§ 25. Sir B. Rhys Williamsasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by what amounts the exchange rate between the £ sterling and the United States dollar 236 declined in each of the periods up to the present day since 1913, 1929, 1939 and 1947, expressed as an average annual movement at compound rates.
§ Mr. Harold LeverOn the basis of the parity—or for 1939, the fixed rate—at the end of each of the four years in question the average annual downward movement to the end of 1968 at compound rates was 1.28 per cent., 1.80 per cent., 1.77 per cent. and 2.44 per cent.
§ Sir B. Rhys WilliamsAre not these figures so small as to prove that, if we had had a flexible system of exchange rates for sterling during this period, the annual variations would have been so small as to be quite manageable?
§ Mr. LeverThe figures can be taken to prove anything hon. Members wish them to prove. Without these flexible rates, the world has prospered exceedingly, as my right hon. Friend has just said.
Mr. Gresham CookeIs it not better to have no decline in the £ at all as compared with the dollar? Could that not be achieved if these very large adverse visible trade balances were put on one side for a time? Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that we had the biggest adverse trade balance in 1968—as big as that of 1951?
§ Mr. LeverChanging parities as between one country and another are, or should be, a function of the development of world trade. One cannot argue for the need for reasonable flexibility in these parities on the one hand and, on the other, urge that they should never change in a manner adverse to one particular country.