POLES, LUDFORD (FOOD REGISTRATIONS) (Hansard, 23 March 1950)

§ Mr. Osborne (Louth)
I am very grateful to you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, and also to Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to change the subject that I want to bring before the House tonight. I had hoped to have brought up some aspects of the National Savings Movement, and I still hope to bring that matter forward later on. However, my constituents ask me to raise as a matter of urgency a grievance of which, I think, this House ought to hear, and I hope that the right hon. Lady will reply to it.
In my constituency there is a village, Ludford, in which 500 Poles have been living for the past four and a half years. They are living in an old R.A.F. camp, and they have been getting ready for British citizenship now for some time past. I was asked to go up there on Monday, and and I spent the whole of the afternoon going round the camp seeing the Poles, and seeing the business people, upon whose behalf I wish to put their case. This village camp, as the right hon. Lady knows, is administered by her Department, and the National Assistance Board.
At the beginning of this year these Poles were told that they were to get ready to acquire British citizenship and that the first step towards that would be the issue of ration books. Then instead of being fed on a communal basis they would be like any other ordinary British citizen and would have to look after their own rations. The Poles, so far as I can tell, are welcoming this step forward, and I am sure that it is a good thing. The complaint that I have to make on behalf of my constituents is that when it came to the point of issuing the ration books at the beginning of this month, advantages were given to the Co-operative Society to secure these registrations, which were denied to the local traders. That is the point and pith of my protest and I wish to give details.
I am not criticising the Co-operative Society as such. All I am criticising is 2299 that they should have been given advantages and privileges which my constituents, as ordinary traders, were denied. If I can establish that, I am sure that I shall have even some hon. Members opposite with me. In January of this year, the Poles were given a series of lectures on British citizenship by a Mr. Gulc, an English-speaking Pole. I am told that from the beginning of January to the end of February his lectures were largely on the advantages of joining the Co-operative movement.—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—I shall welcome those "hear, hears" in a minute because they will support my case. He stressed what he considered to be the advantages of joining the Co-operative Society, and, as one of the Poles said to me, he continually dangled the "divi." in front of them. He did not go so far as Gracie Fields in her famous song and say, "You must shop at the Co-op.", but he went pretty near to it.
The complaint of my constituents is that they, as ordinary taxpayers, are having to pay to maintain this man who is advocating a form of trading which would take their living from them. My point is that there is no Co-op. shop nearer to this village than six miles. It was known in the village some weeks ago that ration books would be issued, but the exact date of issue was not known. Many of the Poles who had been getting their extra rations from the ordinary shops in the village naturally went to the people with whom they had traded before, and said, "We will promise you our registration when the time comes," but the local traders were not advised when that time would be.
On 3rd and 4th March—I should like the right hon. Lady to note these dates—these ration books were issued to these 500 Poles at Ludford in my constituency and by a strange coincidence—and this is my point—on the day, at the very hour, they were issued there were three representatives of the Lincoln Co-op. Society in the hut where they were issued. My constituents who have shops only a stone's throw away were not told anything about it. I have been told by certain people on the spot that it showed an intelligent anticipation on the part of the CO-op. Society. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] It is nice to know that some sections of the Socialist Party can 2300 at times show intelligent anticipation; it is not often that we see it. I want to prove to the House that there was a good deal more than that. They were there the whole day on their own, and they secured between 200 and 300 registrations before the local people even knew that these books were going to be issued.
I put it to hon. Members opposite that that is not fair to our ordinary constituents, and I am protesting about it. Furthermore, the nearest Co-op. shop is at Market Rasen, five and a half to six miles away, and it is by no means the biggest or the best shop, even in that small town. Therefore, if these people were going to register at the biggest or the best shop in the locality, they certainly would not have gone to the Co-op., unless they had gone to Lincoln some 25 miles away.
The questions I put to the right hon. Lady are these. How did the Co-op. know that these books were to be issued at this exact time? Who advised them?—because they were advised. On whose authority were they advised? The local grocers complain, and complain rightly, that they should have been told at the same time, and should have had as fair a chance of getting registrations as did the Co-op. The right hon. Lady's Department was represented by one of her officers from London, who had come down to see that the registrations took place properly. A Mr. J. Q. Evans of the Assistance Board, London, came down, so it is the responsibility of the right hon. Lady.
I am making a protest on behalf of the little shopkeepers of my constituency that they have not been given a fair deal. Hon. Members opposite will undoubtedly say that some of these Poles were members of the Co-op. before they came to this country, but for the past four and a half years the Lincoln Co-op. have done nothing for their Co-operative brethren—not one thing: they left it to the private traders, the little people in the village shops, to look after them. But as soon as ever a real plum comes along, one arm of the Socialist Party helps the other arm of the Socialist Party under the big umbrella of the State in order to get an advantage. [Laughter.] Hon. Members opposite may think that is funny, but I think it is a dastardly thing to do.
I went up to my constituency, saw the people concerned, and this is what I was 2301 told. Mrs. Jones, who keeps the post office told me—[Laughter.] This is the evidence I bring to the House. Hon. Members may think it is something to laugh about, but it is both my duty and their duty to see that our constituents get a fair deal. It is no laughing matter when men protest that they are being treated unjustly. She said that this Mr. Gulc began his lectures on the Co-operative system in January. He said that the Co-operative way of trading was the best. He is entitled to say that, and I do not complain of that. But when the ration books were ready to be issued he advised only the Co-op. Society in Market Rasen, and the local people were ignored. I am sure that no hon. Member would say that that is fair, or would try to justify that procedure.
I questioned the education officer, a gentleman with the name of Kawecki, and he confirmed to me that lectures had been given to the Poles for two months, on and off, on the Co-op. system. I also saw the camp padre, whose name I will not attempt to pronounce, and he again said that these lectures had been given over a period of weeks, at which they were told what a good thing it would be, and what a great advantage it would be to these Poles to join the Co-op., ignoring the local people.
I got in touch with Mr. Spring, the chief food officer at Grimsby, who said this to me: This has worried me very much because of what I have heard. Right at the beginning I was asked to go over and explain the method of rationing and registration, which I did through an interpreter. I took great pains during my lecture to stress the fact that registration"—

