§ 23. Mr. Stokesasked the Minister of Food whether he is aware that a bottle of Scotch whisky now sells for 6 dollars compared with 3.29 dollars in 1939 whereas the export price has only risen from 75 cents to 1 dollar a bottle; and if he will take steps to prohibit the use of imported barley for whisky production in view of this disproportionate increase.
§ Mr. StokesYes, but I wanted an answer now. Is the Minister aware that last year something of the order of 88,000 tons of barley were used for the distillation of whisky, and if any barley had to be imported which today cost £22 a ton and the equivalent of £2 million, does he not think, in view of the very low export price of whisky, that barley supplies for whisky distillers should be restricted?
Dr. HillNo imported barley has been used for making whisky, but clearly distilling has a bearing on barley consumption. On the right hon. Gentleman's general statement, may I say that at first sight it would seem to be most unlikely that an industry would refrain from collecting profits which could be obtained from the sale of its goods in an overseas market. The right hon. Gentleman has made certain suggestions. I have agreed rigorously to examine those suggestions, and I would ask him to hold or to rest this particular horse until that examination is complete.
§ Mr. StokesBut while recognising, as I do, that imported barley is not used for whisky distillation, surely the Minister will agree that if any barley at all is used for whisky distillation, barley has to be imported to take its place for other uses here?
Dr. HillYes, but to do what is suggested in the second part of the Question, to prohibit the use of imported barley for whisky production, would have no effect at all, for none is used.
§ Mr. J. HudsonWould the hon. Gentleman, in the examinations he has promised to make, take into account the fact that the waste of good English barley in the manufacture of something not 863 necessary in this country is not to be justified even on the basis of poisoning unworthy Americans on the cheap?
Dr. HillThe views of the hon. Gentleman are well known, but, whatever his views about the consumption of whisky may be, I would remind him that it is the biggest single dollar earner in the United States of America.
§ Mr. NicholsonIs there any ground for supposing that the whisky distillers— I am not a whisky distiller, by the way —refrain either in the private or public interest, from getting the biggest price possible for their export? Is it not likely also that the whisky distillers know more about it than the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes)?
§ Mr. StokesBefore the Minister replies to the question, will he at the same time explain to his hon. Friend why it is that although all our imports cost three or more times as much as they did before the war and practically all our exports, especially to America, cost 2½ times as much, whisky has gone up by only 33⅓ per cent., which is one-third? Surely there is something cuckoo about it?
Dr. HillIn reply to my hon. Friend, I know of no ground for the suspicion that the export price is kept artificially low. The right hon. Gentleman has pressed his point with such vigour and sincerity, however, that I have said we will examine it as carefully as we can, and I await any contribution as to the facts from the right hon. Gentleman.
§ 25. Mr. Stokesasked the Minister of Food how much barley was used in the process of whisky production in the last 12 months for which figures are available.
§ Mr. StokesYes, but perhaps the Minister will now reflect on this. Also will he call the attention of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the fact that the cost of this imported grain is nearly four times as much as it was pre-war, and if it takes the place of material which is used for the purpose of distilling Scottish whisky at only a one-third increase in the export price, surely 864 it is an uneconomic export, and will he therefore also call the attention of the Chancellor to that fact?
Dr. HillIn view of what has been said today, I ask the right hon. Gentleman to allow this allegation of his to be substantiated or to be denied and to leave it alone in the meantime. I would also ask him not to mistake his vigour of expression for accuracy of allegation.
§ Mr. StokesIn view of that challenge, may I ask the Minister whether he is capable of contradicting any one of the figures which I have given him?
Dr. HillThe right hon. Gentleman has offered to supply me with certain facts about this matter. I have not yet received them—other than, of course, those facts which have been deployed in his various Questions.
§ Mr. StokesMay I ask the hon. Gentleman if he will stir up his Department, because they were sent to him five days ago?
Dr. HillThe Department does not need stirring up. What the right hon. Gentleman needs to do is to collect some facts in support of his allegation and to refrain from continuing to make it without supporting it by facts.
§ Mr. StokesI shall go on. The whole thing is a complete swindle.