Talk:Rationing in the United Kingdom/Archive 1

Archive 1

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 September 2018 and 13 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nicholasxhall.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Picture request

A picture of a ration book has been requested at the UK Wikipedians' notice board. TheGrappler 17:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Image of a shopkeeper cancelling coupons from a ration book was added October 26, 2006. Tim Pierce (talk) 00:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Text from other article

The following text is from "world war 2 rationing", which was marked to be merged here. Perhaps the detailed figures ought to be added to the article, but they aren't souced, so I'm just putting it here.

lots of things were rationed including eggs, bacon, milk, sugar, cheese, butter, bread and jam.An average adults weekly ration in may 1941: 3 pints of milk 55g tea 225g jam 1 shillings worth of meat 170 g of butter 55 g of cooking fat 225g of sugar 115g of bacon 30g of cheese housewives had to do with what they had. many new recires were invented during world war 2.carrot cake was one of them.

dbenbenn | talk 01:47, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Post-war rationing

Can somebody please explain why rationing continued in Britain after the end of the War. The U-boats were not sinking ships ye British people could not feed themselves adequately, Why??

Neverdespairgirl 09:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC) Hello - the reasons why rationing continued were several. Firstly, world-wide food production was still down - lots of people were in armies, land had been damaged, etc. Secondly, there were severe financial problems. Some British products (such as whisky, for example) were export-only so that foreign currency could be obtained. Britain was broke. In addition, it was difficult to remove rationing because once a product went off-ration, there was a huge surge in demand for it, from people who wanted to enjoy something they'd not had before.

Also there's the question of Britain's legal obligations as an occupying power. After the war the Allies (including Britain) had to not only feed themselves but also their former enemies too. Occupying powers are responsible for the welfare of the countries they occupy, and places like Germany (which was under Allied control after the war) were so devastated that they could not produce much food themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.146.46.247 (talk) 22:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

On top of that, the economy was being centrally planned by the Labour government to a degree that it is difficult to envisage today. The powers that be had decided that the scarce resources were better employed servicing other industries than producing and importing food over that needed to supply basic rations to the population. The industries that were prioritised were often export industries - this helped maintain the level of Sterling and to service the massive war debts mainly owed to the US. BaseTurnComplete (talk) 19:59, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The UK was also the only country in Europe (other than the neutrals of course) that got no benefit from the Marshall Plan. -- Roger (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah but it did. The UK got more Marshall aid than any other country. Soarhead77 (talk) 14:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Correct - I've heard the "no Marshall aid" myth surprisingly often though.BaseTurnComplete (talk) 20:02, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

There were probably a number of factors, many of them outside the government's control, but one factor could have been the decision to maintain conscription and the armed forces at a relatively high level (a decision which was not taken at the end of WW1) which could have been both costly and taken a large number of able-bodied young men out of the national workforce. PatGallacher (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

There were two main reasons for continuing with rationing, 1) The lack of foreign exchange currency with-which to buy food and goods from abroad, Britain's normal overseas export trade having more or less ceased in 1940, and the country being effectively bankrupt in the foreign currency needed to buy the normal peacetime imports by 1945, 2) The decision to carry out the development and manufacture of a UK nuclear weapon, which cost a considerable amount not only in research, but also in infrastructure, this decision being a result of the US passing the McMahon Act in 1946.

The overall reason however was the US government insisting before Lend-Lease that the UK sell-off all its US assets to pay for war materiel bought from the US and then also refusing to allow the UK to raise loans in the US with-which to subsequently finance the war it was then fighting. Before Lend-Lease, there was 'Cash and Carry' and Britain had paid the US over £500,000,000 ($2 billion at the-then current exchange rate) in cash for aircraft alone. Previously many governments fought wars paid for with loans raised abroad. In 1940 the US government refused the UK any loans and then made selling-off all UK assets in the US a condition before it would consider what then became Lend-Lease. In 1940 Britain was by far the biggest foreign investor in the US, so this forced sell-off represented a great financial loss to Britain.

AFAIR, Marshall Aid was only available to countries that had been occupied by Germany, Japan or Italy. The Soviet Union was offered the aid but Stalin refused it. Britain was not occupied, with the exception of the Channel Islands, and IIRC, that didn't count as it was regarded as a 'colony' by the US and the US was opposed to 'colonialism'. So whether Marshall Aid was in fact received or not by Britain I don't know, it may have been, but I have read in reputable books that it was not. But none of the other countries that did receive it still had rationing in the 1950s.