§ Mr. Osborne
As I was saying, the food officer at Grimsby said: I took great pains during my lecture to stress the fact that registration could be done with any trader. But it is difficult to put this over through an interpreter. I am convinced that the food office at Grimsby are in no way responsible for this treatment. The responsibility lies with the Department. The camp manager 2302 is quite a different kettle of fish. His name is quite an English one—Joyce. He states: No special opportunities were afforded to anyone, the Co-op, or anyone else. That is not true, because it is admitted that the first time when the flush of registrations took place it was only the Co-op. that had three men there—the other people were not given a chance. If the manager did not know what was going on, he ought to have known, in order to hold his job. He is a servant of the Department and must take responsibility for what he has been doing.
I challenged the Co-op. manager at Market Rasen that he had got 300 out of the 500 registrations, and he said: "Not 300, but something over 200." I say that until this piece of rigging by the party opposite took place there were not half-a-dozen Co-op. supporters in the whole village. It is quite clear to me, therefore, that undue advantage has been given to the Co-operative Society, advantages that were denied to the ordinary small traders. That is what I am protesting about.
A farmer, Mr. F. T. Martin, who lives at "White House," has been supplying a large part of the milk to this camp for about four years. Suddenly the contract was taken from him. He is given no chance to get registrations, but is told that the milk is to be brought from miles away into this village, right past his own farm with all the petrol and labour involved, and that his milk, under this wonderful planning, must be taken miles elsewhere to be sold to other customers. He is, quite naturally, angry over the treatment he is receiving.
A coal merchant in the district, Mr. Cooper of Parsons Bros., told me that the Co-op. were breaking a gentlemen's agreement which had been entered into by engaging a Polish girl to go round this camp to get coal registrations. They have got all but six of the 200 registrations. I say that there has been no fair dealing as between the Co-op. and the ordinary private traders. It is a scandal, and if Members opposite are prepared to laugh and jeer at scandalous behaviour like this, then it is time someone else was facing us.
If a normal trader wants to open a new shop, he has to go to the Government Departments and prove that there is a consumer need. He has to prove that 2303 supplies cannot be made available through existing organisations. Why has not that principle been applied to the Co-operative Society? Why should the Co-operative Society be a privileged society? Do not forget that the nearest Co-op. shop is 5½ miles away. They have now applied for permission to open a shop in the camp. I want to know whether that application is to be granted, and if so, why? If it is to be granted, it violates the very principles the Government have laid down which affect and control the activities of ordinary private traders. That is completely unfair, and I protest against it.
I want to make this point also. The local traders have asked me to protest in the strongest terms, and it will not be very nice for me to go back and say to them, "I have done my best on your behalf, as is the duty of a Member of Parliament to his constituents, but all I met with was jeers and catcalls from those supporting the Government." The Socialists have no interest in the rights of individual persons. All they are concerned about are the trade unions, on the one hand, and the privileged Co-operative Society on the other.
This is the danger which I want to put to the right hon. Lady. She may think it far-fetched, but I do not think so. In two years' time these Poles are going to be entitled to full British citizenship, which means they are going to have a vote. That is quite right and proper, because they are doing a good job on the farms and in the canning factories. Will the same principle apply to them politically as is being applied commercially here? Will this Government if they are still in power—[HON. MEMBERS: "They will not be."]—they might be, and if they are still in power, will they, out of public funds, send down a Socialist lecturer to persons like these, telling them to vote Socialist and denying the right of the other side to put their case? If that is so, we are facing the worst form of Tammany Hall corruption ever seen in this country.
I am protesting against it. It is not so far-fetched as hon. Members opposite seem to think. In "The Times" this morning, the Labour correspondent writes: 2304 The National Committee of the Co-operative Society is expected to move an emergency resolution in support of the Labour Government at the party annual conference at Great Yarmouth at Easter. That is fair; and then he makes this point: The main intention of the resolution appears to be to secure a vote of confidence in Labour policy. That is quite fair. I do not complain of that, but what I do complain of is that public funds, contributed by this side of the House as much as by hon. Members on the other side, have been used to send a Socialist-minded man down to this place so that the Socialist point of view and Socialist privilege can be put forward for another wing of the Socialist Party. Hon. Members may still think it is funny, but I do not. It is a scandal, and in the name of my constituents I am protesting. I hope I get a reasonable reply.

