the doctor at katie's surgery told me tens of thousands of patients have been referred for social prescribing across the region, which has one of the highest levels of deprivation in the uk. ultimately, it means fewer visits to the doctor and less pressure on the nhs. one of the benefits might be that patients who frequently— attend or access services, because they are unsure i of where to go to solve some of these difficulties, - will actually, if those needs are getting addressed, - will attend less frequently. i feel more like i can go out... for katie, it has been life changing. i have not actually had to visit my gp for a little while because it has helped me. like i say, mental and physical health, it's not... i've not really had to go to the doctor to get any help for anything so... so you have got your life back on track? a lot better, yeah.

the chancellor says we've turned a corner, but is the uk now in a cul—de—sac? i now call the chancellor to make the autumn statement, jeremy hunt. jeremy hunt trumpets a two percentage point cut in national insurance, and an almost 2% rise in the living wage, but the uk tax burden is still the heaviest since world war ii, and growth forecasts are down, so will the cost of living crisis still be a cost of living crisis next year and the year after? nick's been out gauging reaction injeremy hunt's patch.

ijust i just worry that this is a government that is running out of good ideas. government that is running out of good ideas-_ government that is running out of aood ideas. , ., ., , , good ideas. they are doing the best the can good ideas. they are doing the best they can under _ good ideas. they are doing the best they can under the _ good ideas. they are doing the best they can under the circumstances. l they can under the circumstances. they— they can under the circumstances. they are _ they can under the circumstances. they are definitely the worst bunch i have _ they are definitely the worst bunch i have ever — they are definitely the worst bunch i have ever seen _ they are definitely the worst bunch i have ever seen in _ they are definitely the worst bunch i have ever seen in my— they are definitely the worst bunch i have ever seen in my time - they are definitely the worst bunch i have ever seen in my time as - they are definitely the worst bunch i have ever seen in my time as a i i have ever seen in my time as a voter~ _ we'll be speaking to the economic secretary to the treasury and to the shadow business secretary. and later in the programme, the all important analysis on the politics of this, we'll be joined by our very own powerhouse panel to ask if this changes the electoral dial ahead of the coming election. also tonight we're hours from an agreed temporary pause in fighting between israel and hamas, in which there will be an exchange of 50 of hamas's hostages for 150 palestinian women and teenagers held in israeli jails. could this lead to a longer lasting peace? good evening. the chancellor said that today was a proud day. he was delivering the biggest business tax cut in modern history and the largest ever tax cuts for workers but measured

against what? we are still set to have the largest overall tax burden since the second world war. and we face the prospect of a very tight public spending for so—called protected departments such as defence, and health and education in england, while we learned today of an implied extra cut on unprotected whitehall departments such as justice, transport and public health. ahead of today's autumn statement the chancellor said this was the moment to go for growth, but the office for budget responsibility has downgraded its growth forecast. so is this really a financial statement that shows we are turning an economic corner and one that will deliver a change in the government's political fortunes? first the economics. here's ben. there were two central claims from the chancellorjeremy hunt today as he delivered his autumn statement. first, that the country has "turned a corner" economically now inflation has halved relative to last year. second, that this was an "autumn statement for growth" down the line. is either accurate? first, lets grapple with whether

we ve actually turned a corner. this shows the last round of gdp growth forecasts from the obr in the march budget. and here s the latest ones, in red. you can see an improvement this year but a deterioration in 2024 and 2025. and make no mistake, the outlook for our living standards remains pretty bleak. here s the march outlook in blue. and here s the new one in red. slightly better, but this dip over the next few years is still the biggest on post—war record. if this is right, it will not feel like we ve turned a corner to many households. but what about those personal tax cuts, the reductions in national insurance announced by the chancellor? those will help, won t they? well, yes, its vital to put them in the context of the many tax rises already in train. this shows the projected increase in tax over this parliament before the chancellors measures, adding up to around 4% of gdp. and here s after, so a very small decrease.

