§ Mr. Sheldon (by Private Notice)asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the $1,000 million loan being negotiated with foreign banks.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. James Callaghan)I have been asked to reply.
§ Mr. RidsdaleOn a point of order. Is not the Prime Minister in charge of the economy? Could he not answer this Question?
§ Mr. SpeakerNo point of order arises at this moment. The Chancellor of the Exchequer.
§ Mr. Callaghan rose—
§ Sir Harmar NichollsOn a point of order—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I understand what the hon. Member for Peterborough (Sir Harmar Nicholls) is trying to do, but I have ruled that no point of order can arise about one Minister answering a Question addressed to another Minister.
§ Sir Harmar NichollsOn that point of order, Mr. Speaker. While it is common form and generally accepted, as it has been for years, that a Minister may ask another Minister to answer for him in his absence, is it proper, normally, or acceptable that someone else should answer when the Minister concerned is actually present?
§ Mr. SpeakerI am sorry that the hon. Member did not understand the Ruling I gave. The Chancellor of the Exchequer.
§ Mr. CallaghanI understood that the question was transferred to me.
The reply is, No, Sir. It would clearly be wrong for the Government either to confirm or to deny a Press rumour of this kind.
§ Mr. SheldonIs my right hon. Friend aware that almost the entire Press, if not the entire Press, has carried this story? Is he aware that what is particularly concerning hon. Members is the conditions likely to be attached to this loan, since, as the Financial Times put it, a loan of this size and duration is unlikely to be given without considerable conditions whatever may be said for the record and that if this leads to unemployment and lower levels of consumption and a lower standard of living and a wage freeze this measure will be totally unacceptable?
§ Mr. CallaghanI have been long enough in this House not to believe everything that I read in the Press, and I would advise my hon. Friend accordingly. So far as Her Majesty's Government are concerned, we shall take what decisions are appropriate in the light of our understanding of the needs of the British economy and no one else's. That, at this stage, certainly does not include the creation of any additional unemployment.
§ Mr. Iain MacleodWould not the right hon. Gentleman agree that continued uncertainty in this matter is the worst of all worlds? Subject to that, until these matters are finalised one way or another, when we would expect to have a full statement immediately in the House by the Government, is he aware that if negotiations are in progress I would not wish to comment?
§ Mr. CallaghanI am obliged to the right hon. Member for not wishing to 634 press me on a loan the conditions about which I have not said any discussion is at the moment taking place. I quite agree that uncertainty and rumour are bad for the exchanges and I hope that some of the speculators get their fingers burned. I did not start the rumours and I do not propose to comment on them. The Press must take full responsibility for anything it prints.
§ Mr. DickensIs the Chancellor aware that many hon. Members on this side of the House—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The House always wants to hear both sides.
§ Mr. DickensIs the Chancellor aware that some of us, at any rate, are totally opposed to—[An HON. MEMBER: "Everything."]—this country having further money from foreign bankers?
§ Mr. CallaghanYes, I understand my hon. Friend's point of view. I have no further comment to make.
§ Mr. ThorpeWhether or not there are negotiations under way, could the Chancellor say for how much longer the Government will rely upon borrowing to maintain confidence in the £? Is he aware that there is a general feeling that to sacrifice full employment and economic expansion for the sacred cow of sterling is something to which many people are opposed?
§ Mr. CallaghanThat does not arise out of my original Answer.
§ Mr. ShinwellDoes my right hon. Friend understand what all the fuss is about? Have we not been living on borrowed money for the last 20 years?
§ Mr. CallaghanYes, but quite recently we have been transferring from one form of obligation into another form.
§ Sir C. OsborneWill the Chancellor take the earliest opportunity available to confirm or to deny this rumour? Secondly, will he bear in mind that it would probably be better for the country if we borrowed no more money from abroad but decided to live on our own income?
§ Mr. CallaghanI understand that it is a long-standing practice of the House that Ministers are not expected to confirm or deny Press statements and hon. Members should not rely on them when putting their questions.
§ Mr. OrmeWould my right hon. Friend agree that if the difference is between a reduction in public expenditure at home, a wage freeze and the introduction of a regulator and devaluation, devaluation is preferable to those three things?
§ Mr. CallaghanI have nothing to add to or to subtract from anything I have said on previous occasions on the subject of devaluation and, in any case, it does not arise from my original Answer.
§ Mr. Stratton MillsThe Chancellor's original Answer is quite incredible. Will he clear up whether negotiations are or are not progressing? When he makes his statement, will he give full details of all the outstanding short-term loans which this country has incurred and which have not been revealed to the public?
§ Mr. CallaghanI have nothing to add to my original Answer.