AGRICULTURE (DAMAGE BY DROUGHT). (Hansard, 11 May 1938)

§ Major Braithwaite
I hope the House will forgive me for taking this opportunity of discussing a most serious matter in connection with our farming community. Everyone who has read the papers during the past few weeks will be familiar with the situation 'which has arisen owing to the unprecedented season that we have had. The last three months have shown a smaller rainfall than at any other period since 1815, and the damage to the agricultural interests of the country is very serious. At this time, when we are considering problems of national Defence, the agricultural interests of the country are very much to the fore.
I estimate that the loss sustained by our agriculturists during the past three months, due entirely to drought, to setbacks to the crops, and to the necessity for extra feeding because of the scarcity of feed, and extra labour for watering stock, has amounted to something in the region of £10,000,000. These figures are made up in this way:—It is estimated that the loss this year already is: on the hay crop, £1,500,000; on fruit, £1,000,000; on cereal crops, £1,000,000; on milk, £2,000.000; on eggs and poultry, 1659 £1,000,000; on cattle, £1,000,000; on pigs, £500,000; on potatoes, £1,000,000; and on sheep and lambs, £1,000,000. There is a deficit on the farming account of £15,000,000 to make up; the milk yield for May will be down approximately 15,000,000 gallons compared with a normal season; hay and concentrated winter foods are now being fed to dairy herds, which should be eating the new crops; and all over the country, even in the most fertile parts, the hope of a reasonably early hay crop has vanished. Frost has added to the farmers' difficulties. Hundreds of acres of early potatoes have been destroyed, and the fruit crop has been irreparably damaged. It is estimated that these conditions are costing the farmers, as long as the rain keeps off, about £500,000 a day.
No one can blame the Government for these unprecedented conditions: the Minister is not in a position to order rain at a moment's notice; but the Government will have to face, as a direct result of the drought, the precarious position in which the farming community will again be placed. Farmers have never been financially strong during recent years. I and other agricultural Members are grateful to the Government for what they have done to raise commodity prices, but, unless increased turnover results, this is not adequate to maintain agriculture on the scale that the nation desires.
This afternoon I asked the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence whether the Government consider the production of food at home was an essential part of the national Defence. He replied that it was. In view of the serious losses that have been inflicted on the farming community because of the drought, and in view of their already precarious financial position, I want to ask the Government whether they consider that an essential part of our national Defence is to be left in a precarious state. I wonder what would have happened if the conditions under which the farmer has to produce had been employed in the production of ships, aeroplanes and guns. The Government, when they contract with those industries, always agree, as an essential part of the contract, that they shall finance production as it goes along. The farmer seems to be the only person in the community who has to finish his production before he gets 1660 money for it. [Interruption.] I think I am stating a fact when I say that the farmer has to finish production before he can sell his crops. Therefore, I ask the House whether it is not possible to give the farmer some more generous help.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. and gallant Member cannot propose on the Adjournment anything for which legislation would be necessary.

§ Major Braithwaite
I am sorry that I have gone outside the Rules, but I was trying to show that the result of the drought will have to be made up in some way to the farmers if they are going to carry on their industry in the next few months. I should like to know if I am in order in making any suggestions to the Government, with a desire to help.

§ Mr. Speaker
I cannot see how the Government can do what the hon. and gallant Member wants without some form of legislation. They cannot do it by administration.

§ Major Braithwaite
I find it very difficult to bring what I wish to say within the scope of that ruling. I should like to put the matter to the Government in a form which I consider would avoid the necessity for any legislation. Is it not possible for the Government, who have already contractual obligations to the farmers for nearly 50 per cent. of the volume of production, through the various marketing boards, to make some advance to the farmers under the powers which they have in this connection?

§ Mr. Speaker
That would involve legislation.

§ The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. W. S. Morrison)
I think my hon. and gallant Friend is slightly in error in saying that the Government have any contractual obligation. What he has in mind is the relation between the farmers and the marketing boards. That is their own affair, and not the Government's.

