Proceeding contribution from Lord Marlesford (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 5 March 2012. It occurred during Ministerial statement on European Council.
European Council
My Lords, can my noble friend the Leader expand a little on paragraph 26 of the Council conclusions on contributions to the IMF funds? I think I am right in saying that the G20 agreed that the amount of funds for the IMF should be reviewed; that the review came up with the need to double them and that this doubling would cost Britain about £10 billion, but that this £10 billion does not count as part of public spending because it is merely a guarantee rather than a cash payment. Am I right in thinking that HMG will be favourably disposed to playing their part—the part I have just described—in the increase in the IMF funds, assuming that 70 per cent minimum collaboration is achieved, but that if there was a special fund to rescue the eurozone by producing funds through the IMF, as is slightly referred to in paragraph 26, Britain would not contribute to that?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 735 c1635
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Digital technology Human rights Energy EU enlargement Humanitarian aid EU internal trade EU action EU external trade Economic and monetary union Economic growth Politics and government Regulation Violence Service industries Serbia Kosovo European Council Syria Somalia
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:44:59 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_814742
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_814742
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_814742