HL Deb 16 June 1971 vol 320 cc579-82

2.47 p.m.

BARONESS PHILLIPS

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will introduce legislation to amend Section 11 of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 in such a way as to place on a shop the burden of proving that goods on sale at a reduced price were in fact on sale at a higher price for a continuous period of at least 28 days in the preceding six months.]

THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (LORD DRUMALBYN)

No, my Lords. Her Majesty's Government do not consider that such a reversal of the burden of proof is necessary for adequate enforcement of the section or that it would in this context be right in principle.

BARONESS PHILLIPS

My Lords, while thanking the Minister for that reply, I would again ask him whether he is aware that this decision has caused some alarm among those interested in consumer protection, as when we were considering the Act this was not the way in which we envisaged that it would operate.

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, this is a criminal offence, and in criminal offences it is normal for the prosecution to have to prove its case. If I remember aright, this point was never questioned during the passage of the Bill.

LORD DERWENT

My Lords, does my noble friend realise that if this suggestion were adopted it would be quite unenforceable, because an inspector would have to visit the same shop every day for six months?

LORD BROWN

My Lords, would not the Minister agree that the only person who has knowledge of pricing practice over a period of six months in respect of a shop is the shopkeeper himself? Would the noble Lord therefore agree that it is quite impracticable to place the burden of proof on the weights and measures inspector?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, Section 24 of the Act gives weights and measures inspectors power to require the production of books and documents where he has reason to suspect that an offence has been committed.

LORD SLATER

My Lords, is the Minister not aware that, while certain powers are invested in the inspectors of weights and measures, the general public are not aware of the conditions under which the Act operates in regard to sales of this type? Would it therefore be out of place for the Government by some means to bring to the notice of the general public the steps they can take in regard to this issue?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, a good deal of information and advice was given by the then Government when the Act first came out. This is really a matter of a normal offence. If it is a matter as between the person who is supplying the goods and the consumer, who has the right to make a complaint, enforcement lies in the normal way with the weights and measures inspector, but anybody else can prosecute if he wants to do so.

LORD BROWN

My Lords, would the noble Lord not agree that although the weights and measures inspectors have powers to obtain documentary proof, very often the proof does not exist in writing but only in the mind of the shopkeeper?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, first of all may I say that I referred to Section 24: I should have referred to Section 28. There have been over 700 convictions under Section 11 of the Act, so that in itself does not suggest that it has been wholly inoperative.

LORD BLYTON

My Lords, is the Minister aware that if the Government accepted the burden of this Question it would stop the public from being kidded that they were getting something cheaper?

LORD HANKEY

My Lords, underlying the purely technical side of this Question, would the Government consider whether there is any means of meeting the very real worry of many housewives over the constant rise in prices, many of which are hidden under subtle changes in size of a package or the weight contained in it? These are changes of prices which do not match those differences.

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, in this particular Question we arc dealing not with rises in price but with claims that the price has been reduced.

LORD FRASER OF LONSDALE

My Lords, does the Minister feel that it is not a very good thing and not very flattering to the British public, the British woman or the consumer, to assume that they are quite incapable of judging what they are buying? And does not the old rule of caveat emptor apply? is it not wise to encourage that, rather than try to help people by other means?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, the Trade Descriptions Act was designed to prevent people from telling lies in this sphere, and I am bound to say that I think it has had some success in this respect. It is perhaps worth while to mention the case of a woman who often went shopping to the sales and said that in the old days she used to get good bargains, but nowadays everything is either rejects or seconds. Surely that shows that things are now being properly described and are not being represented as sold at a reduced price.

LORD BLYTON

My Lords, may I put my question again to the Minister? Is he aware that if he accepted the burden of this Question it would stop the public from being kidded that they were getting something cheaper in the sales?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, I think that the trade does recognise this system, and, by and large, as I have said, the evidence is that things have improved quite a good deal in respect of pricing. As noble Lords will know, I have had some evidence myself on these lines since the Act was passed; but I think one must adhere to the principle, which is that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove their case.