this is still set to be the biggest tax—raising parliament since the second world war. lets illustrate this. for an employee on full—time annual earnings of £35,000, today s national insurance cut will cancel out the personal tax rise that would otherwise have caught them next year. but according to the institute for fiscal studies, by 2028 they will still be paying £249 a year more in direct tax overall as a result of all the tax changes since 2021. but was this a budget that will grow the economy in the longer term? the chancellor said his national insurance tax cuts and his business tax reform, making it possible for firms to offset their investment costs against corporation tax immediately, will deliver this. the obr does judge that this package will make a "small but lasting" impact on the economy s ability to grow. that s certainly welcome. yet, its important to note that the obr has still, despite this boost, revised

down its estimate of the economy's medium term growth potential today from 1.8% to i.6%. that might not sound very much but it really matters. and it indicates we re still in a growth malaise. and while the chancellor spoke a lot about tax, he had less to say about our public services, particularly overstretched ones like the courts and police. that s likely because he has increased the implied post—2025 squeeze on unprotected departments day—to—day budgets in this autumn statement. here s the implied impact from march in terms of annual real terms growth. you can see there are increases for protected departments like health, defence, overseas aid, etc, but everything else, which includesjustice and local government etc, seems set for a 1.5% annual contraction. now here s the picture after the autumn statement. an even bigger implied cut to unprotected departments and also education. many analysts argue that these cuts are simply implausible and these

budgets will have to ultimately be topped up. the obr itself says the chancellors implied spending plans are a "significant and growing risk to our forecast". these deep implied spending cuts, combined with the new tax cuts, will severely limit the room for manoeuvre of whoever is chancellor after the next general election. that s why some feel this autumn statement was as much about short—term political positioning as about growing the economy in the longer term. the government has very little time to change the economic weather before a general election, but is the direction of travel one that will energise the tory base, shore up the blue wall, attract the red wall, and keep westminster mps in line? the one nation caucus has already hailed the autumn statement as compassionate and fiscally responsible. nick's here. so tax cuts today but that's not the end of the story? that is right. jeremy hunt did

describe this as the biggest package of tax cuts since the 1980s and a government as being described tonight as a down payment, in other words this isjust tonight as a down payment, in other words this is just the beginning. tonight as a down payment, in other words this isjust the beginning. it is the firm view in downing street that if inflation does continue on its downward path, and it is projected to go in that direction, then we will see more tax cuts before the general election. i am told it is the hope and intention of both the prime minister and chancellor that we will see those tax cuts in the spring budget. so what might we see? maybe we will see income tax cut, maybe we will see a cut to the inheritance tax. in income tax cut, maybe we will see a cut to the inheritance tax.— cut to the inheritance tax. in some wa s is it cut to the inheritance tax. in some ways is it making _ cut to the inheritance tax. in some ways is it making it _ cut to the inheritance tax. in some ways is it making it more - cut to the inheritance tax. in some ways is it making it more difficult i ways is it making it more difficult for the government and the rest of the westminster gang? the government was u set the westminster gang? the government was upset that — the westminster gang? the government was upset that everyone _ the westminster gang? the government was upset that everyone was _ was upset that everyone was focusing, the obr were saying it was the biggest tax burden since the war. they were saying we had a pandemic and an energy crisis. a

divided party, but a united party tonight. jeremy hunt was talking about his compassionate and fiscally responsible stance and from the right, we should give this a fair win and they are very happy with the national insurance cuts. one senior figure on the right said the government obviously hopes this will shift the dial. if this doesn't, this person paused and said to me then what? a crucial moment for jeremy hunt to change the fortunes of this government, but also to shore up his own back yard which is a crucial battleground. a genteel corner of the english home counties. relative affluence and a sedate pace of life. godalming in surrey, which has comfortably returned jeremy hunt to parliament for nearly two decades, but now a potential battleground for the

