HL Deb 13 June 1944 vol 132 cc219-22
LORD ADDISON

My Lords, I beg to ask the question that stands in my name.

[The question was as follows:

To ask His Majesty's Government, whether the Minister of Food has been able to revise the Regulations affecting family gifts by self-suppliers of bacon, and if so, whether they will inform the House of the changes proposed.]

THE MINISTER Or RECONSTRUCTION (LORD WOOLTON)

My Lords, under the Pig (Self-Suppliers) Order it was illegal for a self-supplier to give away any part of his pig and it was incumbent on him not to draw similar rations while any of the pig meat—bacon or pork—was left in his home. The meat could only be consumed by some member of his own household. The individual self-supplier will in future have two alternatives; either he may keep the whole pig and surrender 52 bacon coupons, or he may keep half the pig and sell the other half to the Ministry, although the Ministry retains the right to insist on his taking the former course if it would be impracticable to collect half the pig and add it to the general food supplies. Having thus made his contribution to the general food supply he will be able to give away a part of his pig if he wishes, but neither the self-supplier nor a pig club may sell the pig or any part of it to anyone but the Ministry of Food. I hope the noble Lord will be satisfied that as a result of the question that he addressed to the Government on March 21, action has been taken which will no longer place the individual who has a little spare meat over from the pig that he has reared in the position of having to be put into court for having given it away. If I may say so, we are very grateful to the noble Lord for having raised the issue in the first instance and I hope he will regard the alteration in the Order as satisfactory to him.

LORD ADDISON

; My Lords, I listened with care and attention to the exposition of the revised Order given by the Minister of Reconstruction and I am glad to note the assurance in his concluding sentence, but I am bound to confess that I think it is an assurance that would not be obvious to the ordinary pig keeper from his interpretation of the new Order in Council. It did not appear to have any relation whatever to the revised Order. It would appear to him, I think, as one of my noble friends behind me suggests, that he was being presented with another "pig in a poke." What I think the noble Lord really meant, divested of formal language—

LORD WOOLTON

It was not really dreadful.

LORD ADDISON

I am going to give what I think would be a sensible interpretation. What I think it really means is that a person surrendering the right number of coupons—52 in the case of a whole pig or 26 in the case of half a pig—will then be able, within that surrender, to give away a piece of this bacon if he likes to a friend. The only condition is that he would be required to surrender the coupons, which of course is quite right and proper and has never been questioned. The difficulty has been that large numbers of quite humble people have felt it to be quite wrong that one should be in danger of punishment because he gave away a piece of bacon to some member of his own family. Such a possibility is intrinsically absurd and there is no justification for it. I am glad to know that that position is being altered, but it would be helpful if the noble Lord would tell us if my interpretation is right. I gather that a person would be required to surrender or cancel, as the case may be, the requisite number of coupons—which, so far as I know, was never in question and is quite right and proper—and having cancelled the coupons, if he had any bacon to spare he would be at liberty to give it to a friend. If that is a right interpretation (and I trust it is), the new Order seams sensible. That would not interfere with any legitimate trading or business and would no doubt satisfy the people concerned. I think, however, we are entitled to a little better explanation than that read out by the noble Lord.

LORD WOOLTON

My Lords, I am sorry if I did not make the position clear, but I reduced my statement to a very few words deliberately and I think they are simple words. If I may repeat those words what I said was this: Having thus made his contribution to the general food supply he will be able to give away a part of his pig if he wishes, but neither the self-supplier nor a pig club may sell the pig or any part of it to anyone but the Ministry… That really is quite simple language. I am not free from responsibility for the earlier issue. As I remember very well, the thing that we were so concerned about was that there should not be illegitimate trading as a result of this self-supplier business. Therefore what we have said is that self-suppliers may not sell their pigs except to the central food supply of the Ministry of Food, but if they do not want to sell they may give it away and there is no danger of their being prosecuted. I hope the noble Lord will be satisfied that that is a quite clear statement.

LORD ADDISON

I think the statement which the noble Lord has just made is entirely satisfactory and I thank him for it.

House adjourned.