THE WHOLE, NOT THE PART

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 121, 18 November 1932, Page 8

THE WHOLE, NOT THE PART

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —A year ago we were'in the throes of a- controversy on this subject. The fundamentals of the question are unchanged, but the position has alter-, ed a little. But it has altered in the direction that there are loss grounds for raising the rate to-day than there were a year ago. The import and export figures prove that, so there is no need to reiterate.the arguments. There is no room for argument. The facts are incontrovertible. The bankers are against it, and they should know. What are the banks going to do with excess London funds if bought at 25 or 30 per cent? They will need our Government guarantee'against loss, and the people of this country will pay not" only higher prices for their imports, but will b© called upon to make up the loss on the surplus exchange. The banks cannot be expected to bear this loss. If they are forced to buy exchange at "high prices, and cannot sell all they buy, they will naturally require the Government to make good the loss. Why! Even at 10~ per cent, the banks have more money than they can sell. They will be able to sell less if the exchange rate is raised! Why cannot the Prime Minister definitely end this uncertainty. The continued reopening of this subject is disastrous to business. What we need is a Government that has the courage to do what it knows is right. Mr. Forbes has been told by, the' banks "that the raising of the exchange rate is unjustified. Let him do what he must know is right and in the best interests of the country as a whole, and not merely one section.—l am, etc.,

MEECHANT.