conservatives after 13 years in power. this is thejolly conservatives after 13 years in power. this is the jolly farmer pub, mentioned byjeremy hunt today. this is right in the heart of his constituency and right in the heart of the blue wall. those are those ones safe tory seats now firmly in the size of the liberal democrats. rishi sunak is clearly worried, that is why he brought back david cameron who has a bit of an effect in areas like this, so a big attempt today to shore up tory support in areas like this. and a big political message from the chancellor. i am the agent of stability no longer buffeted by an economy beyond our control. as master of events i can now deliver. so two headline grabbing retail offers. the two percentage point cut in the main employee national insurance rate. and a large tax cut for business with a permanent

extension of an investment tax break. but the overall tax burden is still heading to a post—war high. and on the economic fundamentals, inflation is due to fall but growth is relatively flat. i inflation is due to fall but growth is relatively flat.— is relatively flat. i now call the chancellor _ is relatively flat. i now call the chancellor to _ is relatively flat. i now call the chancellor to make _ is relatively flat. i now call the chancellor to make the - is relatively flat. i now call the l chancellor to make the autumn statement, jeremy hunt. we are deliverin: statement, jeremy hunt. we are delivering the _ statement, jeremy hunt. we are delivering the biggest _ statement, jeremy hunt. we are delivering the biggest business | statement, jeremy hunt. we are l delivering the biggest business tax cuts in modern british history. the largest ever cut to employees and self—employed national insurance, and the biggest package of tax cuts to be implemented since the 1980s, an autumn statement for a country that has turned the corner, an autumn statement for growth which i commend to the house.— autumn statement for growth which i commend to the house. whoever this prime minister _ commend to the house. whoever this prime minister picks _ commend to the house. whoever this prime minister picks as _ commend to the house. whoever this prime minister picks as the _ prime minister picks as the chancellor at the truth is this, britain — chancellor at the truth is this, britain is _ chancellor at the truth is this, britain is and will be worse off under— britain is and will be worse off under the _ britain is and will be worse off under the conservatives. they have held back— under the conservatives. they have held back growth, they have crashed our economy, increased debt, trashed

our economy, increased debt, trashed our public— our economy, increased debt, trashed our public services, left businesses out in _ our public services, left businesses out in the _ our public services, left businesses out in the cold and made life harder for working — out in the cold and made life harder for working people.— out in the cold and made life harder for working people. today he had the ower to for working people. today he had the power to help — for working people. today he had the power to help people, _ for working people. today he had the power to help people, to _ for working people. today he had the power to help people, to lift - for working people. today he had the power to help people, to lift a - power to help people, to lift a finger. — power to help people, to lift a finger. to _ power to help people, to lift a finger, to write _ power to help people, to lift a finger, to write some - power to help people, to lift a finger, to write some of- power to help people, to lift a finger, to write some of the l finger, to write some of the wrong is that— finger, to write some of the wrong is that this — finger, to write some of the wrong is that this government _ finger, to write some of the wrong is that this government has - is that this government has inflicted _ is that this government has inflicted upon _ is that this government has inflicted upon them, - is that this government has inflicted upon them, but i is that this government has - inflicted upon them, but people are not this— inflicted upon them, but people are not this government's _ inflicted upon them, but people are not this government's priority. - inflicted upon them, but people are not this government's priority. we i not this government's priority. we know_ not this government's priority. we know who — not this government's priority. we know who goes _ not this government's priority. we know who goes through _ not this government's priority. we know who goes through their - not this government's priority. we . know who goes through their priority lanes _ know who goes through their priority lanes. , , ., , know who goes through their priority lanes. , .,., lanes. this statement is deception from the chancellor _ lanes. this statement is deception from the chancellor after - lanes. this statement is deception from the chancellor after years of| from the chancellor after years of unfair tax hikes. from the chancellor after years of unfairtax hikes. underthis unfair tax hikes. under this conservative unfairtax hikes. underthis conservative government economic growth is flatlining and public services are on their knees. back to the “oll services are on their knees. back to the jolly farmer _ services are on their knees. back to the jolly farmer pub. _ services are on their knees. back to the jolly farmer pub. he _ services are on their knees. back to the jolly farmer pub. he has - services are on their knees. back to the jolly farmer pub. he has been l the jolly farmer pub. he has been known to frequent _ the jolly farmer pub. he has been known to frequent the _ the jolly farmer pub. he has been known to frequent the place - the jolly farmer pub. he has been known to frequent the place fairly regular and he likes fish and chips. confirmation thatjeremy hunt a is regular and a welcome for his freeze in alcohol duty until august and the wider help for business. it is in alcohol duty until august and the wider help for business.— wider help for business. it is a ositive wider help for business. it is a positive thing _ wider help for business. it is a positive thing for _ wider help for business. it is a positive thing for us, - wider help for business. it is a positive thing for us, very - wider help for business. it is a l positive thing for us, very much wider help for business. it is a - positive thing for us, very much so, and the freeze on the business rates, again very positive. but it will not stop the brewers increased their prices. we know there is

