HL Deb 22 July 1926 vol 65 cc159-60

LORD MONK BRETTON moved to include "Jam" and "Marmalade" in the Schedule. The noble Lord said: On the Second Reading the noble Viscount told us that there were technical difficulties with regard to the inclusion of jam and marmalade in this schedule. The noble Viscount is well aware how important this matter is and what a large amount of jam and marmalade are included in the food of the people, especially in London. I believe the trouble is that these jams are put into three different sorts of small pots, and the jam makers rely on the capacity of the pots to ensure the weight of the jam. The result is, as we know from the inspectors of the London County Council, that there are many complaints and there seems to be much that ought to be righted.

I cannot help reminding the noble Viscount that Messrs. Hartley & Co., of Liverpool and London, who are one of the biggest, if not the biggest, manufacturers of jam in this country, gave evidence before the Food Council to the effect that they guaranteed the weight of jam in their own jars—and they are turning out 15,000 jars a day. They say that to guarantee the weight is perfectly feasible, and this contention is borne out by the evidence brought before the Public Control Office of the London County Council.

Some time ago the United States required that imported jam should be sold by net weight. There was anxiety about this, but the jam industry has accommodated itself to the provision. The same thing has occurred in South Africa, where the importers said that the practice was impossible, but when the law was made they found it was perfectly possible and they have followed it ever since. It is important that His Majesty's Government should make some pronouncement on this matter. The noble Viscount, on the Second Reading, said that he could not do so at the moment, but it is important that he should do so, because these jars go on being made, and as long as they go on being made the jam will be put in without regard to the weight. I feel that if His Majesty's Government would make some pronouncement with regard to the makers and containers of this jam, the public would be warned, and the wrong would be righted much more quickly.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 10, third column, after ("Dried sultanas") insert ("Jam, Marmalade."—(Lord Monk Bretton.)

VISCOUNT PEEL

I do not wish to oppose a direct negative to the proposals made by my noble friend, but since the Report of the Food Council the Board of Trade have been going into these cases very carefully, and find that there is a great deal of technical difficulty in the way of introducing jam and marmalade at once into the schedule. If the noble Lord will look, however, he will see that Clause 9, subsection (1), of the Bill gives power to the Board to add to the list of articles set forth in the First Schedule, and subsection (2) gives them power to modify the provisions of the Act in their application to such additional articles. The Board wish to go on investigating this problem, and they may find it necessary to take steps, as he says, to add jam and marmalade to the schedule; but as the matter is so difficult I hope that my noble friend will not press his Amendment at the present time, it being understood that the Board of Trade is further considering the matter and will modify the schedule, should it prove to be wise to do so, by introducing the words "jam" and "marmalade."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

First Schedule agreed to.

Remaining Schedules agreed to.