§ Mr. BrockwayOn a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. I rise to put a point of order of which I have given you notice, which may raise an issue of Privilege.
Yesterday, this House, in Committee, carried a Resolution which the Chancellor of the Exchequer said would mean a reduction of ½d. per 1b. for sugar. This morning I found that instructions had been issued to multiple retail shops to increase the price of sugar by ½d. a 1b. from this morning. Subsequently, the price was reduced by ½d. in accordance with our Resolution, but the result is that the price of sugar remains the same despite our Resolution.
My point of order is whether that was due to an extraordinarily intelligent anticipation, or to a leakage of the intentions of the Budget. I suggest that these facts justify an inquiry by the Committee of Privileges.
§ Mr. SpeakerI do not quite follow why the hon. Gentleman thinks there may have been a leakage through the Officers of the House. They would not get the Resolution until it would be too late to have managed this. Unless it was suggested to be by them, I do not quite follow how this raises a point of order. Some other remedy may be open to the hon. Member, but he is not suggesting something of that kind, is he?
§ Mr. BrockwayI am, as always, asking your guidance, Mr. Speaker. I raised it as a point of order because it seemed to me that there was a case, as there has been, unfortunately, in previous Budgets, of a leakage of information to interested persons, and that that would be a matter for the Committee of Privileges.
§ Mr. SpeakerThat is quite another point, but I do not think that it raises a point of order. I should like to consider what the hon. Member's remedy may be in the circumstances, but, clearly, it is not a point of order.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Selwyn Lloyd)Further to that, Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member was courteous enough to tell me that this would be raised, although the message I got was that he was to raise it tomorrow.
On the issue of fact, I am told that there is no truth in this. I am told that the price of sugar has been reduced by Messrs. Tate and Lyle by ½d. a 1b.
§ Mr. BrockwayIn view of that statement, may I say, first, that I was informed by a consumer that he had been charged an extra 1d. on 2 1b. of sugar this morning? I then went to the retail shop and was informed that information first came that the price should be raised by ½d. a 1b. today and only subsequently, because of the Budget, was it reduced. My point is this: why was the price raised by ½d. a 1b. early this morning so that the total effect is no reduction whatsoever in price?
§ Mr. SpeakerI think that the hon. Gentleman's point is well understood, but perhaps we cannot probe the matter further at the moment.