inflationary pressure at there and it will reflect one way or another, but it is good the government is not adding to that. yes, we are happy with that news. very pleased. back in godalming _ with that news. very pleased. back in godalming strong views about the government. i wonder how do you think things are looking? absolutely chastl . think things are looking? absolutely ghastly- they _ think things are looking? absolutely ghastly- they are — think things are looking? absolutely ghastly. they are clearly _ think things are looking? absolutely ghastly. they are clearly doing - ghastly. they are clearly doing pensions to try and get the grave out, but i as a grey voter have just had it up today with the 13 years of tory misrule. but had it up today with the 13 years of tory misrule— tory misrule. but are supported. the are tory misrule. but are supported. the)! are doing — tory misrule. but are supported. they are doing the _ tory misrule. but are supported. they are doing the best - tory misrule. but are supported. they are doing the best they - tory misrule. but are supported. they are doing the best they can | they are doing the best they can under_ they are doing the best they can under the — they are doing the best they can under the circumstances. the difficult under the circumstances. tie: difficult circumstances? under the circumstances. the difficult circumstances? very| difficult circumstances? very difficult circumstances? very difficult and _ difficult circumstances? very difficult and they _ difficult circumstances? very difficult and they are - difficult circumstances? very difficult and they are doing the best they can. difficult and they are doing the best they can-— best they can. evening calm in surrey and _ best they can. evening calm in surrey and in _ best they can. evening calm in surrey and in the _ best they can. evening calm in surrey and in the high - best they can. evening calm in surrey and in the high streets| best they can. evening calm in - surrey and in the high streets and alleys a fierce debate is underway. earlier, i spoke to the economic secretry to the treasury, bim afolami.

i began by asking him about the downgrade of uk growth in the obr's forecasts. so the first thing is that we don't lag behind most other countries. in the g7 we have the third highest growth since 2010. and in relation to growth forecasts i know that last year our growth was actually much higher than the obr forecast it was going to be at the time and next year our growth is up, the total size of the economy is up 2% — £40 billion — from where it was meant to be in the march budget. so i don't accept your picture on growth at all. so what you're suggesting is that the obr isn't really worth the paper it is written on? no, of course not. they have a very difficult job forecasting, as everybody does, but my point is that the measures we are taking today are setting the long—term foundation for growth in our economy. when i said that we are only third in the g7, that's not to say that our growth

is as high as we would like, of course it's not, that's why we are taking these measures. we have got over a hundred growth measures in this autumn statement. and you know in the budget next year, there will be more to come. so what the chancellor has announced today amounts to a £19.1 billion cut in public spending, roughly equal to what the chancellor's spending in tax cuts. so people are going to feel much more of a lack of public spending and services, more than they're going to feel the benefit of tax cuts, given that actually the tax cuts don't actually measure up to the impact that inflation's had on wages and pay? so, it is not a cut in public spending. what you're referring to is spending going up less than it otherwise may have gone. we have chosen, and it's a political choice and i accept that, we have chosen to give tax cuts to hard—working people on average

earnings. i don't apologise for that. through the 2% cut in national insurance for employees and a similar set of measures for self—employed. and we have chosen to back british business through giving business tax cuts. that is the political choice we have made. i think that is a reasonable choice, but public spending at the end of the forecast period which was five years, it is likely to be £85 billion more than it otherwise was. given that actually there is... ..you're not changing the threshold for tax, given the lag of other taxation that people are facing from the last two or three years, people aren't going to be better off. look, it's worth pointing out that we had a once in a lifetime pandemic earlier on in the parliament. that meant that the government spend over £450 billion supporting people and businesses and supporting the health of everybody in this country. that's why the debt burden and the tax burden rose. that's the fact.