§ Mr. Deer (Newark)
I had better declare my interest in this matter, because I happen to be a member of the Co-operative Society that has been attacked. I have never heard a greater distortion of the facts than that which has come from the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Osborne), and I feel sure that when he has heard the real facts he will revise his views about the matter.

§ Mr. Osborne
I was not attacking the Co-operative Society. I was attacking the privilege that has been extended to them under the aegis of this Government.

§ Mr. Deer
If I understood the hon. Gentleman correctly, he was attacking the Society for preferential treatment which he said the Government had given it to take advantage of certain circumstances that private traders were not allowed to use. He also said that the Cooperative movement was "tipped off" with some private information which local traders did not possess. How can that happen when the people have not only to register for groceries but also for meat? The Co-operative Society there left the meat position to the private traders, because it had not the mobile shop to deal with it as it did with groceries. To suggest that this was something done under the counter or outside the normal trade arrangement, seems all 2305 eyewash, in view of the fact that village butchers got the registrations.
After all, the Co-operative Society have a shop six and half miles away. I should like to draw attention to the fact that it is because of unfair preference against Co-ops. that the Co-operative Society have had to arrange the system of mobile shops going to Co-operative customers, in places where the local authorities will not give permission for Co-op. shops to be put up. There are housing estates in Lincolnshire where no Co-operative Society is allowed.

§ Mr. Osborne
Is the hon. Gentleman telling the House that local authorities have ever refused to Co-operatives the right to build a shop in Ludford? If not, he should withdraw what he has said.

§ Mr. Deer
I said in Lincolnshire. I could give the hon. Gentleman the names of housing estates where permission has been refused on the ground that all the shops had been allocated to small local traders?

§ Mr. Osborne
In Ludford?

§ Mr. Deer
No, not in Ludford. It is admitted that only 50 per cent. of the registrations went to the Co-operative Society. Therefore there was free choice for the remaining 50 per cent. Two private traders in Ludford, namely Mr. Lee and Mr. Gibson, who own shops, have stated that they are perfectly satisfied, and there is only one Tory shopkeeper who is not satisfied. The hon. Gentleman complained tonight about preferential treatment. I suggest that the Co-operative Society have nothing to be ashamed of in that they got those registrations. The customers can change them in eight weeks if they are not satisfied. If there is preference, it has been given to private traders. It is the Co-operative Society that has suffered, not the private traders.

§ The Minister of National Insurance (Dr. Edith Summerskill)
There have been other occasions when the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Osborne) has raised matters on the Adjournment and, in his characteristic, impetuous manner has levelled wild and baseless charges which, after the Adjournment, he has regretted.

§ Mr. Osborne
Tell me one.

