MILK (GUARANTEED PRICES) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 1976 (Hansard, 26 February 1976)

§ Lord SOMERS
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he could give the House any idea as to the total cost of producing new bottles for the new measurements?

Earl FERRERS
My Lords, I am sure that we are very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, for having introduced this order. May I apologise to him for not having been in my seat when he started? I regret that. The order is perfectly simple. It merely changes all units of milk from gallons to litres, as I understand it, in the wholesale state. I am bound to say that the whole principle of metrication seems to me curious in so far as it was never put to Parliament whether or not we should go metric, but yet when one has to change "gallons "to "litres "you have to get Parliamentary approval, in which case of course it is too late to do anything about it.
I am bound to say that I have my own reservations as to whether metrication is going to do any good at all. I would feel that it was likely to be a very considerable waste of time and money and effort. 877 I could not help being slightly amused by what A. J. P. Taylor wrote in the Sunday Express a few weeks ago when he said that metrication, is a product of those superior people who claim to know what is good for us and that they can run our lives better than we can ourselves. He went on to say: The peoples who have long groaned under metrication do not like it at all. French housewives do all their shopping by the pound, though it was abolished in 1795. Danish beer drinkers use mugs with a capacity that was abolished even earlier. No self-respecting Dane would ever drink half a litre or even a litre. Finally, the entire metric system is nonsense. The metre is supposed to be a precise decimal fraction of the earth's circumference. The calculation was made by a French mathematician in the eighteenth century. He got his calculations wrong. My Lords, I make that only as a passing observation upon the metric system, but I have two reservations about this order. The first—and perhaps this is slightly reactionary—is that if we do go metric as regards milk, it will of course make it much easier for liquid milk to be imported into this country. I do not wish to go into details, but it would have a very bad effect on the dairy industry on which, in fact, the whole agricultural industry is so dependent. If wholesale milk is to go metric, it will be only a short time before retail milk also goes metric. In which case, what happens to the "pinta "? This is a serious point because the greatest strength of the dairy industry is the size of liquid milk consumption. Here, of course, we are streets ahead of the European Community. One of the reasons why the European Community has surpluses of milk is because of the very low proportion of milk which goes for liquid consumption—particularly compared with the United Kingdom.
The European Communities could do much to alleviate their milk problems if they tried to stimulate more the consumption of milk. I hope that when we go metric in the retail system, the Government and the industry will take great care to see that this does not adversely affect liquid milk sales. I believe that the pint is 568 millilitres; one wonders whether the pint will be kept or whether it will be rounded up to 600 or rounded down to 500. In any event, whichever happens, I have no doubt that the Govern 878 ment will take great care to see that it does not adversely affect the retail supply of milk, because this is absolutely vital.
Perhaps the noble Lord could clear up a point that is troubling me. I think he said that as from this year the guaranteed price and quantity will be in litres, and 1 understood him to say that farmers will be paid for their milk in litres but that the retail system will still be in gallons. At what juncture will we get the changeover? Will the Milk Marketing Board pay for it in litres and will it be collected and bought by the dairies in litres and then sold off in gallons? It would be helpful if the noble Lord could tell me at what point the system will change from litres to gallons.

§ Lord SELSDON
My Lords, I should hate the impression to be created that everybody on these Benches supports my noble friend Lord Ferrers in his views and comments against metrication; and while he comes from a much more agricultural background than I do, it might be fair to point out to him that the reason why we have such a high consumption of milk is because we have daily deliveries and an efficient distribution system. A strong case can be put forward that, because of this distribution system, if at the retail level we start distributing in litres the consumption of milk will go up. I would remind him, too, of the view expressed on the Continent; that one reason why the British are so big and tall is because of the large quantity of milk they drink. We have many French friends and as my noble friend pointed out that it was a Frenchman who determined that the metre was an article of measurement, we should bear in mind that it was George HI who said with a smile that 1,760 yards, being the year he came to the throne, would be the mile. We are not all in favour of metrication but we are not all against it, and I should hate there to be any assumption that my noble friend speaks for all of us.

§ Baroness PHILLIPS
My Lords, I think the assumption of the noble Lord, Lord Selsdon, that people will drink more milk when it is sold in litres at the retail end is incorrect. The litre is a considerably larger measure than the pint, and my studies of the subject lead 879 me to think that women will tend to buy less milk. The 500 millilitre measure will be the nearest to the pint—I believe it is exactly two cups of tea less than we have at the moment—and, knowing the English housewife, I suspect that she will go for the smaller quantity rather than the larger. I hope that this will not be so because, as the noble Lord rightly said, we have built up our splendid race on a high consumption of milk. I also hope that the daily delivery, the last service left to us, will not go.

§ Lord SELSDON
My Lords, I am not yet the Minister of Agriculture, but I would remind the noble Baroness of what happened when we went from the half-pint to the pint; there was a slight fall in sales, but that had no real effect and the housewife adjusted to it.

§ Lord STRABOLGI
My Lords, perhaps one day the noble Lord, Lord Selsdon, will be Minister of Agriculture, but I hope—I say this not on personal grounds—that that will not happen for many years. I am grateful to him for the support he has given to metrication and I have noted carefully what noble Lords have said. I stress that this order has been brought in with the consent and agreement of the industry, which has been consulted throughout. Before proceeding further, I must pay tribute to the milk delivery services of this country and to the milkmen. We enjoy an absolutely first-class service. My milkman at home delivers all over the Christmas holiday, at Easter and at Bank Holidays; there, unfailingly, is the milk on the doorstep every morning when one goes down to pick up the newspaper. One cannot be appreciate enough of the wonderful service our milkmen give in all weathers.
Before I deal with the question of the retail side, I should comment on the question of the noble Earl, Lord Ferrers, about how this will affect the returns received by dairy farmers and milk distributors. These are not directly linked with the level of the retail price of milk. The cost of the guaranteed price to farmers and the controlled margin of milk distributors is met through a notional account known as the milk fund. Until 880 the introduction of the milk subsidy it had been the policy of successive Governments that the retail price of milk should be set at a level sufficient to ensure that, taking one year with another, it met these costs. The price of milk is now being subsidised and the resultant deficit is being met by the Exchequer. Consequently, the current retail price of milk does not reflect the true cost of milk distribution nor the guaranteed price paid to farmers.
In regard to metrication and its effect on the retail side—on the "pinta ", as it has been described—I would remind noble Lords that successive Governments have endorsed the voluntary metrication programme since 1965. The question of the metrication of retail sales of milk is a matter for discussion with the trade, consumers and the Metrication Board. I understand that, for its part, the Dairy Trade Federation has only recently told the Metrication Board that it wishes to retain the pint as the retail container for domestic sales of milk. The Board earlier this week passed this view to the Government.
Under the Treaty of Accession to the EEC it is possible for special reasons to negotiate the retention of certain imperial units beyond 31st December 1979. I am afraid, therefore, that I cannot answer the noble Lord, Lord Somers, about the cost of changing from pint bottles because it may not be necessary to do so. I do not want to be drawn into too much detail on this because it may be a matter for negotiation. However, as the noble Earl, Lord Ferrers, says, a pint equals 568 millilitres and it might be possible to use the old pint bottles but label them as well "568 millilitres ". For retailers who use non-returnable cartons, it would probably be possible to go straight on to the half-litre and one litre but, as I say, the trade has requested that the pint should be retained for certain sectors and we are bearing this very much in mind in our negotiations, and we have till 1st January 1980 to do so. I hope that I have answered the points which noble Lords have raised, and I beg to move the Motion.