HC Deb 02 April 1953 vol 513 cc1352-3
31. Mr. Stokes

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can now make a statement on representations made at the recent conference in Washington on the urgent necessity of revaluing gold in terms of dollars.

Mr. Maudling

No, Sir.

Mr. Stokes

As the question of balance of payments must have been considered at that conference, may I ask if it is not a fact that had the price of gold been allowed to vary in terms of dollars in proportion to commodities in the United States of America, the sterling area would have been in balance with the dollar area every year since 1945? Surely the Government can tell us something about it?

Mr. Maudling

The Washington discussions covered a wide range of financial and economic subjects, but I am afraid I cannot add anything to the statements that have been made.

Mr. Stokes

The Chancellor keeps saying that. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the cost of producing this valuable metal is now so high that no one can afford to do it? Does not that make humbug of the whole situation?

Mr. Maudling

People still seem to be producing it. I agree as to the importance of this subject, but I think that if the right hon. Member will reflect on some of the monetary implications, he will also see the great importance of them.

Mr. Stokes

I have been reflecting for years about this and cannot get any sense out of Her Majesty's Government. Can the hon. Gentleman say when the Chancellor will tell us what happened about this matter at the Commonwealth Conference and in Washington?

Mr. Gaitskell

In order to satisfy my right hon. Friend, will the hon. Gentleman be a little less coy on this matter? Cannot we have a full and frank statement from the Government and a reply to my right hon. Friend; I am sure we should all enjoy it?

Mr. Maudling

I think that the right hon. Member should not confuse discretion with coyness.