§ Q6. Mr. Ridleyasked the Prime Minister why he turned down the offer of an international loan, with conditions, as an alternative to devaluation.
§ The Prime MinisterI made it clear that a substantial part of any international finance made available to safeguard the old parity would be on a short-term basis only. Any longer-term accommodation could have meant much more stringent terms than any British Government could accept.
§ Mr. RidleyWhy, then, did not the Chancellor of the Exchequer say on 20th November that offers of this loan were made but that there were no conditions attached to these? Will he also say what conditions could be attached to any loan which could have been more onerous than the conditions eventually accepted when the final loan was accepted?
§ The Prime MinisterThe answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary lies in his question—on the difference between very short-term accommodation, which is no solution and which would not have had conditions attached, and that part which, if the short-term loan was rejected and if it was all International Monetary Fund borrowing—far greater than our drawing rights—they would have had the right to ask for far more stringent conditions. The hon. Gentleman can use his own imagination to see what conditions might have been laid down in re- 1088 gard to, for example, public expenditure programmes and taxation programmes laid down by this House, which no Government could or would have accepted.
§ Mr. DickensDoes my right hon. Friend intend to consult with Mr. Schweitzer and the I.M.F. on the details of the current review of Government expenditure, and will Mr. Schweitzer's approval have to be sought before they are announced to this House?
§ The Prime MinisterThe answer to the first part of that question is, "No, Sir", and the answer to the second part is, "No, Sir".