what we are choosing to do now, yes, we are focussing this tax cut, its not the end, it's the beginning, we are focussing this tax cut on working people. someone on average earnings who is an employee will see net their taxes cut, as a result of that national insurance cut. how quickly, net tax is cut, how quickly will they actually be taking home more money? well, to be clear that, what i'm saying by that is, you mentioned thresholds rising... not rising. rather thresholds staying the same over time. what i'm saying is someone on average earnings who gets that 2% tax cut will be slightly better off even, notwithstanding that fact. the reason we have done that is because we know that working people, we need to back them and make sure they contribute and they benefit from these growth measures. finally, minister, the chancellor announced long—term cash freeze in public investment. that is a significant cut.

because public sector investment is way below comparable countries at the moment. public sector investment is the way you deliver growth isn't it and you've got a cash freeze? so, investment is very important and one thing... so i've talked about business investment, but some way in which we are going to get much more investment into the economy are our reforms to solvency two, these are actually a sort of a brexit freedom that we have taken advantage of and our reforms to pensions more broadly that will lead to £75 billion extra invested in british business, british stock market. so that investment comes from the private sector and we've done that through regulatory changes. so you're right that investment matters, but what we have done is through regulatory change we are getting the private sector to invest more. thank you very much. i also spoke earlier to labour's shadow business secretary jonathan reynolds. i asked him whether labour

would unfreeze tax thresholds. we have made the principalfocus of our policy platform stronger and better economic growth. in fact that is the only way we will see reasonable burdens in terms of taxation and reasonable funding of public services in the future. what was required in this budget, the chancellor said it would be a budget for growth, growth has been downgraded next year and the year after that in the year after that. so this is a step change in government policy. do you believe the obr is right on this? they have downgraded the growth forecast. there is no reason to doubt the obr's growth forecast. labour has already said that a labour government would borrow to invest but presumably you are going to have to borrow to fund day—to—day spending in the public sector as well? we have made very clear that the fiscal rules that we put forward will not allow for borrowing for day—to—day expenditure and we will bring down the burden of debt as a proportion of gdp over the term of the parliament. that should give us money to invest, that is part of our plan, our green prosperity plan which i think is an integral part

of what we put forward. but it is also alongside our industrial strategy and planning reform and changes to the apprenticeship levy. you will stick with what, as it were, you inherit if you win the election, so there will be no question of reinstating the 2% in national insurance, for example? we are not at this stage accepting all of the government's plans. you said you wouldn't raise tax, would ni be exempt from that? typically undercut to the national insurance, we opposed the rise in national insurance and it is entirely consistent to back the reduction. i think people look at it and see if you take the tax burden in this parliament that is equivalent to an extra 10p in the pan or national an extra 10p in the pound or national insurance, so 2p off and you are still worse off. in fact people will be paying more tax until the next election. you would leave ni as it is? the specific pledges on thresholds have to be funded. how are you going to

fund the shortfall? the specific pledges on tax rates and thresholds have to be part of the election campaign, not at this stage before a budget. i understand what you are fundamentally asked me, which is the government have taken the dividend of higher inflation and tax receipts and they have spent it. that implies a really tough times for the future. it always would have unless economic growth improved. so the focus is economic growth but let's look at nonprotected departments because what the government has said is the nonprotected departments will be cut. according to the obr it is 0.23% cuts in real terms. so what would you do? you have got transport, the environment, justice, public health and we are just out of the pandemic. how would you make sure they are properly funded from the get go? i accept what we are seeing in terms of the government's plans is very, very worrying. there is no doubt about that in terms of the lack of a long—term, reasonable trajectory that the chancellor has put forward today. we have identified some areas where we would do switch spend, so for example the changes to the non—dom tax

