PETROL ALLOWANCES (RURAL AREAS) (Hansard, 5 May 1949)

§ Mr. Niall Macpherson (Dumfries)
The question I wish to raise tonight is very different from that which we have just been discussing, but it is nevertheless one of great importance for the country, and particularly the countryside: namely, the allocation of petrol in rural areas. Since I put down my name for the Adjournment, there have been some relaxations in the extreme austerity in the application of petrol control. In particular, the very ill-advised and inequitable practice of deducting the standard ration from the supplementary ration has been discontinued. This practice involved the very greatest hardship for country people with small supplementary rations, particularly, for business purposes, and I hope devoutly that we have heard the last of it for ever.
My purpose tonight, in the very short time at my disposal, is to point out what is self-evident to all country folk, and even to all reasonable people in the big cities who can rise above their own immediate self-interest and take an impartial view, namely that the people in the country have a much bigger distance to cover and have to rely to a far greater extent—

Mr. Macpherson
They have to rely to a far greater extent than city dwellers on private transport both for earning their daily bread and also for recreation and amusement. In the cities there is a tram or bus every five minutes or so and a taxi just round the corner. In the country, on the other hand, they are lucky if there is a bus once an hour and it may be only once a day. As for hired cars, very often the proprietor is not on the telephone, and when one walks along to his house for an urgent hire one may find that he is either out or out of petrol. What city dwellers cannot understand 1351 until they go to live in the country and experience it is the tremendous sense of frustration that afflicts country people who have been accustomed to going about their business with no restrictions on their movements except time and expense, and who now find their petrol allocation cut down far below the barest necessities.
Petrol rationing is not like food rationing. Everybody needs a certain quantity of food, but the Ministry of Food recognise that agricultural workers and miners need more than others. When a country dweller writes for more petrol, however, he very often finds that he is already, to quote an oft-repeated saying, in receipt of a maximum allowance applicable to his category and however great his need he cannot get any more. I am not blaming the regional petroleum officers or their staffs. If all my constituents were to receive the same courtesy and prompt attention as I do, they would do very well, but I realise that this is unlikely. As for the delays and the impersonal formal communications and circulars, they are inevitable in any Government Department, and the unavoidable accompaniment of controls.
The trouble is that the rules that regional petroleum officers have to interpret are not flexible enough. If they cannot be more flexible there should be a higher scale of allowances for the country areas than for the large urban agglomerations, if I may use a little bit of Bevanese. Such a system would be more difficult to administer, but surely the Minister will not wilt or tremble in the face of difficulty, because it would mean that the Government would have to trust the people a little more than they are doing and not treat all applicants as knaves, thereby inciting them to knavish tricks such as an exaggeration of their needs.
The present system of petrol rationing is reducing agricultural 'efficiency, restricting livelihoods, restraining voluntary service, curtailing recreation and sometimes causing acute personal distress. Apart from the farmers, some of whom I admit are harder hit than others, there are those who gain their livelihoods by serving them. For example, there are seed and fertiliser merchants, threshing contractors, agricultural machinery experts, Scottish drapers, architects and insurance 1352 agents. Perhaps of all people the insurance agents are the hardest hit of all as their remuneration is directly related to their ability to get about. Yet there is exactly the same ration for insurance agents no matter where they are living. Then there are the taxi and hire-car proprietors, some of whom I find can work only for three or four months out of six on their present ration. Incidentally, it is quite unreasonable to make them consume any part of their private ration for public services such as taking children to school.
As for voluntary services, I can quote the case of the vice-chairman of an important national body who has been told that for his public duties he must rely largely on public transport. That would be all very well if he were radiating from Glasgow or Edinburgh, but it is hopeless when he is five miles from the nearest small burgh. I can quote the case of a grass-drying co-operative committee which is refused any additional allocation at all. In that connection I should like to quote what was said at the time by the regional petroleum officer who was then in office. This is what he said: When petrol is required for a purpose which is ancillary to the applicant's regular employment, it is the recognised procedure to regard the additional purpose as one coming within the applicant's allocation of petrol. How are we to get anybody to do anything extra, whether paid or unpaid, if they are not to be given the petrol to do it with? I could quote also the case from Scotland of a Presbyterian church vacancy committee, which was allowed only half its minimum needs.
Then there is the question of recreation and touring. I should like to know why the Minister has restored only half the allocation to excursion buses in the country. Holidaymakers want to get about. Tourist centres are mainly in the country, and the cut certainly does not help the tourist trade. Why does the Minister chisel so hard at the allocations to travelling rural cinema operators, which are most important in the rural parts of Scotland. Lastly, why are compassionate allowances limited? Here at least there should be no maximum. I have had one case where a paralysed woman was not even able to make the required number of journeys to the nearest hospital for regular treatment. 1353 The Minister should at least remember that the quality of mercy is not, or ought not to be, strained. Perhaps we should be grateful for any little extra that might be granted. Well, we are, because we have no option, but how nice it would be if the Minister would just occasionally meet a real need in full, instead of always halving it. If a need is proved, then let us have the wherewithal to meet that need. That is not generosity but commonsense if those engaged in agriculture or rural industry are not to feel thwarted.
If rural workers are to be encouraged to live in the country it is essential that some way should be found, or special consideration given, to meet the needs of the country in regard to petrol, whether for private cars or for hire cars. Nobody doubts or disputes the difficulties of dollar shortages and all the rest of it, but if the countryside is to flourish, those difficulties must be overcome. That is the task of the Minister. He must find the petrol that is required.

