital necessity for manufacturing pharmaceutical chemists in the production of remedies for pernicious anaemia. They are not exempted from the Bill, and I ask the Government whether they will be good enough to consider at a later stage inserting that exemption of liver products? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] The position is that the additional cost entailed by this Bill will render the cost of the medicine equivalent to 3½d. per week per person. At present the raw materials for these remedies are imported from South America. Only 20 per cent, is available from our Dominions, and a British product is not available.

Apparently, although six years ago a Committee was set up to inquire into slaughtering methods in this country and indicated that the present methods did not put at the disposal of manufacturing pharmaceutical chemists the requisite glands for producing this, nothing has been done up to date. I will not read the conclusions in that report, but they indicate that something should be done without delay. In the meantime our manufacturing chemists have to import the material they want from abroad, and although Continental pharmaceutical chemists could import similar products, although this country gives an ad valorem duty of 10 per cent., our British manufacturing chemists will have to pay 20 per cent, on their raw materials. What I am asking is not a large matter. The quantity under discussion amounts to about 800 tons per annum and an approximate value of £36,000, so that the Treasury will not lose a great deal, but they will certainly help to maintain an essential remedy at a lower price to the public, if they are able to make this concession. I think it is in the public interest that they should do so—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear"]—and I sincerely hope that the Government will give this matter very careful consideration at a later stage of the Bill.

11.14 p.m.

Sir Francis Fremantle

I cannot understand the levity with which this matter has been treated by hon. Members opposite. Pernicious anaemia is a disease that might attack anybody, and, that being so, they would be very glad to have the remedy in question. It is exactly on the same footing as sweetbreads, which is a matter on which the Medical Committee of this House has taken action in approaching the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Ministers for some years past, and exactly the same considerations arise in regard to liver products. Therefore, it requires similar treatment, and I hope it will receive the sympathetic consideration of the Government.

11.15 p.m.

Sir Percy Harris

I have pleasure in supporting the two hon. Members who have just spoken. My only regret is that they did not see fit to move an Amendment. If they do so on the Report stage I shall support it. I was surprised at their arguments. The Financial Secre- tary to the Treasury spent nearly 10 minutes trying to persuade the Committee that a tax of this kind must inevitably be paid, not by the consumer, but by the producer and the exporter into this country. If the Argentine is going to pay tax on liver, where is the soundness of the hon. Members' arguments? It merely means that the Argentine will be paying a contribution towards providing this essential remedy. The hon. Members are on the horns of a dilemma. We know very well, as all scientific chemists know, that the consumer pays the tax in the long run.

Hon. Members

Answer!

11.17 p.m.

Mr. Ede

I did not rise before because it seemed to me that after the three speeches in violent opposition to the Government we might have expected some reply for the Government bench. Like the hon. Baronet, the Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Sir P. Harris), I was very pleased to find that there were still some remnants of fiscal sanity on that side of the Committee when Members begin to deal with subjects which they understand. It is clear that when it is the raw material of a profession, and not merely of a trade, like the profession of the hon. Member for St. Albans (Sir F. Fremantle), the hon. Member realises that the fiscal heresies that are usually propagated for that side of the Committee have no foundation in fact.

Sir F. Fremantle

It is not the raw material of the profession but of the pharmaceutical chemist.

Mr. Ede

But without the assistance of the hon. Member's profession the pharmaceutical chemist would not get very far. It is true that the hon. Member buries his professional mistakes, but he is apparently not prepared to bury his fiscal mistakes. I hope that this will be a warning to the Government of what will happen to them when the country really understands, as their two hon. Friends do, the way they are allowing the country to drift. It cannot be argued after what has been said by these two hon. Members that in this particular instance they expect anyone other than the consumer to pay. We are entitled to have from the Government some ex- planation of their reason for pursuing something which is shown to be contrary to the physical-fitness campaign upon which we understand they are going to start. I should have thought at least, seeing the way the Government itself suffers from pernicious anaemia, that they would have taken no steps that would have made it difficult to provide a cure for that complaint.

11.19 p.m.

Captain Euan Wallace (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department)

It was only the tremendous alacrity of the hon. Gentleman opposite in jumping up like a Jack-in-a-box—

Mr. Ede

Really the hon. and gallant Gentleman must have observed that the Chairman was on his feet, almost about to put the Question, before I rose. I waited for several seconds.

