WELFARE FOOD (Hansard, 2 March 1971)

§ Mr. James Wellbeloved (Erith and Crayford)
It is a matter of regret that the Government and the Minister at the Box have not thought fit to explain this Order in a little more detail. It really will not do for the Government, night after night, to present business to this House in such a slack and almost unconstitutional manner. The House is entitled to an explanation of this Order and I hope to be able to put a limited number of questions to the Under-Secretary. 1584 When the hon. Gentleman comes to reply, I hope that he will show the House and democracy a little more care and courtesy—

§ Mr. Michael Jopling (Westmorland)
Humbug!

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
If the hon. Gentleman wishes to intervene in a normal parliamentary and dignified manner by standing, then I will resume my seat and allow him to intervene. He, of all people, ought to be showing the House a little more care and courtesy than sitting there, imitating his Leader the Prime Minister, and confining his political argument to hole in the cheek political jibes across this Chamber. The hon. Member seems to think that the House is discussing humbugs and sweets for children. We are, in fact, discussing vitamins A, D and C combined in liquid form and considering whether it is appropriate to include the definition, , vitamins A, D and C combined in liquid form". in Section 4(2) of the Emergency Laws (Re-enactments and Repeals) Act 1964. 1585 Under Section 4 of that Act, a number of welfare foods are set out, such as liquid milk, dried milk, concentrated orange juice, cod liver oil and vitamin tablets and now, I assume because of some development in the process of manufacture, it is possible for the vitamins to be provided in liquid form. I should have liked the House to be in possession of some knowledge of what this means, but as the Under-Secretary has decided not to give us information—

§ Mr. Michael English (Nottingham, West)
I understand that at least one of these vitamins is a solid at normal temperatures, and I am wondering whether my hon. Friend will address himself to the possibility that this wording may be inaccurate. It is of course possible to put a solid in a solution, but I am not certain whether it is possible for at least one of these vitamins to be in liquid form at any normal temperature.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
I am indebted to my hon. Friend. We shall require the Under-Secretary to deal with that point, because if the Order is incorrectly drafted and he cannot give a satisfactory explanation I shall have no hesitation in recommending to my hon. Friends that we divide on this Order.

§ Mr. Arthur Lewis (West Ham, North)
I am sure that my hon. Friend will not wish to divide, because he can surely suggest to the Under-Secretary that he takes the Order away and reconsiders and amends it. My hon. Friend does not have to force a vote after a debate. After my hon. Friend has put his legitimate point, he can surely ask the Minister to take the Order away and bring it back again later.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
We can ask the Privileges in respect of Lords Amend-of the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, I am not hopeful that we shall get any help at all from any Minister of this Government.
On the surface, this seems a highly desirable Instrument. Normally, I would not oppose such an Order. However, unless we receive an adequate explanation from the Government, I will have no alternative but urge my hon. Friends to oppose it. What is the advantage of having vitamins A, D and C in liquid form as opposed to tablets? Will vitamins 1586 in this form for children, expectant mothers and others, entitled to receive welfare foods be palatable? What tests have been made to ensure that, in this form, they will not have an obnoxious taste or tend to make children sick?

§ Mr. Thomas Swain (Derbyshire, North-East)
Is my hon. Friend aware of the greater danger of giving an overdose of a liquid, particularly during the hours of darkness, than of tablets?

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
My hon. Friend makes a valid point. Pills can more easily be touched and counted by mum in the dark when giving a dose of vitamins to a child. In other words, there would appear to be more chance of people being given an overdose of liquid.