§ Dr. Summerskill
If the hon. Member looks up HANSARD during the last 4½ years he will find that I have on occasions said to him, when I represented the Ministry of Food, that if he had come to me on the question at issue, and asked me for the facts before he had put his Question down or raised the matter on the Adjournment, I should have been able to reassure him. Tonight—

§ Mr. Osborne
rose—

§ Dr. Summerskill
The hon. Gentleman has had 20 minutes for his speech, and I have only a quarter of an hour. I wanted to give him plenty of time to put his case. He must not feel aggrieved when hon. Members on this side of the House enjoy a little laughter at his expense. He must have felt that some of the charges he made tonight were quite unfounded.

§ Mr. Osborne
They are not.

§ Dr. Summerskill
I shall prove to him that they are. If on that Monday afternoon which he spent among the Poles he had devoted a little more time to going to people in authority, he would not have come here tonight and made, if I may say so without disrespect, such an unfortunate exhibition of himself. I would remind him that under the Polish Resettlement Act, 1947, the National Assistance Board administered 25 hostels in this country. They have in the past supplied these Poles with food and accommodation, and those men and women who were in employment paid an inclusive charge for their board and accommodation. Many of them now, quite naturally, have said the time has come when they would like to cater for themselves, but they would like to pay the Board for their living quarters. We who are anxious to make these people as comfortable as possible, have agreed that that would be an excellent idea.
Therefore it was decided that ration books should be distributed to them, and on 2nd March arrangements were made for the residents to register with suppliers. The Board's officers were informed that they should, of course, make no approach to traders of any kind, and the warden of the hostel went to see the food executive officer and explained the matter. Subsequently he went to see the secretary of the chamber of commerce at Louth, in the hon. Member's constituency. Perhaps 2307 the hon. Member will go and confirm what I am telling him now. He asked the secretary of the chamber of commerce what procedure should be followed, and the secretary agreed to get in touch with the traders in the district to notify them of the potential consumers in the hostel and to attend on a certain date.

§ Mr. Osborne
rose—

§ Dr. Summerskill
The hon. Member has had his say. Let him listen to the facts. These are the facts. I am not going to give way.

§ Mr. Osborne
There is not a chamber of commerce in Louth.

§ Dr. Summerskill
Again the hon. Member is displaying ignorance about matters which he should know. This was done. The traders were informed, and on 2nd March eight of them attended at the hostel. They included the manager of the Market Rasen branch of the Lincoln Co-operative Society. So far as I can ascertain, about 202 people registered for groceries with the Co-op., 95 registered with Mr. Gibb, grocer, a private trader, 65 registered with Mr. Lee, a private trader, and 30 registered with Mrs. Jones. In other words, 202 registered with the Co-op. and 190 with private traders. I, who have served for four and a half years at the Ministry of Food, say that that ratio between Co-op. and private traders in a community of this kind where the wages are not very high is quite a usual one.
A complaint was made by Mrs. Jones, who as the hon. Member has rightly described, keeps the little post office-grocery-general shop, where, obviously, her trade is very limited. Hon. Members can envisage Mrs. Jones's little shop. Mrs. Jones came to the hostel with the other traders. The hon. Gentleman alleges that none of them were known. Mrs. Jones alleges that the education officer had been bringing pressure upon the Poles to register with the private traders.[HON. MEMBERS: "The Co-op."] I apologise. I meant "with the Co-op."

§ Mr. Osborne
Get the facts right.

§ Dr. Summerskill
The teacher in question is employed by the education committee, which is an agent of the Ministry 2308 of Education, and, of course, when Mrs. Jones made this complaint, inquiries were made and the teacher categorically denied that he had gone around among the Poles telling them to register with the Co-op. It is interesting that no other trader has complained—

§ Mr. Osborne
But they have; I have the evidence here.

§ Dr. Summerskill
—and Mrs. Jones, having complained, after all the registrations had been made, said she was quite satisfied and that she had as many registrations as she could cope with.

§ Dr. Summerskill
I have already described what accommodation Mrs. Jones has. Her tiny shop had 30 registrations and she said she was satisfied and that was all she could cope with.

§ Mr. Osborne
But it is not true.

§ Dr. Summerskill
The hon. Gentleman must remember that he is talking as though these Poles have come over to this country last week and know nothing about our institutions. They have been here for some years. They have been working in the district, they know Mrs. Jones's shop, all the other shops, and the Co-op., and they were in a position to know what they were doing. As far as I can see, the officers of the Board acted throughout with strict impartiality—

§ Mr. Osborne
Rubbish.