There were many wonderful Americans who did their best to help Britain in 1940, many 'ordinary' people sending food parcels to the people besieged in the UK, and many prominent Hollywood stars such as Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall, James Cagney, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., who off their own bat, raised money for, and helped publicise and raise support for Britain in the years before the US entered the war. But many in the-then US government and Congress were very against the British Empire, and were determined to destroy it. In this they succeeded. Let's hope they are still enjoying it. It's certainly costing them a lot more in dollars and lives than I suspect they ever imagined it would.

And that's why rationing continued in Britain long after May 1945. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

well maybe not. the anon contributor is not well informed....UK got $$$$ from the US: $31 billion from Lend Lease (not repaid), a 1946 Loan and --yes indeed--the Marshall Plan. It also got Canadian $$. It was the heavy drain caused by the British nationalization of industry (the owners were bought out by the Treasury) & its deep involvement in Greece, India and elsewhere that UK could not afford. Furthermore the US spend very large sums of dollars in defending the British Empire -- as in SouthEast Asia and ANZUS -- that Britain never was asked to repay. Rjensen (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually in return for Lend-Lease goods the US was given 99-year leases on British bases around the world that for the most part it is still using. So that's hardly something for nothing. AFAIK none of the other recipients of Lend-Lease ever gave anything much in return. BTW, that's why it was called "Lend-Lease"

And in addition the UK gave the US almost all of it's various technological advances such as radar, the jet engine etc., for the most part for nothing. Free. How much do you think all that was worth in dollars.

As for the US spending $ in defending the far east, well the British and Commonwealth did most of the fighting there and despite what many might have been led to believe, the majority of the Imperial Japanese Army was actually fighting in the Far East, Burma, Singapore, and Malaya, not in the Pacific, so the British and Commonwealth took on most of the enemy's land army that the US would otherwise have been facing elsewhere. The IJA losses in Burma were greater than its losses everywhere else combined. How many American lives in the Pacific do you think that saved.

Britain and her Empire went into what became the Second World War because they were making a stand against a nasty evil regime, that was bent on world domination, not because they could make money out of it. And they didn't wait for war to be declared on them either, they made a stand and went to war voluntarily, which neither the US nor USSR did. Then in 1940 her so-called 'Allies' surrendered, leaving Britain and her Empire to fight Nazisim alone.

So THAT's why Britain came out of the Second World War bankrupt and needing rationing long after everyone else had recovered from the war. People could perhaps be forgiven for thinking the British shouldn't have bothered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Merge request

The requested merge was with an article which takes the form of a page copied verbatim from an uncredited source. As this is a potential (and very likely) copyright violation I've deleted the offending article and redirected the topic to this one. Chris Cunningham 13:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism

This section:

"Establishments known as "British Restaurants" supplied another almost universal experience of eating away from home. British Restaurants were run by local authorities, who set them up in a variety of different premises such as schools and church halls. They evolved from the LCC’s Londoners’ Meals Service which originated in September 1940 as a temporary, emergency system for feeding those who had been bombed out. By mid-1941 the LCC was operating two hundred of these restaurants. Here a three course meal cost only 9d. Standards varied, but the best were greatly appreciated and had a large regular clientele.

is almost entirely taken from here with some re-ordering of sentences, without the source being credited or quoted. Crana 00:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

End of rationing in UK

Rationing ended in 1954 (not 1953) - and I don't mean bananas. See for more detail of what came off coupons and when see http://www.worldwar2exraf.co.uk/Online%20Museum/Museum%20Docs/foodrationpage5.html Norvo 19:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

New Request / Conversation

I'm placing this request here, since it is the most recent entry:

Does the author or any other party have a source for the following?

"At the beginning of World War II, the UK imported 55 million tons of foodstuffs per year (70%), including more than 50% of its meat, 70% of its cheese and sugar, nearly 80% of fruits and about 90% of cereals and fats. It was one of the principal strategies of the Axis to attack shipping bound for the UK, restricting British industry and potentially starving the nation into submission (see Battle of the Atlantic)."

I'm in the midst of my dissertation, and could certainly benefit from the document from which this passage was culled.

