HL Deb 19 July 1965 vol 268 cc452-5

2.46 p.m.

Lord CONESFORD

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government on what date they learnt that the alleged saboteurs in the City, to whom Lord Stonham referred in his speech at Swaffham on July 10, 1965, were delaying the receipt of sums due to them in foreign currency; and on what date the Treasury took the necessary action under Section 24 of the Exchange Control Act, 1947, to bring these delays to an end.]

Lord SHEPHERD

My Lords, in his speech my noble friend was referring to the practice technically known as "leading and lagging". The published figures for the balance of payments in the first quarter of 1965 indicate that there was probably some leading and lagging, adverse to sterling, in the timing of commercial payments. I am advised that before the Treasury can take action under Section 24 of the Exchange Control Act, 1947, firm evidence is required of positive action to delay recovery of a debt.

Lord CONESFORD

My Lords, may I thank the Minister for his Answer and ask him whether he is aware that the specific charge that I quote in my Question was made by the noble Lord, Lord Stonham, and was contained in the Press handout of his speech? Does the noble Lord, Lord Shepherd, mean by the last part of his Answer that no case at all was known to Her Majesty's Government in which action could have been taken by the Treasury, as it could have been taken if these charges were proved? Does he agree in those circumstances that the charge was wholly without foundation?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, if the noble Lord had listened to my Answer to his Question, he would have realised that my noble friend was substantially correct and that there had been lagging and leading, and that this had been adverse to sterling. In regard to the second part of his Question as to what action the Treasury could take in this matter, I again made it clear that action can be taken only where there is clear evidence that a company has deliberately refrained from collecting a debt. No doubt a good deal of what has occurred is due to the fact that companies have not pressed for payment, but it has the same results. In those circumstances I am advised that it would not be possible, and indeed I think it would be unwise, to take action under this section.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the section does not apply only to companies but applies also to any individual, and that there is nothing to stop the Treasury, if the Treasury think that a debt is not being collected promptly enough, having the debt transferred to themselves? Does the noble Lord's answer mean that there was no case at all known to Her Majesty's Government in which this section could have been operated? If so, does he think it was right for his noble friend to refer to "saboteurs in the City" when there was no justification for it?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, the noble Lord will be aware that the Treasury have powers to collect information and to take any necessary action. At the present moment, the Government think that it would be wrong to set in motion considerable examination of public books and papers and letters in this matter, but my noble friend was right, in that there has been leading and lagging which is adverse to sterling. My noble friend used the phrase "saboteurs in the City", by which I presume he meant those people who were failing to take action in the national interest.

LORD BROWN

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the implication of this Question is totally misleading? Is he aware that a large number of the decisions which determine the rate of repatriation of foreign currency to this country are entirely discretionary?

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, would it be possible for the noble Lord, in replying to his noble friend, to recommend him to read the section of the Act to which I have drawn attention?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, I think the noble Lord, Lord Conesford, was out of order in that matter. My noble friend should remember that at the present moment we wish the fullest co-operation of all, whether they be companies or individuals, to help in this matter of the balance of payments. That is what the Government wish, and that is one of the reasons why we do not wish to bring Section 24 into immediate effect.

LORD HILTON OF UPTON

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the speech which is the subject of this Question was made in my home town before a very large audience, none of whom took exception to the speech made by my noble friend, and could the noble Lord who raised this Question now lay his hand on his heart and declare that since last October the City has always given full support to Her Majesty's Government?

THE EARL OF MANSFIELD

My Lords, would it not be better if Her Majesty's Government were to censor in advance irresponsible statements made by junior Ministers?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, I think that many people in the political field are becoming a little bit thin-skinned. If some took exception to the speech of my noble friend, perhaps they will understand the exception that we took to some speeches made last week-end.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, may I make it clear once more to the noble Lord that I take no exception whatsoever to this speech? I merely want to discover what, if anything, it meant. May I ask this final question? When the noble Lord says he has evidence of this practice, may I ask him whether there is one single example that Her Majesty's Government can quote where a "saboteur in the City" has delayed claiming the sums due to him in foreign currency?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, I suggest that the noble Lord looks at the answers I have given. He will see that there is clear evidence that there have been delays. At the present stage Her Majesty's Government do not think it right to bring into force Section 24; it is a very formidable section, and they are reluctant to do so.

LORD RUSSELL OF LIVERPOOL

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether this is another example of what appears to be a habit on the part of members of the Government, that what they say has little relation to what they mean?

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, that may be correct in the view of the noble Lord.