HC Deb 16 April 1953 vol 514 cc352-4
13. Mr. Callaghan

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will reverse his advice to the banks that loans to finance houses and other private persons for the purpose of buying lorries from the Road Haulage Executive may be given the same priority as loans for export, defence, agriculture and Commonwealth development, in view of the present restrictions on borrowing.

Mr. Maudling

No, Sir. The general priorities which the banks have been asked to apply in accordance with the Government's credit policy remain unchanged. They have been told that the provision of credit for the purchase of assets from the Road Haulage Executive, in accordance with the Bill now before Parliament, will be regarded as consistent with Government policy. It must, of course, be left to the banks themselves to decide whether to provide facilities for individual customers.

Mr. Callaghan

Does this mean that the United Dominions Trust and other finance houses are to have credit facilities, which are better than those given to normal businessmen who wish to expand their enterprises, merely for the sake of breaking up the Road Haulage Executive?

Mr. Maudling

My answer was carefully phrased to explain the position of Government credit policy; but I think that the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends tend to ignore the difference in economic significance between a transfer of assets and their associated finance and the creation of new assets and new finance.

Mr. Callaghan

Does not this mean that upwards of £100 million have to be raised by the banks to finance this purchase? Will not that be directly in competition with other businesses which want credit facilities for doing jobs that are really necessary?

Mr. Maudling

The whole point of my previous reply was to explain that that is completely inaccurate.

Mr. H. Morrison

Is this not a case where Government influence over credit facilities is being deliberately used for party political purposes? Is this not a case where credit is restricted over a wide field of normal business, but is being relaxed to suit nothing short of the party political purposes of Her Majesty's Government?

Mr. Maudling

Before the right hon. Gentleman makes these party points I am sure that, wishing to be fair, as he always does, he will study what I said about the economic difference between the transfer of assets which are already financed and the creation of new assets which need new finance.

Mr. Lee

Is it not a fact that the Government have already publicly announced that they will sell these important national assets at knock-down prices? Now that the Government are giving this most favourable treatment, why not be honest and give them all away?

Mr. Maudling

I would hardly regard that as a question, but as a statement which is wholly inaccurate.

Mr. Callaghan

Does the hon. Gentleman really regard the transfer of these assets, which must involve the raising of money in the City by someone, as being of equivalent importance to dollar exports?

Mr. Maudling

That is an entirely misleading point. The hon. Gentleman is perfectly aware—or he will be if he studies my answer, and I ask him to try to understand it—of the difference between the transfer of existing assets and the creation of new assets and new finance.

Mr. Callaghan

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that the Earl of Selkirk, as Government spokesman in another place. said that the transfer of assets will be given the same degree of priority as exports which may secure dollars?

Hon. Members

Answer.

Mr. Speaker

Order. We cannot debate this matter now.