Something else that wasn't rationed

According to my mother, who claims to have eaten it, whale meat was not rationed (I am guessing because it was easier to get a large supply from a single animal.) Does anyone know if this was the case? Apparently only the poor familiies, like my mother's, ate it. 99.246.21.226 (talk) 18:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep it's true, I found a reference to it too. I might add it to the article. BaseTurnComplete (talk) 21:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I can remember a big publicity drive to get people to eat it 81.152.64.93 (talk) 12:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Additional rationing to the article

I seem to remember that coal, oil, petrol and parafin were also rationed and that there were certain restrictions on some public transport. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.110.236 (talk) 00:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Additional rationing to the article

Coal, oil, petrol and parafin were also rationed and that there were certain restrictions on some public transport. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.110.236 (talk) 00:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Onions

I have removed "onions" from the list of rationed foods. The only detailed source cited for this article, Ina Zweiniger-Bargielowska: Austerity in Britain: Rationing, Controls and Consumption, 1939-1955, not only does not mention onions but says explicitly that (apart from a short-lived "potato control scheme" after the war), "perishable fresh foods such as fish, fruit and vegetables were never rationed and only loosely controlled". The date when onions were added to the list is perhaps significant: 1 April 2006. JohnCD (talk) 15:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

This is an old post, I know, but for future reference the BBC series The Wartime Kitchen and Garden (part 1) offers the answer. At about 8 minutes 13 seconds in (from the beginning), the narrator explains that onions didn't grow very well in the UK and were usually from warmer climates, such as France. He continues, saying that they disappeared from the shops entirely. For this reason, there were no rations because there were no onions for sale. You either grew your own, if you were lucky enough to be able to do so, or you didn't have them at all. MagnoliaSouth ^(talk) 16:54, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Free Issues

As well as milk powder, concentrated orange juice was issued. (Was lovely on Shrove Tuesday pancakes :-) ) 81.152.64.93 (talk) 12:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Possible vandalism?

Can someone explain the following line to me?

'Fruit was banned in the UK by Queen Victoria and to this day the ban has not been rescinded'

Unless I am missing something (big) this is not true and probably vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.59.243 (talk) 21:55, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

End of rationing

From the timeline section: "Sweet rationing ended in February 1953, and sugar rationing ended in September 1954, however the end of all food rationing did not come until 4 July 1954, with meat the last to go."

So sugar isn't considered a food, or is there a wrong date in there somewhere? --Helenalex (talk) 09:51, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

It was September 1953 for sugar. I've added a reference (to the Imperial War Museum website). Si Trew (talk) 19:20, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Paper rationing

I don't see any mention of the effects on print media. In fact no mention of paper rationing whatsoever. I know that a lot of comics and I'm guessing other magazines ended at around 18 May 1940, die to paper rationing. It also caused others to fold or reduce page count later on. Digifiend (talk) 23:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Good point. I'll see if I can drag some figures out of the Home Front Handbook. Orwell was always moaning about it, too, and in a few places might give actual figures. I think his essay Books vs Cigarettes for example, but I will have to check. Somewhere he gives the total tonnage given to newspapers, books etc and (interestingly) the Admiralty or the War Office, I forget which, but which swamps all the rest put together. I imagine Orwell would be considered RS (and is certainly V). Si Trew (talk) 08:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I've mislaid my copy, as usual. I'll find it some time. Si Trew (talk) 08:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I found it and have added some figures, but there's not much in there. I know it's somewhere in Orwell, but the editions I have now of the Essays don't have an index. Si Trew (talk) 19:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Found it.

"In Mr Stanley Unwin's recent pamphlet Publishing in Peace and War, some interesting facts are given about the quantities of paper allotted by the Government for various purposes. Here are the present figures:-

Newspapers	250,000 tons
H. M. Stationery Office	200,000 "
Periodicals	(nearly) 50,000 "
Books	22,000 "

A particularly interesting detail is that out of the 100,000 tons alloted to the Stationery Office, the War Office gets no less than 25,000 tons, or more than the whole of the book trade put together."