§ Sir Ian Fraser (Lonsdale)
Countryfolk will owe a debt of gratitude to the hon. Member for Dumfries (Mr. N. Macpherson) for having raised this matter.. He speaks for Scotland. I can affirm that in the North of England, as in the Lonsdale Division, in Northumberland, in Cumberland and in many parts of Yorkshire, there are wide spaces between villages and between local market towns where the ordinary basic ration is not adequate to meet the needs for which it is granted. The petrol ration is the same in a rural district as in a town district and yet in a rural district one may use a quarter or half a gallon to go and get one's petrol before one does any useful journeying. There is a special case for a larger basic ration in the rural districts and a larger share of all supplementary rations.
I have only two minutes so I will deal with what I have to say in two sentences. There is more than enough red petrol and not enough white. Why cannot the Government adjust that anomaly? Lastly, the air lift is to end. Does not this offer an opportunity not merely of doing justice to the countryside but of clearing away petrol rationing altogether, thereby getting rid of the temptation to a great many people to exaggerate their claims? Does it not offer an opportunity 1354 of doing away with hardship and difficulty caused to many scores of thousands of our citizens, particularly in the rural areas, thus making a great contribution towards our well-being and happiness?

§ Brigadier Medlicott (Norfolk, Eastern)
I am glad to have the opportunity of adding a few sentences to what has already been so ably said, and I do so with particular reference to another type of rural area, that of East Anglia, where the petrol problem is an ever present anxiety. It is tempting to make a somewhat superficial comparison between the city and the countryside but we have often heard it said in the House that it is not only necessary for justice to be done but also for it to appear to have been done, and I can assure the Minister that the people in the countryside do not feel at the moment that justice is being done in this matter. I hope the Minister will be able to tell us the considerations which are borne in mind in the attempt which I am sure he makes to hold the scales fairly between the town and the country.
One has only to look around the streets of London to see that the amount of petrol available in the London area is already creating a most serious traffic problem: there seems to be an abundance of petrol there. Those of us who speak on behalf of the countryside cannot help feeling how unfair it is that the London motorist has so much petrol as well as such a wide choice of alternative means of transport. It is possible in the London area, and to some extent also in the other great areas like Manchester, to pass right across that area, taking either direct or circuitous routes, by a wide variety of alternative means of transport. People go in cars in their thousands over the very routes which are covered over and over again by train, tube, tram, bus or Green Line coach, but in the. countryside there is often no means of transport other than the private car. When one sees thousands of cars outside great sporting centres in London, it seems unfair to the countryman that some system cannot be devised whereby the real necessities of the countryside can be met.
I endorse what has been said by my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Mr. N. Macpherson) that the ordinary life of the countryside is handicapped by this shortage of fuel. He gave an im- 1355 pressive list of the activities which are being injured, and I could add to that list the case of veterinary surgeons, religious and social workers, workers in youth clubs and a wide variety of people who are continually having to write to their regional petroleum officers and their Members of Parliament. I endorse the statement that regional officers are doing the best they can, but the correspondence which we get proves that there is need for some re-adjustment between town and country. I hope the Minister will be able to give us an indication that that is engaging the Government's attention.