§ Mr. David Stoddart (Swindon)
It is obvious that my hon. Friend has not had much experience of giving vitamin pills to babies. As the father of a 14-month old baby, I assure him that it is difficult to administer a pill without holding the baby's nose, and this is quite unpleasant for the baby. Vitamin drops, on the other hand, are much easier to administer. I hope, therefore, that he will not oppose the Order, at any rate not on the basis on which he has spoken so far.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
I am obliged for that intervention, which came from an hon. Member who has had first-hand experience. He gave the sort of details that should have been given by the Minister. I do not have my hon. Friend's knowledge of these matters. My three children were all healthy, bouncing babies who, taking after their father, did not need these stimulants to growth. I particularly recall my eldest's lusty voice, which he no doubt also inherited from his father. But I must not stray out of order. I have asked the Minister one or two questions and I hope that we shall have proper answers.
What is the anticipated demand for these vitamins in their new liquid form? It would be unfortunate if the Government, in pursuing such a Scrooge policy in respect of many other welfare benefits and considerations, found that a great expense had been involved in research, production and distribution of these vitamins without a proper evaluation of the likely demand arising from those persons likely to want them. We need some 1587 satisfaction on that question before we can agree to the Order.
Another matter is the cost to the recipient of this new form of liquid vitamins. Before we pass the Order, are we to be told whether there will be any cost or whether the vitamins in the new concentrated, combined liquid form will be free? What is the position? What will be the cost to the expectant mother and the taxpayer? We must know these things because we do not trust the Government. We may find that we are agreeing to a variation of a statute by the inclusion of the words vitamins A, D and C combined in liquid form in Section 4 of the Emergency Laws (Re-enactments and Repeals) Act, 1964, only to find that we have agreed to the Government's intention of imposing yet a further excessive charge upon the welfare facilities of the nation. We want assurance on that matter.
I am surprised, on an Order which not only concerns England but also Scotland and Wales, that no Welsh Minister is present. I am delighted to see a Scottish Minister, who, I assume, has dragged himself away from the most important events taking place in the Scottish Grand Committee, because we need to know a little about the application of the Order to Scotland. He ought to be telling the House whether the Order will apply in Scotland in the same manner as it is intended that it shall apply in England.
If the Secretary of State for Wales or one of his underlings had been present, we should have also wanted to know about the application of the Order to the Principality. My hon. Friend the Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Gwynoro Jones) asks if we have a Secretary of State for Wales. We see him occasionally in the House. I understand from my hon. Friends who represent Welsh constituencies that Wales sees him only infrequently. He is omitting his duty. If he has been to Wales only 20 times since he has been Secretary of State, that is unsatisfactory. But I must not stray along those paths.
I hope that my hon. Friends will join with me in exploring the implications of the Order. If the reply from the Parliamentary Secretary is unsatisfactory, I will 1588 recommend to my hon. Friends that we divide on this Order, primarily not because we shall be against the Order—it is for entirely desirable purposes; I want that clearly stated on the record—but because of the disgraceful conduct of the Patronage Secretary in trying to stifle free speech in this Parliament by the injudicious exercise of the closure. On this and other measures we must protest against that sort of dictatorial, undemocratic behaviour. Unless there are some very good explanations from the Parliamentary Secretary, it will be in protest against the Government's stifling of free speech in Parliament that I shall vote, and not whether it is desirable or undesirable—we have yet to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary—to insert those words in the Emergency Laws (Reenactments and Repeals) Act, 1964.

§ Mr. Bob Brown (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West)
A number of liquid vitamins are supplied in capsule form. Is the new liquid preparation of vitamins A, D and C to be supplied M. and at C.W. centres in capsule form or in some other form of container? Whether or not it is to be in capsule form, what is to be the type of container? If the liquid is dispensed in the non-returnable type of bottle made of very fine glass, the question of pollution of the environment arises. In the vicinity of welfare clinics there is the danger of grave injury occurring to small children. If the liquid is to be dispensed in plastic containers, there is again the dreadful problem of pollution of the environment. I hope that the Minister and his advisors will address their minds to this question and tell the House what the Government's proposals are.
I support the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for Swindon (Mr. David Stoddart) that liquid would be the easiest way of administering vitamins to young children. We all know the desirability of administering this type of vitamin to young children and of the great success of the welfare food scheme. We on this side regret the way the scheme has been mercilessly butchered over the years by Tory Governments.
In Newcastle the reactionary local authority is closing welfare clinics as fast as it can. In view of the prevalence of such local authorities, is the Minister satisfied that the type of expenditure 1589 which will be necessary as a result of the House agreeing to the Order will be justified, if it is so difficult for mothers to take their children long distances to clinic because of the closure of so many clinics in places like Newcastle?