Captain Wallace

If that be so, I am sorry that I was looking in the wrong direction. I can assure the Committee that having provided myself with a short but convincing brief on the subject of liver I did not intend to lose the opportunity of discharging it. It is quite under standable that hon. Members should wonder why the Government have drawn the distinction between sweetbreads and liver. Sweetbreads are used largely for the manufacture of insulin, and for that reason have been exempted from quotas, and also from duties under this Bill, and I can understand that hon. Members wonder why liver is not treated in the same way. The real difficulty is that it is impossible to trace the progress of the liver after it comes into this country. My hon. Friend the Member for New port (Mr. Clarry), who wished to move an Amendment, suggested that the tax we were going to put on would cost a person suffering from pernicious anaemia an extra 3½d. a week. I am not prepared at the moment to controvert that statement but I can accept it only with great reserve. The real difficulty from which the Government have been suffering over this liver question is that while about half the quantity of sweetbreads imported are used for the manufacture of insulin, and it is admitted that insulin has been given an entirely unique position as regards duty, the annual imports of liver amount to £500,000, not £36,000 as mentioned by my hon. Friend, and—

Sir R. Clarry

I only referred to the quantity used for this purpose.

Captain Wallace

Of the quantity imported only 5 per cent., so far as we are able to trace, is used for medicinal purposes. The medicines into which this 5 per cent, of liver is manufactured are used, as has been stated, for the cure of pernicious anaemia. It will, of course, be open to the people who get their liver in this country to apply to the Import Duties Advisory Committee, if they feel that they are being done down. I should like to treat the matter on a rather broader basis and to suggest that to deprive the Exchequer of the revenue on imported liver whose total annual value is something like £500,000 for the sake of 5 per cent, of the liver would be to strike another blow at the general scheme of duties by which the Government set such store.

Sir R. Clarry

The point I wished to make was that it was only the 5 per cent, used in the production of that remedy which we wished to have exempted, and the remaining 95 per cent, would therefore be subject to duty.

Captain Wallace

What I have endeavoured to show was the impossibility

of identifying this particular 5 per cent. If it were possible for my hon. Friend to suggest any means of segregating this 5 per cent., I am perfectly certain that the Financial Secretary would be prepared to consider it.

Mr. Alexander

Could not the Parliamentary Secretary arrange for a drawback on liver used for the production of medicinal preparations by the pharmaceutical chemist? That would be simple.

Captain Wallace

It is not quite so simple as the right hon. Gentleman thinks. I would not like to tie myself down on a matter of this kind, but, as my hon. Friend knows, the Government have a very open mind on this as well as other questions. I think I can say that if a means is found of easily and simply identifying this liver, without undue administrative complications or undue financial implications, we shall be prepared to do what we can to meet this point.

Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 158; Noes, 91.

