DELIVERY OF BREAD

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23545, 24 January 1942, Page 5

DELIVERY OF BREAD

Sir,—ls not the Canterbury Master Bakers’ Association definitely a combine, as implied in “Crusty’s” interest- | ing letter? Major bakeries in this autocratic monopoly have acquired smaller bakeries and are still marketI ing bread under the original name ' brands, which may mislead somewhat the general public. You count once on your right hand the associated "masters” of bakeries which produce two-thirds of the total bread output for this city. A measure of Government control referred to by the general secretary is non-existent on the delivery service end. It is a subtle point which Mr Burrpwes raises when he infers that there is no extra profit accruing to the bakers, as a lesser price is paid by stores. With a greatly \. lessened distributing cost, can he deny Vihat the net profit collectively will be / definitely hi n her? That is the main reason why this change-over has effected. If the new situation, this bread encumbrance, is a war effort, why is it that the master bakers have no intention of reverting to the old house-to-house delivery system when peace is restored? Additional horses and carts, even now, are still available, as there is no official impressment whatever to prevent the original service to the householder being effectively continued. Too much stress has been laid on the “new order" as a war measure. It is palpably a misnomer. The public alternative is: not to order but to grow more potatoes in the kitchen gardens and bake more scones! Public health assuredly will not be impaired. -Yours, etc., SMALL CEREAL. January 21, 1942 [“The statements contained in this letter are not correct,” said Mr G. R. Burrowes (secretary of the Canterbury Master Bakers’ Association), when the letter was referred to him. As the subject had been dealt with already ir full in print, he suggested that the writer should make an appointment with him, and he would set out the facts and answer the questions personally.]