regime for the superrich that goes to the health service. even before the decisions today they would have been tough decisions. that is why the focus of the policy is on a stronger economy and without that, this will get really tough. how are you going to create the stronger economy. this government said it is incentivizing business to invest, will the labour government take that in place? yes invest, will the labour government take that in place?— take that in place? yes because we have the lowest _ take that in place? yes because we have the lowest business _ take that in place? yes because we have the lowest business invest - take that in place? yes because we have the lowest business invest in | have the lowest business invest in the g7. on its own it won't do what is needed. the full thing that is required is stability, that has never been on offer from this government, a proper industrial strategy, a green prosperity plan, it is a package that is necessary. it is an element of public investment. but a specific investment. but a specific

investment plans and delegated expenditure must be set out in a general election.— with me now is stephen bush from the financial times and poppy trowbridge, former special advisor to chancellor philip hammond from 2016 to 2019. we are in a pre—election position now. poppy, who was the budget for, for the voters of the blue wall? it looks like that didn't have much impact? i looks like that didn't have much im act? ~ ., , looks like that didn't have much imact? ~ , looks like that didn't have much imact? ~' .,, , ., impact? i think it was partly for the tory party _ impact? i think it was partly for the tory party itself. _ impact? i think it was partly for the tory party itself. there - impact? i think it was partly for the tory party itself. there has| the tory party itself. there has been such disintegration you could argue since brexit. but it wasn't a budget. it was an autumn statement. except it was a budget. the fact they brought out the big guns shows they're gunning to an election. they can't send thousands the out to the streets without having the ability to say, i'm going to put very loose

quotation marks, we cut taxes, because we know it doesn't add up. when you find 20 quid down the sofa and you spend it, you do it because it doesn't feel like yours. that happened here. the money they spent was fortuitous. but it wasn't planned. was fortuitous. but it wasn't lanned. av was fortuitous. but it wasn't lanned. ., ,, ,, was fortuitous. but it wasn't lanned. , . ,, ,, ., was fortuitous. but it wasn't lanned. . ,, ,, ., ., planned. nick's assessment, more tax cuts coming- — planned. nick's assessment, more tax cuts coming- 0n _ planned. nick's assessment, more tax cuts coming. on inheritance _ planned. nick's assessment, more tax cuts coming. on inheritance tax - planned. nick's assessment, more tax cuts coming. on inheritance tax they l cuts coming. on inheritance tax they were flying that kite for a while. what were they doing, sounding it out? a ~ , , what were they doing, sounding it out? , , what were they doing, sounding it out? ~ , , ., out? making sure they can do it in the s-urin out? making sure they can do it in the spring i— out? making sure they can do it in the spring i suppose. _ out? making sure they can do it in the spring i suppose. what - out? making sure they can do it in the spring i suppose. what do you think, steven, the tories were critical of the obr forecast. we have heard that with liz truss. you could see him _ have heard that with liz truss. you could see him realising in the interview— could see him realising in the interview he didn't quite want to go back into _ interview he didn't quite want to go back into that, because of what that did to _ back into that, because of what that did to markets and there a lot of voters _ did to markets and there a lot of voters who — did to markets and there a lot of voters who are angry about that era. particularly — voters who are angry about that era. particularly if you had to refinance