Division No. 54.] AYES. [11.26 p.m.
Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G. Donner, P. W. Hunter, T.
Albery, Sir Irving Duckworth, W. R. (Moss Side) Keeling, E. H.
Apsley, Lord Duggan, H. J. Kimball, L.
Astor, Hon. W. W. (Fulham, E.) Duncan, J. A. L. Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Barclay-Harvey, Sir C. M. Edmondson, Major Sir J. Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. Ellis, Sir G. Leckie, J. A.
Beaumont, M. W. (Aylesbury) Elliston, Capt. G. S. Leech, Dr. J. W.
Blindell, Sir J. Elmley, Viscount Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Boyce, H. Leslie Emmott, C. E. G. C. Liddall, W. S.
Briscoe, Capt. R. G. Emrys-Evans, P. V. Loftus, P. C.
Brocklebank, C. E. R. Entwistle, C. F. Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Bull, B. B. Erskine-Hill, A. G. Lyons, A. M.
Campbell, Sir E. T. Everard, W. L. Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)
Cartland, J. R. H. Fleming, E. L. MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.
Cary, R. A. Fox, Sir G. W. G. Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight)
Castlereagh, Viscount Fremantle, Sir F. E. McKie, J. H.
Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester) Fyfe, D. P. M. Maclay, Hon. J. P.
Channan, H. Ganzoni, Sir J. Macnamara, Capt. J. R. J.
Chapman, A. (Rutherglen) Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir J. Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.
Christie, J. A. Gluckstein, L. H. Markham, S. F.
Clarke, Lt.-Col. R. S. (E. Grinstead) Graham, Captain A. C. (Wirral) Mason, Lt.-Col. Hon. G. K. M.
Clarry, Sir Reginald Gridley, Sir A. B. Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.
Clydesdale, Marquess of Grimston, R. V. Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)
Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston) Guy, J. C. M. Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)
Colville, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. D. J. Hanbury, Sir C. Morris, O. T. (Cardiff, E.)
Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.) Hannah, I. C. Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H.
Courtauld, Major J. S. Hannon, Sir P. J. H. Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)
Courthope, Col. Sir G. L. Haslam, H. C. (Horncastle) Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A. J.
Craven-Ellis, W. Heilgers, Captain F. F. A. Munro, P.
Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P. Nail, Sir J.
Crooke, J. S. Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan- Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.
Crookshank, Capt. H. F. C. Hills, Major Rt. Hon. J. W. (Ripon) Orr-Ewing, I. L.
Cross, R. H Holmes, J. S. Patrick, C. M.
Crowder, J. F. E. Hope, Captain Hon. A. O. J. Peake, O.
Davies, C. (Montgomery) Hopkinson, A. Peat, C. U.
Davies, Major Sir G. F. (Yeovil) Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.) Petheriok, M.
Denville, Alfred Hudson, R. S. (Southport) Pickthorn, K. W. M.
Plugge, Capt. L. F. Storey, S. Tree, A. R. L. F.
Porritt, R. W. Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F. Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C.
Procter, Major H. A. Salt, E. W. Wakefield, W. W.
Ramsay, Captain A. H. M. Selley, H. R. Walker-Smith, Sir J.
Ramsbotham, H. Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar) Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan
Ramsden, Sir E. Shepperson, Sir E. W. Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)
Rankin, R. Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A. Warrender, Sir V.
Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin) Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st) Wickham, Lt.-Col. E. T. R.
Rayner, Major R. H. Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich) Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Reed, A. C. (Exeter) Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen) Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)
Renter, J. R. Somervell, Sir O. B. (Crewe) Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.
Rickards, G. W. (Skipton) Southby, Commander A. R J. Wright, Squadron-Leader J. A. C.
Ross, Major Sir R. D. (Londonderry) Spens, W. P. Young, A. S. L. (Partick)
Rowlands, G. Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)
Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A. Sutcliffe, H. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
Russell, A. West (Tynemouth) Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne) Lieut -Colonel Sir A. Lambert
Salmon, Sir I. Touche, G. C, Ward and Lieut.-Colonel Llewellin.
NOES.
Acland, Rt. Hon. Sir F. Dyke Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth) Parkinson, J. A.
Adamson, W. M. Hall, G. H. (Aberdare) Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.) Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel) Potts, J.
Anderson, F. (Whitehaven) Harris, Sir P. A. Pritt, D. N.
Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R. Henderson, J. (Ardwick) Rathbone, Eleanor (English Univ's.)
Barnes, A. J. Henderson, T. (Tradeston) Richards, R. (Wrexham)
Batey, J. Hills, A. (Pontefract) Ridley, G.
Bellenger, F. J. Hollins, A. Riley, B.
Benson, G. Jagger, J. Ritson, J.
Broad, F. A. Johnston, Rt. Hon. T. Roberts, W. (Cumberland, N.)
Bromfield, W. Jones, A. C. (Shipley) Rowson, G.
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (S. Ayrshire) Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth) Seely, Sir H. M.
Burke, W. A. Kelly, W. T. Sexton, T. M.
Cassells, T. Lathan, G. Silverman, S. S.
Charleton, H. C. Lawson, J. J. Simpson, F. B.
Chater, D. Leach, W. Sinclair, Rt. Hon. Sir A. (C'thn's)
Cluse, W. S. Lee, F. Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)
Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton) Leslie, J. R. Smith, E. (Stoke)
Day, H. Logan, D. G. Sorensen, R. W.
Dobbie, W. Lunn, W. Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)
Dunn, E. (Rother Valley) Macdonald, G. (Ince) Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)
Ede, J. C. McEntee, V. La T. Tinker, J. J.
Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty) McGhee, H. G. Viant, S. P.
Evans, D. O. (Cardigan) MacMillan, M. (Western Isles) Walkden, A. G.
Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H. Mainwaring, W. H. Watkins, F. C.
Foot, D. M. Maxton, J. Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)
Frankel, D. Messer, F. Williams, T. (Don Valley)
Gardner, B. W. Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.) Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke) Oliver, G. H. Young, Sir R. (Newton)
Green, W. H. (Deptford) Owen, Major G.
Grenfell, D. R. Parker, J. TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Mr. Paling and Mr. Whiteley.

Resolution agreed to.