§ Dr. Summerskill
—and I am quite satisfied that they have done so. The hon. Gentleman emphasises the importance of these lectures on co-operation. I cannot say how many lectures on cooperation this teacher has given during the last few years. He is there not only to teach these men English but to tell them something about the institutions of this country. I have not inquired as to the nature of all these lectures, but I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman has betrayed an ignorance of business institutions in Poland. At Question Time we are accustomed to the hon. Gentleman getting up from the back bench and telling this House how much he knows of the business of the world, how he goes to the United States and the Continent. We thank him for doing business 2309 for this country but he has displayed tonight a great ignorance of the business methods in Poland before the war. Does he know that the co-operative principle was applied to activities of all kinds in Poland? There were consumer co-operatives, industrial co-operatives—

§ Mr. Osborne
That is not my point.

§ Dr. Summerskill
—bank co-operatives. They even had co-operatives for the building of apartments. Furthermore, and this is an important point, the co-operative movement in Poland was never linked to any party.

§ Mr. Osborne
Jolly good. There is nothing to complain about in that.

§ Dr. Summerskill
The right wing political parties in Poland and the left wing parties were equally in favour of cooperation, so far in favour of it indeed, that the taxation system in that country favoured co-operative enterprise. Again, 80 per cent. of the arable land in Poland was in the hands of smallholders who, of course, enjoyed co-operative enterprises. Is it any wonder, with that background, that this Pole takes as the subject of his lecture, co-operation in this country?

§ Mr. Osborne
Just before the registrations.

§ Dr. Summerskill
We are told by the hon. Member that this Pole—a man, I am told, of the greatest integrity, chosen carefully—lectured on co-operation last year in the hostel—

§ Mr. Osborne
This year.

§ Dr. Summerskill
—in order to direct these little registrations from Mrs. Jones to the Co-operative Society. Tonight I feel that the hon. Gentleman is underestimating the intelligence even of his own side. Furthermore, I have other evidence to show the House that this charge is completely unwarranted.

§ Mr. Osborne
It is not.

§ Dr. Summerskill
I have already said that the hostels—not all of them, but some of them—are now managed in a different way and that people are allowed to register with certain shops and to conduct their own housekeeping. Two of the hostels, at Kelverdon and Dodding- 2310 ton, have this system in operation and in both these cases we, of course, allow the Poles to choose whom they like. It was asked if the local shopkeeper who was concerned could have a room in the hostel as a shop in order to provide facilities for the occupants. We said, "Yes Choose the people who have the biggest number of registrations." I looked up this matter this morning and I find that in the Kelverdon hostel the biggest number of registrations was with the Co-op. but that in the Doddington hostel the biggest number of registrations was with the private trader.

§ Mr. Osborne
That is not my point.

§ Dr. Summerskill
We therefore said to the Co-op, "All right, come in and use a room." We said to the private trader at Doddington, "Come in and use a room." The hon. Member for Louth asks what we shall do if we are asked in this case. We shall consider the matter in the same way as we have considered the position in Kelverdon and Doddington and, probably, give them the same accommodation.
I think I have proved that the case put by the hon. Gentleman tonight is completely without substance, that he has come here in his characteristic impetuous manner, without facts, without figures. He has come, I am very sorry to say, and, having gone to one of the officers of the Ministry of Food, publicly quotes in this House what an official has said to him privately. He should know the ethics of this place, that if an officer in one of the Ministries has a confidential discussion with a Member, the Member should regard that confidence as sacred.

§ Mr. Osborne
rose—

§ Dr. Summerskill
The hon. Member must recognise that tonight he has put that official, an important official, the whole House will agree, a food executive officer, in an invidious position. He is now suspect by a certain number of people because the hon. Member says that privately he has criticised the Co-operative institution. But that means nothing to the hon. Member. He wants to come here and make a speech of the type we have heard tonight, irrespective of how he may hurt or ruin individuals

§ Mr. Osborne
Nonsense.

§ Dr. Summerskill
The whole House knows that we have listened tonight to strong language and that we have been charged with abusing our position. These officials are unable to come to this House and speak for themselves. Therefore, Ministers on this bench who have to reply should try to defend them. The hon. Gentleman knows that tonight officials both in this Department, in the hostel, and in my Department, the Ministry of National Insurance, have had a certain stigma placed upon them, and I want the House to realise that there was absolutely 2312 no basis or foundation whatever for these charges.

§ Mr. Osborne
The right hon. Lady has not answered the question I put to her. I have asked her to substantiate that three men were put there—