§ Mr. Arthur Lewis (West Ham, North)
Like my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West (Mr. Bob Brown), I do not intend to speak at great length. But I was very surprised that the Minister did not take the trouble to do what has been the custom for many years, namely, to give the House some reasons for the Order when he introduced it, telling us why the Government feel that hon. Members should allow it to go through. The House does not like taking a long time debating matters if the explanation is given at the beginning. Having heard the explanation, hon. Members usually do not have to put the points that they have to put when the Minister has not troubled to explain the Order. My hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Wellbeloved) is to be congratulated upon his skill and ability in bringing these matters to the attention of the House so that we can know the object of the Order.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
I am greatly assisted in this matter by my determination and that of many of my hon. Friends to stop the Government trying to stifle free speech in the House.

§ Mr. David James (Dorset, North)
On a point of order, on the question of free speech. I have clear evidence from many of my constituents that they are now reluctant to ask me to meetings to discuss problems with them. I even know that they are reluctant to ring me up because they feel that the hours to which we are being subjected by the Opposition's tactics are such as to make it unreasonable to impose on my weekends. If the democratic process is being upset it is being upset very much more by our not having an opportunity to have a dialogue with our constituents because of these endless dialogues in the House at this time of night.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
Further to the point of order—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. These are interesting matters. I may have some 1590 sympathy, but they are not points of order.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
On a fresh point of order. May I ask your guidance, Mr. Speaker? The Order Paper contains nine items of business put down by the Government. Will you confirm that each is entitled to receive the full scrutiny of Parliament under our Parliamentary system, and that it is the democratic and Parliamentary function of hon. Members to scrutinise matters which are put down on the Order Paper by the Government? If there is any inconvenience to staff or hon. Members, that inconvenience must surely lie with those who put down at such a late hour such a large amount of business.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. That has nothing to do with order. The hon. Member may or may not be right in what he has said, but it is not a point of order. Let us get on with the debate on the Motion.

§ Mr. R. Chichester-Clark (Londonderry)
On a point of order. Although the House may well become accustomed to these time-wasting activities, are there not in this building still many dozens of members of the staff who deserve a night's sleep? Could not some action be taken to ensure that at least some of them can go home and be freed from this time-wasting activity?

§ Mr. Speaker
That is not a matter for me.

§ Mr. Lewis
I am very surprised by these points of order, because I started by explaining that if the Minister would only treat the House with the courtesy it has had for the past 28 years, by explaining why the Government are introducing the Order as this time of night, the situation would have been different. We did not put the Orders down. We do not ask for Statutory Instruments to come on for debate at 10, 11, 12 or one o'clock. That is the Government's responsibility. The Government are responsible for keeping the House sitting late at night. I do not know whether the hon. Member for Dorset, North (Mr. David James) was present, but I was, when the Minister said, "I beg to move"—and that was all. He never said what he begged to move. He did not take the trouble, as some Ministers do, of reading out the Order and saying 1591 that he was moving it on behalf of the Government. He jumped up and sat down. Hence, we have to ask questions which might have been dealt with if the Minister had explained the Order.

§ Mr. David James
Does the hon. Gentleman seriously believe that he is not wasting the House's time when twice in 10 days he speaks consecutively for one hour and 25 minutes and one hour and 45 minutes on subjects about which his information is strictly limited?

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
On a point of order—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The matter raised by the hon. Member for Dorset, North (Mr. David James) does not arise on this debate.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
On a point of order. Cannot you, Mr. Speaker, protect hon. Members on this side of the House who are performing their parliamentary duties within the rules of order—otherwise you would call us to order—from these unwarranted attacks by hon. Members opposite? This is not a rubber stamp Parliament. We ask for your protection, Mr. Speaker, against unfounded allegations by hon. Members opposite.

§ Mr. Speaker
I do not think the hon. Member needs any protection.

§ Mr. Lewis
I do not need protection, Mr. Speaker. However, if an hon. Member makes a statement which is knowingly untrue I must not call him a liar because that would be unparliamentary, but I can ask him to withdraw. The hon. Member for Dorset, North said that consecutively I made speeches of an hour and 45 minutes and an hour and 25 minutes. I must ask the hon. Gentleman to withdraw that statement because it is not true.

§ Mr. David James
I will willingly withdraw the word "consecutively". On the question of the length of his speeches. I refer the hon. Gentleman to HANSARD.

§ Mr. Lewis
Again the hon. Gentleman is quite wrong, but I will not debate the matter because it is not worth wasting time on it. I have not made two speeches consecutively of that length of time, although I might have made two speeches of that length in the last 20 years.