Something wrong here in this extract from Publishing in Peace and War. None of the above figures add up. Not least: One line says the Stationery Office has 200,000 tons and then in the same section it says 100,000 tons?. It doesn't make sense.BeckenhamBear (talk) 06:52, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

@BeckenhamBear: I finally got around to fixing this, five and a half years later (it should be 100,000 in the table). I kept seeing it in my new(ish) copy of the collected essays but never had a chance to bookmark it! Perhaps it was a misprint in the copy I had before, since it seemed odd to me too and I think I double-checked to make sure I copied it verbatim. Si Trew (talk) 08:09, 31 January 2016 (UTC) (bad ping) Si Trew (talk) 08:12, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Ersatz Apple Crumble

Why is apple crumble described as ersatz? Carrot Cake, perhaps, although it's perfectly agreeable to eat. Seems odd to me. Rob Burbidge (talk) 22:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Because it was a substitute for a proper apple pie (it saved on the fat and flour that would have made the layer of pastry below the apple.) MidlandLinda (talk) 11:46, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Rations

During WWII, rationing was introduced in many countries, including Britain, the Commonwealth nations, and the USA.

In January 1940, the British Ministry of Food restricted the sale of imported goods like tea, coffee, sugar, tobacco, chocolate and fruit. Clothing rations were introduced a year later.

Other imported goods were also rationed, like petrol, textiles, and even soap.

The British Isles were essentially under siege. German submarine attacks on merchant navy ships crossing the Atlantic meant that supplies weren’t getting through. The basis of rationing was to ensure that the population wouldn’t be starved into submission. It wasn’t popular, but the sacrifice was necessary for survival.

Each family was awarded a weekly limit - including the Royal Family. Ration books containing coupons were issued and families were required to register with a local shopkeeper in order to receive their rations.

Rations were subjected to strict price controls and even having the money didn’t mean you could get what you wanted. Consequently, a black market flourished to meet the public demand.

Rationing in Britain finally ended in 1954 – almost a decade after the Allied victory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.85.217 (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

1973

Was rationing introduced in 1973? It seems clear it was considered ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2004/jan/01/uk.past ) and the three-day week (maximum of three days' electricity for business per week) could be seen as a form of rationing too. 86.180.132.215 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:47, 26 November 2011 (UTC).

No, rationing was not introduced, but it was seriously considered and when I was a Science Student Assistant working at AERE Harwell and living in Reading I was issued with ration coupons for road fuel. I still have them somewhere.

Ged Haywood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.136.94 (talk) 22:39, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Rabbit

I have heard mention from sources that Rabbit was also not rationed during the war. In many areas this was a mainstay for topping up the meat ration and was often "poached" for for personal consumption and for resale/barter to others. Does anyone have any sources for this?

81.174.240.178 (talk) 19:40, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Possible copying of non-free copyright source

The section 'British Restaurants' closely matches the extract available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/War/londonRation.html, which lists that this material is copyrighted. Not sure if that might be a violation of Wikipedia rules. Adrian Dakota (talk) 17:01, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

right----I rewrote it to solve the problem. Rjensen (talk) 07:26, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

"one course could contain meat or fish or poultry (but not both)"

I think that needs clarifying. You can't have 'both' of three. Peridon (talk) 18:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Found an explanation further down the page. Now sorted. Peridon (talk) 18:35, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

typo

"ordering a red dye to be to put into some petrol" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.149.221 (talk) 08:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Why does "pool petrol" redirect to this page...

...when the article says absolutely nothing about it? I've scanned all the way through, used the browser's search function, and found zilch. Going to have to go back to google and see what I can find there. Might want to nix that redirect unless/until something's actually added. 37.152.224.232 (talk) 03:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Try this [1] Bevo74 (talk) 18:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Rations in 1941

Hi all, I am new here so please be gentle! I have found this piece in Hansard dated 1941. It gives the scale of rations in 1941 for civilians, members of the army stationed at home (both men and women) and sea men under articles. It also gives additional rations for certain occupational classes and for invalids. I think it would make a good addition to the article. What do you think? In case you are wondering why the meat ration for male soldiers is at variance on the table I have created to the one on the web, I think this was due to the way the paper was scanned, as I have found other articles which confirm 12 Oz of meat per day

Civilian and Army allowances of rationed food per week (15th September, 1941)

