§ 22. Mr. Martenasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his latest round of talks with the representatives of the International Monetary Fund.
§ Mr. Harold LeverNo, Sir. These discussions were confidential, as usual.
§ Mr. MartenIn view of the further standby, can the Financial Secretary say how frequently the I.M.F. will be examining our economy? Have not the Government now got themselves into the classic position of all defaulting bankrupts, of not being master in their own house?
§ Mr. LeverI can best answer the hon. Gentleman by stating three facts: first, the Government is not a defaulter; secondly, it is not bankrupt; and, thirdly, it is master in its own house.
§ Sir W. Bromley-DavenportOh, dear. Write that down!
§ Mr. DickensIs my hon. Friend aware of the deep anxieties that are felt by many people about rumours of negotiations that are going on in Washington which may have extremely far-reaching repercussions on the future of the British economy and the well-being of the British people? Will he undertake to give to the House at the earliest possible opportunity a clear statement, if possible during this week, on the progress that is being made in those negotiations?
§ Mr. LeverI understand perfectly the anxieties of my hon. Friend and other hon. Members. I have already given a firm pledge that any letter of intent will be published. I invite my hon. Friend to show a little patience and to wait until he has some facts, rather than excited newspaper headlines, on which to judge the matter.
§ Sir G. NabarroAt a time when the British people are being subjected to appalling hardships of credit squeeze and additional taxation, is it right that the hon. Gentleman's visit to Washington should have been conducted in conditions purporting to be of the greatest secrecy and without any public announcement having been made, so that one must read the newspapers to learn of his movements?
§ Mr. LeverThe answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is that the British people are enjoying the highest standard of life in their experience—
§ Sir G. NabarroThat's a good one.
§ Mr. Lever—as well as the best public services in their experience.
The answer to the second part is that it was not a secret visit. It was an unannounced visit, which is quite a different matter. [Interruption.] There was nothing secret about my movements I moved about freely in Washington without any attempt at concealment. The reason why no announcement was made was because of the exceedingly sensitive state of the currency markets and because it might have been thought that my visit was for purposes other than those on which I was actually engaged.
§ Mr. Iain MacleodThe Financial Secretary referred to "excited newspaper headlines". Is he aware that a Treasury spokesman was quoted on the one o'clock news as having said that there had been discussions abcut "appropriate undertakings from the British Government"? In that event, why could not the House of Commons be informed of the position? Will he give the clearest undertaking that a full statement will be made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the House at the earliest possible moment?
§ Mr. LeverHad I not been otherwise engaged, I might have heard that news bulletin and the quotation from the wireless to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, although it does not sound to me like a precisely accurate transposition of the words that a Treasury spokesman would use. I therefore do not consider that any undertaking is required in that respect.
I have already given a pledge that the House will have the letter of intent and that it will be published as soon as it is appropriate to do so. [Interruption.] I assure hon. Members that the newspaper headlines which they have been reading do not bear an accurate relationship to reality.
§ Mr. Michael FootIn view of the strong opposition that existed to a previous letter of intent that was issued by the Government, and in order to protect 1209 the supremacy of Parliament, cannot my hon. Friend give a clear undertaking that there will be a debate in the House on any undertakings before any letter of intent is dispatched?
§ Mr. LeverMy hon. Friend is assuming that there are undertakings in the letter of intent. I am, of course, not free to discuss the discussions which are being undertaken with the I.M.F. These are, and always have been, confidential and could not be satisfactorily conducted on any other basis. I can only add that nothing that takes away from the Chancellor's judgment has been or will be undertaken to any outside body and that the supremacy of Parliament is not in question. [HON. MEMBERS: "It is."] Neither the Chancellor nor any Treasury Minister has any authority to do anything save with the assent, approval and support of the majority of this House.
§ Mr. LubbockMeanwhile, before the letter of intent is published, may we know if any undertakings have been given to the I.M.F. about the sacking of the Home Secretary from the Inner Cabinet?
§ Mr. LeverWhile juvenile inference prevails, it might as well extend to that area, too, for those who like juvenile inferences.
§ Mr. BarnettWould my hon. Friend now give the assurance which his right hon. Friend would not give—that no undertaking will be given for there to be a further squeeze other than that which the Chancellor himself outlined in his Budget strategy?
§ Mr. LeverI assure the House that any strategy undertaken by the Chancellor will be the strategy of the Chancellor, in consultation with his Treasury Ministers and the Government, and not a strategy undertaken from any other source whatever.