MR CHURCHILL SEEKS INFORMATION

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24914, 29 June 1946, Page 7

MR CHURCHILL SEEKS INFORMATION

Mr Strachey said he had not underestimated the gravity of the step which the Government had been compelled to make, but the Government would not be worthy to hold office if it flinched from its task and so risked a breakdown in the people’s bread supply. Mr Churchill said that the announcement was one of the gravest he had ever heard in the House of Commons in peace time. No figures had been given to Parliament to justify it Members did not know the stocks or totals of cereals in different parts of the world. “What saving do you expect from an extremely elaborate system of rationing which we never knew in the very darkest days of the submarine war?” he asked. “I have seen it stated to be no saving.” “The rationing of bread demands from the British people a reduction of consumption of only-between 5 and 10 per cent.” replied Mr Strachey. “It is a safety measure enabling the country to ensure its bread supply. That is the prime purpose of the scheme.” “Your statement aggravates the seriousness of the situation,” said Mr Churchill. “What we are asked to do row is not to acquiesce in the imposition of bread rationing, but to the setting tip'of machinery enabling it to be screwed down with every turn in the gravity of the situation.” Mr Strachey: My statement does not crrry.the implication you suggest. There were heated scehes, with Labour members shouting protests and interjections, when Mr Churchill asked that question and again when he said: “Are you ready to give us the facts on which these tremendous decisions are based? We have no figures on a decision so vitally affect- 1

ing every single cottage home in Britain —— ” The rest of Mr Churchills words were lost in Labour members’ outcries. . Mr Strachey said he assured the House and, he hoped, the world that the fact that Britain was faced with the necessity of introducing bread rationing was the best proof that Britain was concealing no’stocks, as she was frequently accused of doing. Mr Strachey added that nutritional experts considered the scales of rations as such that they could fully recommend them. Nothing decided either in the United States or Canada during his visit could possibly affect Britain’s position in the next few months. Mr Churchill sought leave to move the adjournment, but Mr Speaker replied that this did not comply with the rules. It was more a matter for a debate on supply day or a vote of censure.

In spite of a further request from Mr Churchill. Mr Speaker would not

-accept Wie motion. Mr Churchill said that, if forced, the Opposition would put down a censure motion. Mr Attlee said that there could be a debate on supply day next week. Mr Churchill asked for an assurance that the 5 per cent, reduction would not be exceeded in the next six months.

Mr Strachey reminded him that he had said between 5 and 10 per cent., and added: “He would be a rash man who said he could foresee the course of the world food supply for the next 18 months.”

After Mr Churchill had again nressed to have the facts put before the House in a “reasonable and decent manner,” other members tried to continue the questioning, but Mr Speaker called them to the next business.