§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power (Mr. Robens)
I must confess that after listening to the speech of the hon. Member for Dumfries (Mr. N. Macpherson) I had a feeling that he had spoiled his case by gross exaggeration of the situation. [HoN. MEMBERS: "No."] That is my view after listening to what the hon. Member had to say. I must turn immediately to the case he instanced which, if it were true, would Le a serious reflection upon the Ministry. That is, that a woman who was paralysed was refused petrol to enable her to go to hospital.

§ Mr. N. Macpherson
The required number of times.

§ Mr. Robens
I can assure this House and the hon. Gentleman that any person in a condition like that, with medical evidence to support it, would not be refused the petrol to enable her to go to hospital the necessary number of times. I shall be glad if the hon. Member at a suitable time would give me particulars of that case so that I may investigate it personally.

§ Mr. Macpherson
Willingly.

§ Mr. Robens
I should not like it to be thought that in these medical cases there has been any occasion of a deliberate withdrawal of the necessary amount of petrol to enable individuals who are indisposed in that way to get to hospital for their proper treatment.
The other point which I thought was an exaggeration was in reference to the business and professional allowances. It is perfectly clear that an individual may get more than one allowance, and the 1356 man who has his business or professional allowance is entitled, if the circumstances warrant it, to have petrol for other purposes as well, such as shopping and other domestic reasons. This applies in the main to the country areas. It is quite untrue to suggest that the country is placed in the same position as the town because the object of supplementing the standard ration is to provide some extra petrol for those people whose needs are greatest, and obviously the needs of the country dweller are more than those of the city or town dweller who has better public transport.
What do we do at the Ministry? We arrange petrol rationing on two simple principles. The first is that transport is essential because the walking distance is too great. The second is that public transport is not available for the purpose. Then we say to the regional petroleum officers, "You have flexibility in this arrangement and discretion in the amount of petrol you give to applicants based on need up to a maximum." The complaint of the hon. Gentleman about having a maximum is answered quite simply. If we did not put a maximum on certain classes of users what would be the advantage of the discretion allowed to regional petroleum officers? They would not know where they were, they would be at variance one with another, and we, as a Ministry, would have no control over the total amount of petrol being used.
Therefore it is necessary for us to say to regional petroleum officers, "For this purpose or that you can allow up to x gallons." Therefore, up to x gallons the regional petroleum officer is able to use his discretion. However there must be a point at which he may no longer be allowed to use his discretion, and that point is the maximum that can be granted within the availability of petrol supplies. What I thought the hon. and gallant Member gave us was a case for the complete abolition of petrol rationing.

§ Sir I. Fraser
Before the hon. Gentleman leaves that point, are these maxima the same for town and country?

§ Mr. Robens
Certainly they are the same for town and country.

§ Sir I. Fraser
Ah!

§ Mr. Robens
Certainly they are. Take the question of a shopping allowance. No 1357 London citizen would be likely to get a shopping allowance, for which there is a maximum, but the country dweller would certainly do so, and would very likely get up to the maximum, although in many cases something less than the maximum amount is sufficient for shopping purposes. There are also such matters as attending church and certain recreational purposes which arise by reason of residence in the country. There are a number of allowances of which only country people can really take advantage. In some cases, perhaps, the town dweller is able to take advantage of them, but it is really the country dweller who gets the increased allowances such as those to which I have referred. There is, therefore, a difference between town and country in the entitlement to extra petrol upon the conditions which are laid down.

§ Mr. Macpherson
The hon. Gentleman has said that regional petroleum officers take into account the availability of public transport. Can he say also whether those officers are authorised to take into account fully the loss of working time involved in the use of that public transport?

§ Mr. Robens
No, of course not. What the regional officer must do is to see that public transport is used where it is available, although often, of course, the use of public transport may be less convenient. The hon. Gentleman, however, would have us believe that every person living in the country—farm labourers and the rest—could get about only by the use of motor cars. That is not the true picture. Many people living in the country do not possess their own means of transport. That is why I say that the hon. Gentleman has exaggerated his case. There is no doubt that the country dweller needs additional petrol; neither is there any doubt that the country dweller receives extra petrol. That is the reason why there is no difference in the standard allowance for the town or for the country dweller, because the standard ration is supplemented. It is necessary to have the maxima for the reasons I have explained. No one will be happier than my right hon. Friend or I when the time arrives that petrol rationing is no longer necessary.
Reference was made to the Berlin air lift and whether its cessation would assist us in any way. I do not think that 1358 it will. The Berlin air lift used about 120,000 tons of aviation spirit a year. When the air lift stops we shall save, probably, only half of that amount, because of the needs of normal R.A.F. training. What is saved is likely to be utilised for the extension of civil aviation. No one, therefore, should get the impression that with the cessation of the Berlin air lift there will be sufficient petrol to make it freely available for motorists in this country.