§ Major Braithwaite
The marketing boards may have powers to help the farmers over the immediate difficulties. I suggest that, as this capital is irrevocably lost this year and must come out of the pockets of the farmers, some advance in this direction from the marketing boards, which I understand already have the power, might be of substantial benefit. 1661 Then, I understand that the Government have already been purchasing from other countries cereals for storing against a national emergency. These, I understand, are mainly bought for human consumption. In view of the practical difficulties of the farmers, is it possible for the Government to buy from our own farmers substantial stocks of animal food, which might be stored against such an emergency as we are going through now? I think that might be a substantial help. In view of the fact that large numbers of sheep have been placed on the market and sold at unremunerative prices, I would like to know whether it is a fact that a million more carcases have come in from abroad at this stage than was the case last year. If so, I hope the Government will take steps to see that, at a time of emergency—because this is an emergency in the affairs of farming—there shall be some restriction of those imports.

§ Mr. Speaker
Legislation would be necessary for that.

§ Major Braithwaite
I thought that the arrangements made at Ottawa were already effective and that it was on the basis of them that imports of meat were coming into the country at present. The fanning community last year, with the rise in prices, were hopeful of better times. They view with great alarm the complacency with which this situation is being accepted all over the country, and they ask that consideration should be given to their plight. I have not raised this matter with any intention of overstating the case. I believe that the farmers are suffering to-day as they have not done for some years, and even before this drought occurred their plight was not such as would be envied by many other industries. If we are to show the world that there is determination in our policy of Defence, and if other countries are to be made to regard our preparations as really serious, surely a great industry like this, when it finds itself in difficulties, must look to the Government.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. and gallant Member is again proposing legislation.

§ Major Braithwaite
I do not want to detain the House any longer. The restrictions against my talking on this matter on the Adjournment are greater than I anticipated. I apologise for the 1662 omissions I have made, but I hope that what I have said will induce the Minister to do what he can, within his powers, to help the industry. The hon. Member for Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) whose views on agriculture I do not always share, may have something trenchant to say on my remarks, but I hope that his party will do what they can to help. I know that in the Minister we have someone who is very sympathetic to agriculture, and I hope that he will do something to help the farmers in the crisis through which they are passing.

§ Mr. T. Williams
I wish to help the farmers, because, although I doubt whether they have already lost £10,000,000, I agree that at the moment they may, in some parts of the country, be very anxious as to the results of this year's crop. I suggest to the hon. and gallant Member that he might ask the Minister to do something, without introducing further legislation, by going to the countryside and suggesting to those landowners where crops this year will be valueless that they should not insist on any payment of rent. The hon. and gallant Member and the Minister might carry on an effective campaign as a result of which the farmers might be relieved of that liability, and that might help them over the period of drought. The hon. and gallant Member may not have thought of that.

§ Major Braithwaite
I can assure the hon. Member that many provisions of that sort have been made in my own constituency.

§ Mr. Williams
If £10,000,000 has been lost this year we might at least expect landowners to forfeit such part of their rent as would leave the farmer in the same position as he was in before the drought came upon him. The hon. and gallant Member said that the farmers have already lost £10,000,000, which implies that output will decrease to that extent, or rather to a n extent far beyond that. For if the farmers have lost £10,000,000 one can estimate that the output will be down by many times £10,000,000. Then he suggests that we ought further to restrict imports. When the output from our own countryside is down by many millions of pounds' worth it is suggested that we ought to restrict imports further, leaving us without any 1663 food at all! That is a very curious argument. I know that the Minister of Agriculture is in rather a difficulty. The hon. and gallant Member for Buckrose (Major Braithwaite) pleaded with him to do something more than has already been done for agriculture, and I can appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's desire to do something, but the difficulty is in doing something more than has already been done. I think perhaps the hon. and gallant Gentleman might have hinted to the Minister just what he thought he might do this year. Already, for instance, there is a subsidy for wheat.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member must not debate subjects which I have already ruled out of order.

