BAKERS LIKELY TO HEED CHURCHILL AND NOT FLOUT THE LAW

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 90, Issue 167, 20 July 1946, Page 5

BAKERS LIKELY TO HEED CHURCHILL AND NOT FLOUT THE LAW

DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON BREAD RATIONING / Reed. 11.15 p.m. London, July 19. The chairman of the London Master Bakers’ Federation has ‘ advised the London bakers to endeavour to work the rationing scheme. The “Daily Telegraph” says the master bakers will meet again on Tuesday and finally decide on their course of action as to the operation of bread rationing. There already are indications that they may follow Mr. Churchill’s advice. The secretary of the Master Bakers’ National Association said no instructions had yet gone out to local associations, but they would no doubt note Mr. Churchill’s appeal as citizens not to Hout the law.

If they tried reasonably and sensibly the bakers could work the bread rationing sheme, said the Minister of Food, Mr. John Strachey, in the Commons opening the debate on food. He added that only the baker who wilfully and obviously did not attempt to Work the scheme would be punished. Yesterday morning representatives of the bakers met Mr. Strachey, after which the bakers’ chairman said they had been asked not to say anything until Mr. Strachey had spoken in the House. When the Commons* met yesterday four Conservative members amid many interjections from Labour members presented eight petitions against bread rationing. Labour members objected that the House’s time was being wasted by “frivolous and repetitive petitions, whereupon the Speaker declared he intended to protect members’ historical rights. When the debate began to-night, Mr. Strachey made his statement on bread rationing, He said that as prospects improve it may be possible much earlier than seemed likely a few weeks ago to remove the bread rationing burden from the people. Mr. Strachey told the House that the main purpose of the bread rationing scheme was to provide an insurance against various uncertain factors at a time when British stocks were at a dangerously low level. The outlook at present had distinctly improved, but the harvests were not yet gathered. The scheme was being introduced at the latest possible date.

The primary aim to be served was to tide the country over the danger point at the turning of the crop year. The year started with 11,000,000 tons less wheat stocked than last year. Therefore, the year’s harvest from four great exoorting countries must produce 11,000,000 tons more than last year, even to equal stocks.

IMPROVEMENT IN AUGUST Mr. Strachey continued that Britain’s stocks were likely to be reduced slowly until August, when experts believed the graph would again turn upwards. This was the first time for many years that the Canadian elevators had been completely exhausted and there had not been any carryover from the old crop to the new. Canadian officials told him that Britain could not expect a supply from the new Canadian crop in September. That was a matter for October and afterwards. It would be rash before the harvest was gathered to give pledges on that point. The autumn and winter crop prospects, if they continued to improve, increased the prospects of removing rationing at an early date.

‘DUT OF THE OVEN’’ Mr. Strachey entered the House as Mr. Churchill moved prayers to annul the bread rationing order. Mr. Churchill said: “We are ail glad to see him safely out of the oven,' adding that unless a few tacts were disclosed the Opposition was bound to vote against the heavy, awkward ana galling burden. Mr. Churchill said he understood there was no difficulty in importing 150,000 tons or more in September and any imminent danger would be passed by August 31. Why tnen was mere any neea lor rationing beginning on Sunuay ; He could not believe tne petty saving of 7 per cent, was the true reason tor the Government's decision which was like using a 'Steamhammer to crack a nut witn nothing in it. He added that it would be better if the Government, in tne next lew weeks, prepared a rationing scheme in consultation with the bakers but not enforce it until the necessity was proved.