Food	Civilian rations	Army rations Home Service Scale (Men)	Army rations Home Service Scale (Women)	Seamen on weekly articles
Meat	1s. 2d. adult, 7d. child under six.	84 Oz (2.38 Kg)	42 Oz (1.19 Kg)	35 Oz (0.99 Kg)
Bacon and Ham (uncooked, free of bone)	4 Oz (113g)	8 Oz (226g)	9 Oz (255g)	8 Oz (226g)
Butter and margarine	6 Oz (170g) (not more than 2 Oz (56g) butter)	13¼ Oz (375g)(in any proportions of butter and margarine)	10½ Oz (297g) (margarine only)	10½ Oz (297g) (not more than 3½ Oz (99g) butter)
Cheese	3 Oz (85g)	4 Oz (113g)	4 Oz (113g)	4 Oz (113g)
Cooking fats	2 Oz (56g) (may be taken in the form of margarine)	2 Oz (56g) (may be taken in the form of margarine)	-	-
Sugar	8 Oz (226g)	30 Oz (850g)	14 Oz (396g)	14 Oz(396g)
Tea	2 Oz (56g)	4 Oz (113g)	2 Oz (56g)	2 Oz (56g)
Preserves	16 Oz (453g) per 4 weeks (jam, marmalade, syrup or treacle)	8 Oz (226g) jam 2 Oz (56g) syrup	7 Oz (198g) (10½ Oz (297g) for boys and young soldiers battalions) (jam, marmalade or syrup)	10½ Oz (297g) (jam, marmalade, syrup)

Special civilian rations.

Persons falling within the following descriptions are allowed 8 Oz. of cheese per week in place of the general ration of 3 Oz.:—

vegetarians (meat and bacon coupons must be surrendered), underground mine workers, agricultural workers holding unemployment insurance books or cards bearing stamps marked "Agriculture ", county roadmen, forestry workers (including fellers and hauliers), land drainage workers (including Catchment Board workers), members of the Auxiliary Force of the Women's Land Army, railway train crews (including crews of shunting engines but not including dining car staffs), railway signalmen and permanent way men who have not access to canteen facilities, and certain types of agricultural industry workers (workers employed on threshing machines, tractor workers who are not included in the Agricultural Unemployment Insurance Stamp Scheme, hay pressers and trussers).

Weekly Supplementary allowances of rationed foods for invalids.

Disease	Food Supplementary allowance	Quantity	Coupons to be surrendered
Diabetes	Butter and margarine	12 Oz (340g) (not more than 4 Oz (113g) Butter)	Sugar
Diabetes	Meat	2s. 4d., adult 1s, 2d., child under six	Sugar
Diabetes—vegetarians only	Cheese	8 Oz (226g)	Sugar
Hypoglycaemia	Sugar	16 Oz (435g)	-
Steatorrhoea	Meat	4s. 8d., adult, 2s. 4d., child under six	Butter and Margarine
Nephritis with gross albuminuria and gross oedema, also nephrosis	Meat	3s. 6d. adult, 1s. 9d. child under six	-

Tallmale188 (talk) 20:04, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rationing in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100701125635/http://www.iwm.org.uk:80/server/show/ConWebDoc.2498 to http://www.iwm.org.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.2498

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Who are Palmer, Morrow and Beckett

I've been going through tidying the references a bit. We have one each to Palmer (1992), Morrow (2005) and two to Beckett (2007). However the name and date of publication are all that is given as a reference, which is not very helpful. Does anyone know a fuller reference for these? Si Trew (talk) 08:05, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

They're all in section Rationing_in_the_United_Kingdom#World_War_I. I've marked them all as {{clarification needed}}. Si Trew (talk) 08:37, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

It's a product of poor quality footnoting. The citations are to Alan Warwick Palmer and ‎Veronica Palmer, The chronology of British history (1992) p 355-56; Ian Beckett, The Home Front 1914-1918: How Britain Survived the Great War (2006). and John Morrow, The Great War: An Imperial History (2005) p 202. Rjensen (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Minor grammatical correction required.

In section "1970s oil crises"

"Petrol coupons were issued for a short time during the in preparation for ..."

I'd do it myself but the page is locked.

Ged Haywood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.136.94 (talk) 22:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorted. Cheers for pointing that out Ged. Irondome (talk) 22:49, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

1974 sugar rationing

Might be worth adding this.[2] 60.242.1.97 (talk) 06:44, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

no. there was no government rationing: some large stores limited amounts on sale to stop hoarding. Rjensen (talk) 06:50, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rationing in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120611020116/http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/HOMEWORK/war/rationing3.html to http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/homework/war/rationing3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Brexit

Needs added: In 2018 it was revealed in leaked documents that the UK government had ordered secret plans be drawn for rationing food, medicines, and petrol post Brexit. https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/no-deal-brexit-food-shortages_uk_5b13a7f7e4b02143b7cd1b27 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.239.24 (talk) 22:16, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Several times?