§ Mr. Williams
I certainly desire to keep within your Ruling, but I wanted to show the hon. and gallant Member how difficult it was for the Minister. It is almost impossible, without reference to watercress or turnips, to see what more the right hon. Gentleman can do to help agriculture during the present year. I know that to suggest legislation is entirely out of order. There are, however, on the Staute Book certain Measures under which help could be given here and there more speedily than it has been given during the past year or two. I refer to the water supplies on farms. I know that legislation is on the Statute Book. Power is in the hands of the Minister and of the Minister of Health, and I think one other Ministry, to expedite the utilisation of the powers they have for the provision of water supplies in certain rural areas. Beyond that I do not quite see what the right hon. Gentleman could do, unless the Government go down on their knees and pray for rain. They are half way on their knees already; if they would go down fully on their knees and pray fervently for rain, that perhaps would solve the hon. Member's problem. But apart from legislation, involving grants or some more indirect help, I do not quite see what the right hon. Gentleman can do in the month of May when no one knows exactly what the crops are going to be. But if the losses are going to be as heavy as the hon. and gallant Member suggests, there is one way to help the farmers. It has been suggested that the landlords might forfeit their rents. Perhaps the other landlords who are the happy recipients 1664 of royalties might mortgage some of their £66,000,000 and hand it over to the farmers who, after all, are the people who make their property worth while.

§ Mr. Turton
I think that when the constituents of the hon. Member for the Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) to-morrow read that the hon. Member is absolutely barren of suggestions for the help of the owner-occupiers of the Don Valley, they will have still slighter regard for his agricultural knowledge than they have at present. I am very grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Buck-rose (Major Braithwaite) for taking this opportunity to raise the subject of what is in fact a crisis in our agricultural areas. I realise that there are certain restrictions on the scope of this Debate, but I want to put very shortly to the Minister the position of the sheep producers of the North and East Ridings of Yorkshire. They have suffered during the last 10 months from a very rapid fall in prices. The price broke just about November of last year, chiefly I think due to the lower price of wool in Australia. When we came to this drought period we found the sheep producers had already suffered from lower prices, and as a result a lot of them have kept their sheep on their farms and not sold them, waiting for better prices. Owing to this drought there was a shortage of keep, and a great number of farmers put their lambs and hoggs on the markets and the result was that the price went down catastrophically in the last few weeks.
I do not want the Minister to devise new legislation. I should not be in order in doing so. What I do want him to do is to exercise his existing powers under the Ottawa Agreements Act and under the Argentine Agreement, and also under the Livestock Industry Act, to keep the imports from abroad off the market during this time when farmers are unloading their lambs. There is at the moment a glut of mutton and lamb on the English market—that is why the price has gone down. Surely this is not the time to increase the imports of mutton and lamb from overseas. But that is what has been happening—I do not know why—during the early months of this year. The chilled and frozen mutton imports have increased from something like 200,000 cwt. to 300,000 cwt., and 1665 the chilled and frozen lamb imports have increased also very much. That is especially unfortunate at a time when there is an increased sale of home-produced mutton and lamb. And it is no comfort to the consumer. It means that he has a glut at this time, but later on in all probability there will be a shortage. Because, if farmers have not got the feed for their sheep and lambs, they will not be able to put them on the market in the same quantities in the autumn. I think hon. Members in all parts of the House would far rather see ordered supply of mutton and lamb on the English market, which would be for the benefit of the home producer as well as the producer overseas. The Minister has the power under existing legislation. I should like to ask him whether the Livestock Commission have considered the grave position in the sheep industry, and whether they have made any recommendation under their powers dealing with the regulation of imports of mutton and lamb from overseas. I beg him to do what he can to remedy what is a very critical situation in this very important branch of the agricultural industry.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Heneage
I should like to draw attention to the very great difficulties of the sheep breeders of Lincolnshire, who are losing about £1 a sheep compared with the prices obtained last year, so that a farmer who owns 1,000,heep will have lost about £1,000. This may be due to the fact that grass has been short, possibly to a glut of imports, but it is also a matter of change of fashion whereby more lamb is imported because it is popular with the consumer. We know that mutton comes in from abroad in a small size, available for being classed as lamb, and with the addition of mint sauce it is probably more appetising. There is also another factor, and that is the great drop in the price of wool; the hosiery trade also is not going through a good time. I think there is one suggestion which does not need legislation. Other hon. Members have referred to existing legislation and how that can help. Why do not the big stores—the co-operative stores, for instance, in which hon. Members opposite take an interest—encourage the sale of British mutton and British lamb more than they do? They 1666 might have a "British mutton and lamb week."