§ Mr. Bob Brown
My hon. Friend has been critical of the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security and has referred to his lack of courtesy; but we all accept that the Under-Secretary is a kind and courteous man. I implore my hon. Friend to realise that the hon. Gentleman moved the Order briefly because he had been "got at" by someone in authority, possibly the Patronage Secretary, who said, "Do not waste time moving the Order. Introduce it briefly". I implore my hon. Friend to concede that the Under-Secretary is courteous.

§ Mr. Lewis
I did not allege that the Minister was not courteous. I said that he never treated the House with the usual courtesy of Ministers over the years by explaining the necessity for the Order. That is a statement of fact. I do not doubt that the Under-Secretary is very courteous, but he introduced the Order in a very perfunctory fashion without giving any reasons for it. My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West gave the reason. He said that the Patronage Secretary had got at the Minister and told him not to take time in debating this matter. But my hon. Friend should know that it is not the job of Members of this House to be dictated to by anybody. I would not allow the Patronage Secretary or any other hon. Member to tell me what to do in this House. The Minister is responsible to the House, and he should explain to the House why he on behalf of the Government wants this Order to go through.
The Government for weeks past have been holding the House in contempt by trying to get their legislation through without explanation. They do not even allow discussion. Before my hon. Friend even finishes making a short speech, he is closured. This matter should be closely looked at.
The Order says that: there shall be inserted 'vitamins A, D and C combined in liquid form'. My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West, mentioned a glass bottle or plastic container to take the vitamins in liquid form. There are things that could be said either in favour or to their detriment of both sorts of container, but I will not go into details since that might be repetitious. A means of amalgamating the old principle with 1593 the new would be to have the liquid in a gelatine capsule form. This would overcome the difficulty of a mother in knowing whether she was giving the correct dosage, and she would be able to follow the same method as hitherto; namely, picking out the right number of capsules which would be clearly marked as to dosage.
I want to know what "vitamins A, D and C combined in liquid form" means. Does it mean that the three always go together? Does it mean they could be split into pairs, vitamin A with vitamin C, vitamin C with vitamin D, and so on? There is no clear explanation of that point.
There is then the question of the cost. We know the present Government have declared that they want to cut Government expenditure. The first bit of expenditure they have cut is in regard to the welfare services, and, as we expected, they have made a savage attack on those services.

§ Mr. Ernle Money (Ipswich)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Member For West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) has now raised the question of the welfare services. May I address to you, Mr. Speaker, a point of order which I raised with Mr. Deputy Speaker, some 10 days ago? [Interruption.] I am glad that this is a matter for amusement for the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Wellbeloved). I hope that this will be taken note of by his constitutents? The House will know that on the Motion for the Adjournment my hon. Friend the Member for Harwich (Mr. Riddsdale) seeks to raise the subject of the mass X-ray services. Many hon. Members are hoping to address themselves to that subject. I hope that the hon. Member, who has taken up so many hours of the time of the House with such tedious repetition over the last few weeks, will give other Members of the House the opportunity to exercise the right of back benchers to speak

§ Mr. Speaker
That was not a point of order, and I am afraid that that kind of intervention only lengthens proceedings.