The article states that rationing was introduced temporarily by the British government several times during the 20th century, during and immediately after a war but then lists precisely three occasions when it was actually used: WWI, WWII and the Suez Crisis. Though WWII and postwar rationing may feature prominently in the popular imagination, that is not 'several times'.

One could of course add the 1973 oil crisis to that list. Electricity supplies were rationed and television stations were ordered to cease transmitting after 10pm. As I recall fuel supplies to private and commercial vehicle owners were severely cut, and in addition de facto power rationing was enforced by power cuts. I would need to check if this was due to purely Government action or as a combination of the simulataneously occuring industrial action which affected the UK during the winter of 73-4. I think this period would qualify for the list. It certainly affected public consciousness in a more recent way than the 1945-54 austerity period. Every 50-something in the UK vividly remembers the period and the crisis atmosphere it engendered I would suggest. Simon Adler (talk) 03:31, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Meat rationing in Great Britain in World War 2

The meat ration in Great Britain was 1s and 10p per week, later reduced to 1s and 2d. This has been queried, as the ration is given as a monetary amount rather than as a weight of meat. The use of a money value is historically correct. <How the Ministry of Food managed food rationing in World War Two, Terry Charman, 2018>. In practice, it was left up to the consumer to choose what quality of meat he/she wished to purchase. So, they could choose a small portion of a high-quality cut such as steak; or, by opting for a lower value cut such as neck, or offal, they could buy more weight with their ration. Richard2atkinson (talk) 16:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

What about non-citizens living and working in the UK at the time?

I'm not asking about something like troops from other nations but just people, in general. One example that comes to mind are foreign correspondents. Many Americans were living there, reporting from London. Were they issued ration books from the consulates? I've tried to find information but cannot. The Homefront Handbook is no longer online and honestly, I don't even know if this is even addressed in it. MagnoliaSouth ^(talk) 17:12, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, prior to the pre-D-Day buildup of US and Commonwealth forces in the UK, all legally present persons - including members of the US military - were eligible for British supplied rations. This included consular and embassy staff as well as the US Navy convoy liaison personnel in the UK prior to 1943/44. This is sourced from 'The London Journal of General Raymond E. Lee' ed/ James Leutze (1971, Little Brown & Co). Gen. Lee was the US military attache in London between 1937 and December 1941.

I'm pretty sure 'consulates' wouldn't have had the authority to issue British government ration cards. Most likely, these were issued through usual British channels.

The small number of US military units present in the UK prior to the D-Day ops were fortunate in being able to wangle US Army rations as well as British civilian rations. 'The Codebreakers' ed. Harry Hinsley describes a US Army Signal Corps intercept outfit near Bletchley Park which worked very hard to conceal the abundance of their double food supply.

The food demands of US forces gathering in the UK in 1944 were too great to be supplied from overseas; consequently those US units also received very substantial provisioning from British sources. That formed part of the $7.5bn "Reverse Lend-Lease" package of British war aid supplied to the US in WW2 - petroleum products, critical and strategic industrial materials (metals, mica, quartz e.g.), fibre, rubber, foodstuffs, munitions, fighting ships and technology. Lend-Lease was NOT a loan and the US was not required to pay for these supplies. 81.155.74.65 (talk) 12:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Conflicting dates on end of clothes rationing.

In the body of the text under Non-Food rationing, it says that clothing rationing ended on 15 March 1949. In the timeline, it says that it ended in May 1949. The proximate (but not specific) citations are books that are not accessible online.Merry medievalist (talk) 18:02, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit request 8 May 2020 File:Food_rationing_ends.jpg

File:Food_rationing_ends.jpg should be speedily removed from the article as a likely hoax. Have literally never seen a left-facing, banner-waving 'happy lion' in silhouette (as appearing on the top of the circle with the words 'Food Rationing Ends' inside), produced in this country by anyone British, and could actually be definitively dated back to the 1950s. This was obviously a piece or fragment of computer-generated modern graphic instead. 194.207.146.167 (talk) 01:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: There is more information about the image at Commons:File:Food rationing ends.jpg. You may want to start the discussion about the authenticity there. GoingBatty (talk) 01:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Causes

The article sets out in some detail the actual mechanics of rationing but doesn't provide context for why it was introduced - principally freeing shipping for war materials and ensuring minimum diet. GraemeLeggett (talk) 07:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)