§ Mr. Quibell
Why not encourage the sale of British mutton by feeding the British Army on it?

§ Lieut.-Colonel Heneage
By all means bring the Services in. If hon. Members opposite and ourselves were unanimous I think no Government could resist it. But we should like to see the British public themselves help the British farmer now when they see how he is hit. After all, if the stocks of British sheep go down the British public will be more and more at the mercy of rings of foreign importers. Hon. Members opposite as well as ourselves have drawn the attention of the House to the danger resulting from the operations of foreign rings in mutton as well as beef.
I would like to turn to the question of the drought. It is quite clear that the drought, alternating with floods, makes a very difficult situation in many districts of Lincolnshire and the Fens. I think the Minister of Agriculture and his Department, which deal with the catchment boards, has done a great deal not only to prevent floods but also to conserve water supplies, and it deserves great credit for that. It is a matter of interest to note that some Fen farmers in this year of dry land have been optimistic enough to think that there will be no floods, and are starting to plough some of the land generally laid down to grass for potato and other crops. I do think that with drought and floods more coordination is necessary between the bodies concerned. The Ministry of Health have interested themselves in this matter and have set up a committee to deal with the general water problem in this country. That committee, the Central Water Advisory Committee, is now sitting, and we hope that its report will conduce to the well-being of the countryside.
When I look back to the time when I entered this House and remember how few of the villages in Lincolnshire had any kind of water supply, and see them now properly equipped in this respect, I realise how much can be done under a capitalist Government. When one also sees how many of these farms and their cottages on the Wolds have been equipped with local water supplies, one realises that 1667 the landowner system is not quite as bad as hon. Members opposite seem to think. Owing to the Rules of Order we cannot suggest legislative methods, but a great deal could be done to remedy the present state of affairs if the consumers of this country would support us in the countryside by buying British mutton.

§ Sir Edmund Findlay
I hope that the Minister will not consider most of the proposals that have been put before him to-night. Hard cases make bad law, and one drought should not make it impossible for agriculture to lead a healthy existence. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) is wrong when he says that the landlords, of whom I am one, do not consider their tenants sometimes.

§ Mr. T. Williams
The hon. Gentleman must have misunderstood me. I said—

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member had better not pursue this subject.

§ Sir E. Findlay
The question of rainfall is one upon which we cannot possibly decide on a Motion such as this. It is a much bigger question. A mere five weeks' drought is not a reason to ridicule the policy of the Government.

§ Major Braithwaite
I hope that my hon. Friend does not think that I have been trying to ridicule the Government at all.

§ Sir E. Findlay
I agree, but it is not reasonable to say that the policy of the Government has failed because there has been a five weeks' drought. I am satisfied that the policy of the Minister is such that a drought such as this will not interfere with his plans.

§ Sir William Wayland
I represent a constituency where considerable quantities of fruit as well as hops are grown. The plum crop can be said to be quite a failure owing to the frosts mainly, and not to the drought, and I am sure that the Minister is well aware of that fact. Fortunately hops have not been affected, so that we hope there will be just as much beer as before. Sheep have suffered considerably, especially on our hills, and I agree that the Minister would have great difficulty in dealing with this question adequately without a considerable grant 1668 from the Treasury. I disagree with the hon. Gentleman the Member for Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) when he states that free rent would help. It would help to a certain extent, but he cannot suppose that it would free farmers from the troubles from which they are at present suffering, with no grass, no plums and in many districts no water. In our district, mostly composed of hills, we are frequently short. With regard to poultry, beef raising, and especially milk, in which I am particularly interested, we are now feeding concentrates just as much as we were during the winter, and that means that, with the summer price of milk having been introduced, the expense of running the farm is considerably greater.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. and gallant Gentleman also seems to be getting out of order. Subjects raised on the Adjournment must be those for which the Government are responsible.

§ Sir W. Wayland
I hope that the Minister may be able to find some way in which to help the farmers.