§ Mr. Lewis
You will agree, Mr. Speaker, that I have never moved the closure or attempted to stop debate. I would not have the power or authority 1594 to do so. I happen to know procedure and how the House of Commons fuctions. I advise the hon. Member for Ipswich (Mr. Money) not to waste time here but to go and read the Standing Orders. He will then see that it is not possible to amend this Order, if that should be his intention. I do not know whether it is. I do not think he can know what he is talking about.
I repeat that this Goverment have attacked the social services. They have attacked the Welfare State and have said that they will cut Government expenditure. I ask whether their attacks on the welfare services are to save money at the expense of the poor, sick and the disabled, and will cost more or less. I want an assurance whether this will mean more or less to be spent on welfare services concerning these items. I hope that the Minister will be able to give some figures, or at least estimates, on what the cost has been up to now and what it may be if vitamins A, D and C are combined in liquid form.
It has not been made clear whether there will be extra charges to the recipients of these combined vitamins in liquid form. If there is an additional charge, to what extent will that save Exchequer grants and money from the Treasury? Is this a method by which the Government intend to save public expenditure at the expense of welfare foods? As these vitamins are considered under food and drugs, I suppose that I am in order in describing them as food. I know that they are very necessary, and I would not want to do anything which would prevent their being supplied to those who need them.
Like you, Mr. Speaker, I am old enough to remember the days, not far distant, when we had a Tory Government and many kiddies suffered through the want of these vitamins. In the school I went to about a third of the children had their legs in irons because of malnutrition and rickets. They never had enough food, let alone vitamins. I am glad that a Labour Government introduced the welfare foods scheme; now one rarely sees kiddies with their legs in irons. If there is to be a charge we shall be back to the bad old days.
How will these vitamins be supplied? It used to be possible to get them from 1595 the local health offices and offices associated with the Ministry of Social Security. The Government have been cutting down on these for economic reasons, and my constituents have to travel a long way to get to the town hall or the health office. Originally my constituents had to take a bus ride which cost ld. to 2d. but now prices have risen considerably and mothers who have perhaps two children to take with them find that it is a real problem. I am sure that my hon. Friends who have rambling urban constituencies experience similar problems.
If my constituents want to get the new vitamins A, D and C in a combined liquid form, will the Minister make it possible for them to have their fares paid or for them to receive some financial aid or will these tablets, or capsules, be made available at any office of the Ministry of Social Security?

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
Since mothers go to Post Offices to collect their welfare benefits for children, would it not be a good idea for the Government, first of all, to get the post offices open again by meeting the justifiable demands of the postmen, and then make provision for these vitamins to be available to mothers there?

§ Mr. Lewis
That is a good point. I wish that my hon. Friend had made it in his speech because it would have avoided delay in my own.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
Perhaps after my hon. Friend has ended I may succeed in catching Mr. speaker's eye again and thus be able, by leave of the House, to raise this.

§ Mr. Lewis
That is one way of supplying these vitamins. There is no reason why they cannot be made available, in my constituency at least, through the co-operative stores. The West Ham Co-op was the foundation of the Co-op movement in London. We have a number of co-operative stores and chemists shops associated with the L.C.S. It would be ideal if the Minister could make these vitamins available at any reputable organisation—post offices, chemists' shops, drug stores, doctors.
I do not think that vitamins A, D and C can be dangerous, either individually or 1596 in a combined form, even if taken in excessive doses. If that is so, they might be made available at schools. Teachers perform many extraneous duties, and I do not think they would object to this.
We have not been told whether the vitamins will be freely available, whether there will be a charge for them or what the procedure will be. Hence, I ask the Minister for more information before deciding whether to support my hon. Friend in a vote.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My hon. Friend has drawn my attention to the fact that 1 brought forward in my intervention a point which would be useful. If I were to seek the leave of the House to speak again and that leave were refused, am I correct in saying that there is a Standing Order which would enable me to ask the House to divide on the question whether I should have leave to speak again?

§ Mr. Speaker
I am not aware of any such Standing Order.

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security (Mr. Michael Alison)
I extend a brief words of thanks to the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West (Mr. Bob Brown) for his kindness in leaping to my defence on the charge made by one or two hon. Gentlemen opposite that I was discourteous. I assure the House that no discourtesy was intended. I have noticed a certain willingness of hon. Members on the benches opposite to express themselves, and I thought that the courteous thing to do, assuming that hon. Members knew the relevant background information on the Order—as the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Wellbeloved) showed he did—was to let hon. Members make their points, which I could then consider, without boring them with an initial statement, thus allowing them more opportunity to speak. I hope the House will acquit me of any charge of discourtesy. It is quite obvious that hon. Members opposite, including the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis), knew all the basic details abou the family life of those who have children—

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
The Under-Secretary of State is most courteous in what he has 1597 just said. Had he said in moving the Order those few words about giving hon. Members an opportunity to speak so that he might reply to them, we would have accepted that. It was because he was so brief and did not put those courteous words in at the beginning that the strictures were made. We withdraw those strictures in view of what the hon. Gentleman has now said.

