HC Deb 14 February 1951 vol 484 cc402-5
61 and 62. Mr. Arthur Lewis

asked the Minister of Food (1) whether he will now ban the supply of meat to all catering establishments and use the meat thus saved to increase the domestic ration;

(2) what would be the total amount of meat saved if supplies to all catering establishments were banned; and how much increase, per domestic ration book, would result in transferring the amount saved from this proposed ban to domestic use.

Mr. Webb

The meat supplies to all catering establishments is equivalent to about 1¾d. worth a week on the domestic ration. This includes meat for residents in hotels who surrender their ration books, and meat for industrial canteens and for schools. The meat supplied in the remaining cases is equivalent to no more than about one-third of a pennyworth of meat per week on the domestic ration. I do not think, therefore, that I should be justified in withholding meat from catering establishments.

Mr. Lewis

Do I understand the Minister to say that it is 1¾d. per catering establishment? If that is the case—

Mr. Webb indicated dissent.

Mr. Lewis

Did I understand the Minister—

Hon. Members

Question.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman wants to ask a supplementary question and I want to hear it, too.

Mr. Lewis

Did I understand the Minister to say—

Hon. Members

No.

Mr. Snow

Disorderly rabble!

Mr. Lewis

Did I understand the Minister to say—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Mr. Speaker, may I ask you—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I am putting a point of order to you, Mr. Speaker. May I ask you to keep the rabble on the other side in order?

Hon. Members

Oh!

Mr. Churchill

rose

Mr. Lewis

I was asking the Minister a supplementary question and now I am addressing you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Godfrey Nicholson

rose

Mr. Churchill

May I draw your attention, Mr. Speaker—

Mr. Lewis

A point of order, Mr. Speaker—

Mr. Speaker

We cannot have two points of order at once. I did not understand that the hon. Gentleman was raising a point of order.

Mr. Lewis

It is a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Churchill

On a point of order—

Mr. Speaker

Order, Order! I understand that the hon. Gentleman was rising to a point of order and then the right hon. Gentleman rose to object to something that he said. I must hear the first point of order first and the other point of order second.

Mr. Lewis

I was putting a point of order to you, Mr. Speaker. Because of the noise that the other side was making—[HON. MEMBERS: "Rubbish."]—I did not hear the beginning of the Minister's reply and I was, therefore, asking him to confirm what I understood him to say. I was asking you whether I was in order in putting to the Minister what I understood him to say, so that he could give me the answer clearly and I could put my supplementary question.

Mr. Speaker

As far as that is concerned, it is all right, but I much regret that the hon. Member in losing his temper said "Rabble." It was a very unparliamentary word. However, he amended it next time by saying "the other side."

Mr. Lewis

In view—

Hon. Members

Withdraw.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member said "the other side." That I accepted and I think that is right.

Mr. Lewis

In view of what you have said, Mr. Speaker, I withdraw unreservedly and I say instead, the unruly noise from the other side. Now can I put my supplementary question? Did I understand that if the suggestion were carried it would mean the equivalent of 1¾d. per domestic ration? If that is the case, can the Minister explain why it is that if anyone has enough money and enough time he can get as many steaks as he wants in the West End of London? Will my right hon. Friend also explain where they get that meat from if the allowance is equivalent to 1¾d.?

Mr. Webb

rose

Mr. Churchill

On my point of order. Mr. Speaker, I only wanted to get a final ruling from you on the matter. Because an hon. Member is raising a point of order, that does not entitle him, in the course of putting his point of order, to use disorderly and insulting expressions.

Mr. Speaker

I quite agree with the right hon. Gentleman but, after all, the hon. Member withdrew his unparliamentary word when I suggested it was wrong. I. hope that will settle the matter.

Mr. Webb

It is important for the House to get this matter in proportion. The truth is that the outside supplies of meat in this country are, on the whole, a valuable supplementary source of feeding. To destroy them would not add anything at all appreciable to our ration and would, in fact, be depriving large numbers of people of necessary and helpful sources of food.

Wing Commander Bullus

Is the right hon. Gentleman making provision for extra supplies for catering establishments for the Festival of Britain visitors?

Mr. Rankin

Is my right hon. Friend aware that while hotels may be a valuable supplementary source of feeding for some people, they are not a valuable supplementary source of feeding for the majority of people in this country?

Mr. Webb

My answer referred not only to hotels, but to industrial canteens and schools. I ask hon. Members on this side of the House to recognise the importance of industrial canteens and schools.

Mr. C. S. Taylor

Will the Minister consider circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT—I am not asking for them now—figures showing the proportion which goes to industrial canteens and the proportion which goes to other catering establishments?

Mr. Webb indicated assent.

Colonel Gomme-Duncan

Would the right hon. Gentleman, when considering this important matter, bear in mind the most unfortunate situation in which the farm worker finds himself?