§ Mr. Clement Davies
I make no apology to the House for bringing it back to mutton. The position in my county is very serious. The number of sheep in that county is probably greater almost than that in any other county in England and Wales, certainly greater than in any other county in Wales. The sheep population in Montgomeryshire is something like 500,000, and prices have gone down since last autumn roughly from 10s. to £1 per head. It is a purely agricultural county, there being no industry there except agriculture, and it means a capital loss upon the farmers of roughly between £250,000 and £500,000. These people, who have had a very hard struggle since 1929, were just beginning to emerge from the struggle and enjoy a little more success when suddenly they were faced with disaster. The present position is not due so much in my county to weather conditions as to market conditions. Undoubtedly the market began to break last autumn, and it has been affected since by the weather elsewhere because the farmers in other districts have been putting their sheep on to the market.
This matter has already been brought to the attention of the Minister of Agriculture by the National Farmers' Union, and I hope that he will give the 1669 House to-night a more satisfactory reply than he gave to them. It was reported to me that all that the Minister was able to tell them was, "I am watching the position." If he goes on watching long enough either the bottom will fall out of the market or the drought will cease, so that something will happen. [An HON. MEMBER "It will rain. "] It will probably rain, as the hon. Member says, but in the meantime there are measures which the Minister could take. Measures could be taken with regard to imports and in other respects. At the present moment we are concerned not only with rearmament but with the building up of our position with regard to food supplies in case of war. The Government have already expended very large sums in purchasing oil and wheat, but surely they might at least in this crisis come to the assistance of the farmer and relieve the market of a large quantity of the meat which is coining into it, and distribute it at a time when possibly later on there will be a shortage, with prices tending to rise. They could then help to keep a steady market. I appeal to the Minister not merely to give consideration to these matters, but to act, and to act quickly.
It is no use the hon. Gentleman the Member for Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) suggesting that the landlords might meet the situation. In my county there are very few landlords nowadays except the banks. Most of my people bought their land at the high prices which prevailed immediately after the War. They had not sufficient capital and had to go to the banks to borrow money. What is the use, now that they have lost on livestock alone anything between a quarter and half a million of money, of asking the banks: "Please, will you mind holding on?" They cannot possibly do that. The remedy is certainly in the hands of the Government, and I hope that the Minister will act quickly.

§ Sir Joseph Lamb
The Debate has ranged very largely round the condition of the sheep-farming industry, while fruit growing has also been mentioned. I would impress the fact upon the Minister that it is not only one class of stock or fruit crop which is affected, but that the position is general, whether one refers to sheep or other stock, to milk or to arable crops. All are suffering and there will be 1670 a great national disaster unless we are fortunately able to obtain rain. I must not refer to anything which requires legislation, and I know of no legislation which could be suggested which would empower my right hon. Friend the Minister to bring down the rain for us. The country is suffering from an absence of rain and moisture, but it is also suffering from a lack of reserves of water, of which the countryside has been deprived owing to existing legislation. Urban areas and cities have taken millions of gallons of water from these districts entirely for the use of the towns. I do not deny that it is necessary to do this, because under housing schemes and sanitary arrangements, which have become more general, more water is required for the large cities. That water has been taken from the agricultural districts very much to their detriment.
When there is a drought such as that which at present exists, there are no reserves of water for the agricultural areas. Consequently, they are not able to withstand the position as they would do if they had not been deprived of their rightful supplies of water. The shortage of water not only affects the stock of the farmer, but it has a very serious effect upon human beings in the countryside as well. It is all very well to say that a large number of houses and villages are now supplied with water. Legislation has been passed making it possible for water to be supplied to many of these districts, but unless something is done to encourage those in authority to provide water, nothing will be done. I hope that the Minister will watch the existing legislation to see that the rural areas, which are deprived of their natural supply of water for the benefit of the towns, are compensated in some way.