§ Mr. Alison
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford for those kind words. It is a fine point whether I should have made reference to the automatic expectation that hon. Gentlemen opposite would want to say a few words on these matters.
Perhaps I may now come to the important points raised by hon. Gentlemen opposite. I am grateful to them for the sympathetic consideration which they have given to these necessary provisions which we are hoping to make. I confirm that we are seeking to make provision for a more palatable form of the means of ingesting these vital vitamins so necessary for the health of our children. We naturally thought, as some hon. Members have suggested, that the way to provide a palatable form of the combination of vitamins A, D and C might be by the method of the pill. Indeed, one might also add the method of the plastic capsule which the hon. Member for West Ham, North, with his extensive experience of these family matters, suggested quite properly might he one of the options.
However, we were troubled to discover that there were real hazards in the provision of pills through the accidental swallowing of them by children—the inhaling, to use the technical term, which might result in choking. We were, therefore, put at some pains to see whether it was not possible to formulate a liquid version of the combination of these three vital vitamins. I am happy to tell the House that our reseachers and chemists have succeeded in devising a satisfactory liquid form of these vital vitamins which will have no hazard or danger.
I assure the hon. Member for Nottingham, West (Mr. English), in his absence, that there is no tendency, as far as I know, for this liquid to solidify once successfully reduced to liquid form. Once liquid, like many excellent things in the same realm, it remains liquid.
1598 One or two points have been made about the actual form in which the liquid will be dispensed. I am happy to show the House, if it is in order, this little specimen of how the liquid will be provided. Some discussion was stimulated by the hon. Member for West Ham, North and other hon. Members, including the lion. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West, as to the options between glass containers and plastic containers. I am happy to tell the House that in this significant little dispenser we have been able to combine the two. We have here a plastic top and a very satisfactory glass bottle. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I am also happy to tell the House—again reassuring the hon. Member for West Ham, North—that if one empties the complete contents of one of these bottles down a baby's throat, it will do it no harm whatever. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] It is better, of course, to take it in individual drop form if possible.
For the benefit of the hon. Member for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Swain), who, against a background of ten children and, therefore, wide experience in these matters—

§ Mr. Swain
Which is more than some hon. Members opposite can say.

§ Mr. Alison
—wondered whether there would be any hazard or unpleasantness for children in taking these drops, I assure him that one of the advantages of drops over pills or any other substitute is that one can pour them into milk, corn flakes or any of the other food forms which children take and, therefore, their taste entirely disappears in the food.
One or two other points have been made on general matters to do with costs, charges and so on. The hon. Member for West Ham, North made a suggestion about schools. In fact, the provision of food of these kinds is only for children up to the age of five, so the point about the schools does not arise.
So far as charges are concerned, I think that the House will remember that welfare foods in this category have long been retailed by the Government at cost price to mothers and parents of families, except for needy families or extremely large families. The cost of these drops will work out a great deal less than anything 1599 which has preceded them. A 13-weeks' supply—two bottles—will cost mothers 10p.
It is difficult to estimate the likely cost to the Government because there are a number of imponderables about take-up, demand, and so on. But the various foods being replaced roughly cost the Government in their time about £30,000 a year, so we are not talking about a very large sum of money. Apart from the circumstances operating in the case of needy families or particularly large families, these foods will, like the preceding products, be retailed by the Government at cost price. They will be available, like many of the items which preceded them, at health clinics, local authority distribution centres, W.R.V.S. centres and hospitals.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
Would the Under-Secretary take comfort from the fact that, in view of the courteous, generous and detailed way in which he has replied to the debate, it will not be my intention to encourage my hon. Friends to divide on the Order? He has redeemed the position which was created by the Patronage Secretary, and we shall reserve our wrath for Orders which are yet to come before the House.

§ Mr. Alison
I thank the hon. Gentleman for those sympathetic words. I would disclaim all credit for myself. I am sure that what we are all thinking of is the little infants in arms.

§ Mr. Arthur Palmer (Bristol, Central)
As one who has not yet uttered a word tonight, mainly because I want to speak on a later Order, may I ask the hon. Gentleman to tell his right hon. Friends the Patronage Secretary and the Leader of the House that it would facilitate the House's receiving the kind of reasonable explanation which he has just given if in future we did not have to debate nine matters, some of the greatest importance, in this way, which is an abuse of the House?

§ Mr. Alison
I hesitate to stray from the non-controversial ground on which I have been treading so confidently up to now to comment on that point, but I am sure that it will be noted in the OFFICIAL REPORT.