HC Deb 25 June 1957 vol 572 cc12-4
21. Mr. Cronin

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the level of the gold and dollar reserve at the beginning of June, 1957, disregarding increments due to the sale of British assets and withdrawals from the International Monetary Fund.

Mr. P. Thorneycroft

No, Sir. It is not clear what assets the hon. Member has in mind or what period he would wish the calculation to cover, but in any case, as my right hon. Friend the Economic Secretary told the right hon. Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson) on 4th April, it is misleading to exclude particular kinds of receipts from the reserves without also excluding particular kinds of expenditure. Reserve movements can only be properly interpreted in the light of the full range of balance of payments statistics which is published half yearly.

Mr. Cronin

Is not the right hon. Gentleman's Answer somewhat disingenuous? Is not he aware that the real value of the reserve is about $800 million less than was indicated at the beginning of this month? Is not he also aware that there is an impression in the Press this month that the gold and dollar reserve is in a satisfactory state, whereas the real position is that it has deteriorated severely in the last year?

Mr. Thorneycroft

Of course, if one tries to deduct all the receipts and leaves in all the payments, the figure comes out less satisfactorily than otherwise.

Mr. H. Wilson

Yes, but is there any real reason for the Chancellor being so coy about it, when the whole world knows what the figures are? If the Chancellor were to deduct from the present level of the reserve the Trinidad Oil sales, the sales of U.S. Bonds in November last, the borrowings from the International Monetary Fund, including the Indian borrowings, does not he agree that the present level of the gold and dollar reserve would be lower than it was at the time of devaluation in 1949?

Mr. Thorneycroft

I resisted giving the figures because I was being pressed to announce from the Box a figure of reserve which would be quoted by itself, and I was requested to arrive at it by deducting from it, first, all the receipts we had, and leaving in all the payments. That would give a false and damaging explanation of what is, in fact, a very much more satisfactory situation.

Mr. Wilson

But will the Chancellor tell us, if he refuses to deduct the receipts, what are the expenditure figures? Is he really trying to say to the House that any expenditure resulting from the Suez operation, costing this country about £275 million in dollars, should not be, taken into account in the reserve calculation?

Mr. Thorneycroft

No. I am saying that all factors in connection with the plus and minus sides should be taken into account and an honest figure published, as it is.