§ Mr. MacLaren
I have listened to the Debate with a certain amount of amazement. The problem before us is the drought. I should have thought that that was an act of God, which was defined by a Scottish judge as an act which no man in his sober senses would perform. We have a drought. What are we going to do about it? Much as I admire the Minister of Agriculture I think it would be asking too much of him to start shelling the heavens and bursting the clouds in order to bring down rain. The Minister of 1671 Agriculture will have to do something beyond the realms of human possibility to gratify those who have petitioned the Government this evening. For years in this House we have heard agriculturists praising the Government for keeping up prices. Here Nature is coming in and giving them a helping hand, and instead of coming here to-day and complaining about the drought, they ought to have been here taking part in a thanksgiving service. We have had the whole process and madness of modern Government action in keeping up prices by checking supplies, and now hon. Members are complaining when Nature has come in to give them a hand.

§ Sir J. Lamb
Would the hon. Member advocate having little at a high price or a reasonable quantity at a reasonable price?

§ Mr. MacLaren
A little at a higher price and something else at a lower price. Those are relative terms which I cannot handle at the moment. When Nature is fruitful and is responding to the efforts of men and giving us great bulk harvests, we ought to rejoice and to spread that great wealth through the community, but the constant policy of the Government has been to check supplies and to keep up prices, and here to-day when Nature is lending a hand at the thing which they think is political wisdom in the actions of the Government, hon. Members are complaining against Providence and are asking that He should send rain. This House may have great power, according to the Constitution, and we can do almost everything except make a man into a woman or a woman into a man, but there is one thing that we cannot do, and that is to bring down rain to help the agriculturists in their difficulties.
Hon. Members have used this drought as a little bit of propaganda, which I am glad that Mr. Speaker observed. The drought comes along and if it continues I suppose hon. Members will be suggesting shutting off supplies coming from anywhere. If we get some more protection added to the action on the part of Nature of which hon. Members are complaining, this will be a very happy country. One line of propaganda adopted by hon. Members in order to escape the ruling of Mr. Speaker was to give a lecture to the 1672 Minister on how to carry out new water supplies and how to conserve water supplies.
I would remind hon. Members that I raised that question years ago, and I had the backing of many hon. Members on the other side, but the previous Minister of Agriculture told us that my proposals would cost too much, that they would mean levying rates on local authorities in agricultural districts, and that they could not stand it. Now, the hon. Member for Stone (Sir J. Lamb) tells us that the urban districts have stolen the water that should have gone to the agricultural districts, and when the agricultural districts are asked to pay a little towards the conservation of water in time of need they say that they cannot find the money. Mr. Speaker has found it difficult in bringing such a proposition within the confines of the Debate. It is a complaint against the high heavens, and nothing here can remedy it. I hope that what I have said will cause hon. Members to reflect upon the fact that when we have good supplies and Nature is bounteous they adopt artificial methods in trying to check supplies.