§ Sir I. Fraser
But will that be considered?

§ Mr. Robens
There is really nothing to consider. No petrol will become available for motorists in this country as a result of the cessation of the Berlin air lift. Of the 120,000 tons used annually, one half will be used by the R.A.F. for normal training purposes and the other half will be utilised for the expansion of civil aviation. Therefore, I see no chance of petrol becoming available for motorists because of the cessation of the Berlin air lift.
There have been a number of similar Adjournment Debates in the House in the past 12 months and I have made many statements, but I am afraid that there is nothing additional I can say now about the situation.

§ Sir I. Fraser
There was one other point: red and white.

§ Mr. Robens
The idea that there are two kinds of petrol is rather amusing. There is no difference—it is still petrol; it is merely that one is coloured and the other is white.

§ Sir I. Fraser
But there is plenty of red.

§ Mr. Robens
With great respect, who is to say that there is plenty of red?

§ Mr. Renton (Huntingdon)
May we put it this way? Is it not a fact that an application for red petrol is more readily granted, whatever the quantity involved, than an application for white, which may have just as much merit?

§ Mr. Robens
Of course, for the simple reason that red petrol is for use in commerce and industry.

§ Mr. Renton
Not entirely.

§ Mr. Robens
Yes, I should say it is used for commerce and industry.

§ Mr. Renton
So is some white petrol.

§ Mr. Robens
I know, but in the main it is used for the carriage of goods and necessary services. We want to ensure that there is sufficient petrol for agricultural work, carriage of goods, road haulage, public services, transport and the like. Petrol has to be available for those purposes first. The standard ration introduced after the basic petrol ration had been abolished for some time was in order to give some freedom of use to the ordinary private motorists, but was not regarded as essential to the welfare of the nation.
It is true that part of the white petrol is used for commercial purposes. Those are supplementary allowances to commercial travellers and so on, but the amount of petrol is the same whether it is red or white, and it all has to be paid for. It is merely that we colour some of it so that we know the purposes for which it is used and can prevent abuse. It is a fantastic idea that a lot of red petrol is stored away and can be used. Nothing of the kind. We can reduce the stocks of red petrol and run them down, but there would be no point in that. The total is known, our requirements are known, the dollar expenditure available is known and the petrol is brought in on that basis and then divided into the two categories for priority and other purposes. The only reason for colouring petrol was to prevent gross abuse by private individuals using it improperly.

§ Brigadier Medlicott
Will the hon. Gentleman answer the further point made by the hon. Member for Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser) of what allowance is made for the fact that the standard ration is certainly half as valuable to the country dweller because he has three or four times the distance to cover in order to get anywhere?

§ Mr. Robens
I thought I had answered that by saying that the country dweller 1360 enjoys supplementation which the town dweller does not.

§ Brigadier Medlicott
Not always.

§ Mr. Robens
Yes, I illustrated the question of shopping. Very few people in London could get a supplementary allowance for shopping but in the division of Lonsdale many of the hon. Member's constituents get a shopping allowance.

§ Sir I. Fraser
But some only get the basic ration.

§ Mr. Robens
Then there is no need for a supplementary allowance as they are nearer the little towns or villages. Those who only get the basic allowance have not a case for something more. If they have a case for something else they will get it.

§ Brigadier Medlicott
Except that the Minister said that supplementation is only for essential purposes which have to be justified.

§ Mr. Robens
The country dweller gets his standard ration and can do with it what he likes. If he wants petrol for shopping, he gets it in addition. If he wants it in order to go to church, he gets it in addition. If he wants it to visit a hospital some miles away and there is lack of public transport, he gets it. None of these special allowances are readily available to the town dweller because in the main public transport is available. Hon. Members will see that by reason of the allowances which are made, the country dweller gets a good deal more than the town dweller. It is something to which he is entitled because in the country public transport is not so readily available as it is to the town dweller. I am sorry I cannot say more, but that is the situation.