asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if his attention has been drawn to a report in a trade journal to the effect that in 1951 a brewery secured an increase in the price of the pint of stout by one penny through the Prices Advisory Body because the price of barley had gone up to 84/- a barrel and because the firm agreed to increase the gravity or strength of the pint by three degrees; and, if so, if he will now refuse to permit the proposal mentioned in the report to reduce the strength of the pint in order to secure increased profits at the expense of the consumer, especially since the price of barley has been reduced this year to 62/6 a barrel and the firm's profit last year increased by over £400,000 to £5,681,000.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Strength of Stout.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he is aware of a statement in the February issue of a trade journal stating that the strength of the pint of stout is much lower than in pre-war times and if he will state if this reduction in strength was made with his knowledge and approval, and, if so, for what reasons; and if he will indicate the exact difference in the strength (a) of stout now compared with pre-war times and (b) between the stout in question in the Twenty-Six Counties compared with the Six Counties at present.
I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 10 and 11 together.
The report referred to by the Deputy has been brought to my attention. I am not aware of any proposal by brewers generally, or by individual brewing firms, to reduce the gravity of their products.
Reductions were made in the gravity of stout during the emergency period, not for the purpose of increasing the profits of brewers, but because of the necessity to conserve supplies of raw materials. As regards the present and pre-war strength of stout, I cannot disclose information supplied to me in confidence in regard to the quality of any trader's products.
I am not in a position to give information regarding the gravity of stout sold elsewhere.
Would the Minister not agree that the brewery referred to in this question, that is Messrs. Guinness, whatever may have been the intention of the reduction of gravity, have as a direct result of it succeeded in extorting enormous profits at the expense of the farmers of this country, the publicans and the consumers? Is he not further aware that there have been suggestions at a recent conference between representatives of this brewery and the publicans for a further reduction in the gravity of this product, stout, and would he take steps to see that that does not happen?
I want to make it clear that as far as I am concerned I do not exercise any control over the quality of the product produced by brewers. There is no suggestion by any brewer in the country to reduce the gravity of his stout. The Deputy is perhaps not aware that the profits to which he refers are profits made by Arthur Guinness and Son of London, the trading company in England for all over the world, not for their trade in this country.
They get a good share out of this country.
You would like to close it down, of course.