I move amendment No. 1:—
In page 4, before Section 9 (2), to insert a new sub-section as follows:—
(2) The following provisions shall have effect by way of qualification of the provisions of the foregoing sub-section of this section, that is to say:—
(a) if the year in which any such bag as is mentioned in the said sub-section was packed is clearly stated on a seal securing the mouth of such bag, the statement required by the said sub-section to be on such bag of the year in which such bag was packed may be in the form of a statement to the effect that such bag was packed in the year stated on such seal;
(b) different particulars and different things may be prescribed for the purposes of the said sub-section in respect of different classes (defined by reference to such matters (including the retail price) as the Minister shall think proper) of containers or of bags.
This amendment was withdrawn by me last night in order to consider the matter further and, on consideration, and after consultation with the legal people, I find that it will be impossible to alter this amendment in any way without making rather drastic alternations in the Bill. It is really a matter either of accepting the amendment as it is or rejecting it. (a) and (b) in this amendment deal with two different matters, as I explained yesterday. (a) deals with the dating on the bags or packages up to 7 lbs. weight, and it is provided in this amendment that the date may be put on a seal instead of on the bag itself. (b) however deals with a different matter. It provides that different particulars may be prescribed for different classes. In discussing this matter last night I said that the object of the amendment was to enable packers to distribute those small sealed packets without putting on their names. It does, of course, apply to other things also. Regulations might be prescribed with regard to the name of the trader, the place in which the seed is packed and the nature and variety of the seed—all those different matters as set out in Section 9 of the Bill. I think on the whole I would be inclined strongly to recommend to the House that (b) should be accepted, because it is quite possible that it may be necessary to prescribe different regulations for those small packages than will be prescribed for the larger packages containing anything from 2 to 7 lbs. Of course, even when this is passed, there will still be power in the Bill to compel packers of those small packets to put on the name. If at any time there is abuse, or if the business is not being done in a proper way, the name can be prescribed. I think that a good case can be made for allowing (b) to stand.
With regard to (a) on the other hand, the only possible argument that can be used in its favour is the economy to the wholesale seed merchants. That was mentioned here yesterday. They send out quite a number of those bags with seeds in them, and a fair number are returned by the retail seed merchants throughout the country. If the date is to be stamped on the bags the bags will be useless. On the other hand, if the date is put on the seals, the bags can be used again. I think that, for the farmers who are buying the seeds, there is sufficient protection in the fact that the date is stated on the seal. The amendment says: "Clearly stated on a seal."
I think that any farmer who is in the slightest way anxious about the date will have no great difficulty in making out the year from the seal. I would, therefore, recommend that the House should accept both (a) and (b).