§ The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. W. S. Morrison)
We have had an interesting discussion, which has been characterised by two features. In so far as it has dealt with the very depressing drought, it is a matter which legislation cannot effect in removing the root cause, and in so far as measures to cope with the drought would involve legislation, that is beyond the scope of our Debate. My hon. and gallant Friend in introducing the discussion gave certain figures of estimates as to the losses which the present calamitous drought is causing. I am not in a position to place anything like so precise a figure as my hon. and gallant Friend has done on what has happened or what may happen.
It is only too evident that the unseasonable lack of rain from which we have suffered in rural districts must damage our agricultural prospects this year, but I think it is too early to estimate what the full effect on our out-turn of crops will be. To some extent the lack of rain in the spring has been compensated for by good conditions during the winter. For example, we had a mild winter and grazing was able to be carried on until fairly late in the year. There 1673 was also a good hay crop, which is now being called upon rather earlier than we should like to see that being done. As regards the frosts, they have affected the early fruits, and many of them are irreparably damaged, but there is a hope that some of the later fruits may not suffer to anything like the same extent. As regards the corn crops, it is mostly those sown in the spring that have been affected. In many cases the winter-sown crops are standing up well, and if we get an adequate supply of rain in the next week or fortnight I hope that a good deal of what now appears to be irreparable damage may turn out rather better than some people expect.
If I say these things I do so in order to make it clear to the House that for my part I cannot place anything like the figures of losses upon the situation at present, but I do ask the House to realise that this has been a very bad season so far as it has gone in regard to water supply and rainfall. It may be that it will turn out better than it now looks, on the whole. This discussion has certainly taught us one great lesson, and that is that the agricultural industry, above all others, is subject to a set of hazards which are imposed upon those who follow it by the climate of this land. In many ways it is a fine climate, but the hazards of frosts, droughts and floods are inseparable from the agricultural calling. If I may point a further lesson, it is that we should at all times view with sympathy any proposals that may be made to reduce the other hazards of the industry, namely, instability of markets and the like.
It is difficult for me, and I do not propose to try, to discuss any of the matters which have been mentioned which would involve legislation and which would be completely out of order in a discussion of this sort. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Buck-rose (Major Braithwaite) talked about credit. The present position on that is that, for example, the Milk Board has power to lend to a registered producer on security not exceeding altogether two-thirds of the total amount of the particular estimate of the amount which the producer will receive for the milk produced by him. That, however, is a matter entirely for the board and not for the Government. If they wish to exercise that power they have to weigh 1674 up the advantages and disadvantages of asking other producers to stand the risk of a loan to someone who is perhaps unable to get it from the bank. Short of discussing further legislation there is nothing further that I can say on that subject.
Several hon. Members have drawn attention to the present sheep position. To some extent that is linked up with the question of the drought. It is true that the present lack of teed has resulted in farmers being forced to sell sheep which otherwise they would have kept, thus bringing an unseasonable pressure to bear upon the markets and tending to have a depressing effect upon sheep prices. It is true to say that the fall took place from the relatively high levels of last summer before there was any question of the present drought. My hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Mr. Turton) diagnosed one of the important factors in that fall, namely, the fall in wool and skin prices. Another thing that has happened is that farmers have held on to sheep on account of the fall in the autumn, with the result that the sheep are now of the larger size which is not welcomed by butchers in these days of gas ovens and small families.
Several hon. Members have drawn attention to the Ottawa Acts and what could be done under them. The position is that supplies to the United Kingdom are regulated in accordance with the Ottawa Acts and they are now reduced to 65 per cent. of the supplies of a standard year. I have looked into the question of making a. small cut in foreign supplies, and the effect of that would be to reduce imported supplies in our markets by something under 3 per cent., which would have an unappreciable effect upon prices. With regard to the supplies from our Dominions, the only regulation that can be achieved would be by voluntary agreement and, as I informed the House in reply to a question the other day, I am in consultation with representatives of the Dominion Governments with a view to seeing what can be done about the present situation. That is all that I can say on this matter without trespassing on the question of legislation.
I am sure the House will appreciate fully the object of the hon. and gallant Member for Buckrose in raising this 1675 matter, and the anxiety that is felt in many parts of the House over this very unseasonable weather, and they will join with me in hoping that Providence will soon send us rain in good season, so that the men who work on the soil may reap some reward for their toil. It is obviously difficult for agriculturists to stand up to the vagaries of the weather. The real lesson of this discussion is that we ought to do all we can to see that agriculture is made prosperous to enable it to stand these inevitable hazards and to enable the industry to flourish as much as possible through bad times as well as in plenteous seasons.

§ Mr. Paling
To sum up the discussion, it seems to me that hon. Members opposite have exaggerated the case. The hon. and gallant Member for Buckrose (Major Braithwaite) spoke about £10,000,000 losses up to now and suggested that if the drought continues the loss will be a much bigger figure. The Minister does not believe it. The Minister himself admitted that he could not limit it to anything like that.

§ Mr. W. S. Morrison
What I said was that the situation is not static. If we were to get rain within the next week or fortnight the whole situation might be changed, and, therefore, as the story is not complete I cannot either confirm or deny the figures of the hon. and gallant Member.

