asked the Minister for Supplies if the allocation of sugar to retailers has now been amended to permit of each person receiving 1 lb. per week and, if not, when this will be done.

Under the Emergency Powers (Sugar) Order, 1941, each licensed sugar retailer is entitled to receive deliveries of sugar at the rate of 80 per cent. of his 1940 purchases. These deliveries should suffice to enable each such retailer to provide the ration at the prescribed rate of 1 lb. weekly per person to every householder who was a regular customer for sugar during the year 1940 and I see no reason to increase the allocation.

Since the introduction of the sugar rationing scheme cases have come to notice where householders have been unable to obtain their full ration. The difficulties in these cases arise mainly from the fact that many householders did not register for sugar with their usual suppliers, as they were advised to do in the public notices issued by my Department. Steps are being taken to deal with the cases of difficulty, but these cannot be entirely removed unless the householders will change their registration to the traders from whom they ordinarily bought sugar.

Does the Minister not realise that the whole system of the distribution of sugar is ridiculous? The Minister said that it is distributed on the basis of 80 per cent. of last year's purchases. Surely a very much simpler method would be to ascertain the number of persons registered with each retailer and to see that that retailer received one lb. per person. That seems the rational thing and it has occurred to everybody in the country except the Minister. The position is that many persons do not buy consistently in one shop, for one reason or another. Now they have to buy in one shop. It is ridiculous to send round a circular, such as was recently sent to the retailers, to say that they should more or less chase their customers away and tell them to go somewhere else. I think the Minister should give the matter more consideration.

If the merchant has acquired new customers what is to become of them? Is he expected to advise his customers to go elsewhere?

He is only to register the customers he supplied in 1940.

Is the Minister aware that the substance of his answer is not correct? The Minister said that the retailer receives 80 per cent. of his 1940 purchases. I say he did not receive that. He received 80 per cent. of his sugar less what the Sugar Company said he drew in excess in the months of April, March and February. Half the retailers were not getting as much as 80 per cent., but only 40 per cent. It is not good enough to kick the shopkeeper to conceal the Minister's inefficiency.

If supplementary questions degenerate into speeches the Chair may refuse to see certain Deputies.

Is not the Minister misleading the House?

No. The traders concerned got, not 80 per cent. but over 80 per cent. since the 1st April.

That is the second time the Minister has tried to mislead the House in regard to that matter.

The Minister said, in his original reply, that the difficulty arose largely through the failure of consumers to register.

No.

The Minister did not say that in his original reply?

No. A number of consumers registered with traders other than those from whom they normally bought sugar. That applied particularly in the larger centres of population. To the extent that there has been disorganisation in the distribution of sugar, it has been due almost entirely to that fact.

Surely the real fact emerges, that all this confusion and muddle is due not to anything the Minister has said but to the fact that the Government refused two years ago to have a national register and a rationing scheme.

If the Minister or his Department is informed of a case where a retailer is not being supplied with the amount of sugar he should be supplied with and is, consequently, able to supply his customers with only half a pound, will the Minister take steps to remedy that matter? Will he take steps to see that that retailer receives the amount of sugar to which he is entitled?

Certainly.

For every customer he had the previous year he is entitled to one pound of sugar?

Yes.

I will furnish details.

It should have been done before this.