He was not referring to trade agreements; he was referring to the Bretton Woods agreement. He was discussing the Bretton Woods agreement at that time and saying that if they came under the agreement and got into difficulty, they could always withdraw, that, thank God, there was an exit.
I am suggesting that if we wait until they reach the point where they have exhausted their quota and are not able to meet their obligations, then they are going to be in a far more difficult situation than they would have been in if they had refused to go into it in the first place and adopted measures within the sterling bloc. The hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) stated the other day that we should have demanded security from Great Britain. I say to the hon. member that that would be altogether too crude. Public sentiment being what it is, there still being present the fervour of war, the people would not like it if we were to say to the United Kingdom, "We will give you this loan if you give us security, say in the form of some of your colonies or certain islands."
I would point out to the hon. member that that sort of thing is pretty well taken care of in the Bretton Woods agreement, but it is done in a more subtle way. If a nation defaults under the Bretton Woods agreement and cannot meet her obligations and has used up her resources, if she has exhausted her quota and cannot meet her obligations with gold, she will have to get a loan. When a loan is given to that nation security may be taken for the, loan. I suggest to the hon. member that that is the time that security will be demanded for the loan. That time would be several years after the war, and probably there would not be quite the same reaction throughout the world that there would be now if a nation demanded security.
Subtopic: APPROVAL OF FINANCIAL AGREEMENT SIGNED
Sub-subtopic: MARfcH 6, 1946