§ Mr. Paling
I am saying that the argument of the right hon. Member indicates that the stories told by various hon. Members are exaggerated, and that the ill effects of the drought are not so great. I think that is true. With regard to sheep, that is not entirely due to the drought according to the Minister of Agriculture. But I want to congratulate hon. Members who represent the farming community on never losing an opportunity of coming down here and asking for something they want. If there is a flood they come to the House of Commons and ask what we are going to do about it. If there is a drought they come here and ask what we are going to do. If there is a surplus of food they want to know what the House of Commons is going to do about it. Whatever trouble they are in they come to the Government and ask 1676 how much the Government are going to pay them. They seem to have lost all initiative as far as their own industry is concerned. The moment they get into trouble, or even if they are anticipating trouble, they come and ask what the Government propose to do. They are in a sorry state. Hon. Members who represent agriculture have been so successful in the last few years in getting a subsidy for nearly everything that they produce that they have lost the art of fending for themselves. They have been spoonfed so long that whenever they get into any trouble they ask the Govrenment to help them.

§ Mr. Turton
We believe in our Government, whereas you did not believe in your Government in 1929.

§ Mr. Paling
And in view of what happened in 1931 we had good reason not to. I wonder what would happen if every other section of the community took the same view as agricultural Members in this House and asked for Government assistance. There are other people in the country who are in trouble to-day besides agriculturists. People in the aircraft industry are being dismissed by hundreds, and that means probably that their incomes will be less than half. As far as I know they will not come to the House of Commons and ask for a subsidy because they cannot help themselves. In the coalmining industry the same thing happens. Our people are on short time now and their incomes are reduced, but they will not come to the Government and ask what the Government are going to do. Even the poor coalowner will not, I think, come and ask for assistance. But the farming community have been so spoon-fed, have got so much in the last few years, that whenever anything happens they come to the House of Commons and ask what we are going to do about it. If history teaches anything it is that capitalism and private enterprise cannot do anything in farming. Private enterprise has entirely failed because those who believe in private enterprise come to the State for assistance whenever they are in trouble. Last year it was a flood, now it is a drought, next year it may be a frost, and the year after that Heavens knows what.

§ Mr. Macquisten
I do not know why there should be any disappointment on the part of hon. Members who have raised 1677 this question, or on the part of the Government on account of the drought because their whole policy has been directed to a restriction of supplies, and now that the Almighty has looked down and said "I can do that far better than you can," why should they complain? Seeing that the Lord has helped us in our good work of restricting supplies we can now dispense with all our marketing boards. I am perfectly amazed at the disappointment which has been expressed. We shall get high prices for what is left. We could have had more food supplies if we had planted a bigger acreage, but we have not been allowed to do that.

§ Sir W. Wayland
The hon. and learned Member has mentioned high prices. May I draw his attention to the fact that the price of milk was reduced on 1st May while it is costing more to produce?

§ Mr. Macquisten
That may be, but it is still far too dear for working people. How can you expect a working man to pay 2s. or 2s. 4d. per gallon for milk; and what he gets is wretched half-boiled milk. The whole thing has gone wrong. It is the invariable result of interfering with enterprise and producing schemes in order to get a shortage. We have got a shortage, and why should we complain About it? The other day I planted some potatoes—I hope I shall not be fined £100 for so doing—but the drought has come and there is a little frost on the top. If we do not produce as much foods as before the result will be that we shall get more from Australia, which will help shipping and also help the coal industry, which has got far more than agriculture out of this Government. They are an excellent body of men, the salt of the 1678 community, and I sympathise with everything that the miner gets. I have been down a pit and I did not like it. They get their share from the Government. The only man who really is never much considered is the taxpayer, but he will be exterminated in time.

§ Sir Ernest Shepperson
I want to reply to some of the remarks of the hon. Member for Wentworth (Mr. Paling), who complained that agriculturists always came to this House and asked for help. It is a wise man who does not wait until the horse has bolted before he shuts the stable door. He said that when the coal industry or the iron and steel industry were doing badly and men were discharged, they lost half their income. May I point out to him that agriculturists in circumstances like those will not be getting half pay, but will be absolutely losing money. An industry like iron and steel can close down its factories if it is losing money, but the agricultural farmer cannot close down and wait until conditions are better; he must carry on. I would like the hon. Member to realise what agriculture is suffering. Since February up to May we have had less than one inch of rainfall, and the average rainfall in my part of the country during that period is 11 inches. We have, therefore, received 10 times less than the average amount of rainfall.

§ Mr. Speaker
The lion. Member cannot suggest that the Government are responsible for that.