your mortgage. but the grain of truth _ your mortgage. but the grain of truth is — your mortgage. but the grain of truth is the obr has always been pessimistic. truth is the obr has always been pessimistic— pessimistic. don't you 'ust keep second guessing _ pessimistic. don't you 'ust keep second guessing the _ pessimistic. don't you just keep second guessing the obr - pessimistic. don't you just keep second guessing the obr and l pessimistic. don't you just keep - second guessing the obr and change your stance? you second guessing the obr and change your stance?— your stance? you are still better off bein: your stance? you are still better off being in _ your stance? you are still better off being in a — your stance? you are still better off being in a situation _ your stance? you are still better off being in a situation where . off being in a situation where you're — off being in a situation where you're going oh i have more to spend than oh _ you're going oh i have more to spend than oh dear— you're going oh i have more to spend than oh dear i have less. that is the risk— than oh dear i have less. that is the risk that— than oh dear i have less. that is the risk that he is taking. he is used _ the risk that he is taking. he is used most _ the risk that he is taking. he is used most of his head room. you remember— used most of his head room. you remember the only way he can make the sums— remember the only way he can make the sums add up is suggesting the fuel duty— the sums add up is suggesting the fuel duty freeze will go up. if anybody— fuel duty freeze will go up. if anybody thinks that will go up again under— anybody thinks that will go up again under any— anybody thinks that will go up again under any government, i anybody thinks that will go up again underany government, i have anybody thinks that will go up again under any government, i have a bridge _ under any government, i have a bridge to — under any government, i have a bridge to sell them.— under any government, i have a bridge to sell them. also he didn't have that much _ bridge to sell them. also he didn't have that much head _ bridge to sell them. also he didn't have that much head room, - bridge to sell them. also he didn't have that much head room, not i bridge to sell them. also he didn't - have that much head room, not much, like 13 billion or something? the impressive _ like 13 billion or something? the impressive thing he did use most of that on— impressive thing he did use most of that on full— impressive thing he did use most of that on full expensing, the stuff that on full expensing, the stuff that will— that on full expensing, the stuff that will get growth going. but he

has used — that will get growth going. but he has used all of his wriggle room to -ive has used all of his wriggle room to give the _ has used all of his wriggle room to give the conservative rank and file is in tax _ give the conservative rank and file is in tax cut... give the conservative rank and file is in tax cut. . ._ is in tax cut... freedom to live is the -- reason — is in tax cut... freedom to live is the -- reason to _ is in tax cut... freedom to live is the -- reason to live _ is in tax cut... freedom to live is the -- reason to live is _ is in tax cut... freedom to live is the -- reason to live is the - is in tax cut... freedom to live is the -- reason to live is the word | the —— reason to live is the word that you are looking for. and the cut and it is coming injanuary? it has listen floated in the conservative.— has listen floated in the conservative. , has listen floated in the conservative. has been back it? yes, it is an interesting _ conservative. has been back it? yes, it is an interesting statement, - it is an interesting statement, because it was finishing off the policies they had been planning to nick from labour and doing some conservative ones like the tax cut and some of the welcome business measures. they are focussing on growth, but the problem is timing. better late than never, but it probably too late to see that feed through. probably too late to see that feed throu . h. , ., through. interesting, on the expensing. _ through. interesting, on the expensing, they _ through. interesting, on the expensing, they went - through. interesting, on the expensing, they went for i through. interesting, on the| expensing, they went for the through. interesting, on the - expensing, they went for the hard core machinery, the heavy industry and not service sector or financial or creative sector. fir

and not service sector or financial or creative sector.— or creative sector. or regional development. _ or creative sector. or regional development. there - or creative sector. or regional development. there is - or creative sector. or regional development. there is more i or creative sector. or regionall development. there is more to or creative sector. or regional- development. there is more to be done there and i'm sure they know there is more to be done. when it comes to productivity in the uk it has been a problem for decades and core to that has been investment in machinery and plants. so they're taking the tap layer off. we machinery and plants. so they're taking the tap layer off.- machinery and plants. so they're taking the tap layer off. we are not auoin to taking the tap layer off. we are not going to have _ taking the tap layer off. we are not going to have any _ taking the tap layer off. we are not going to have any public— taking the tap layer off. we are not i going to have any public investment, hs2 seems like a distant branch line. they won't be doing that stuff? in line. they won't be doing that stuff? ,., ._ , ., , ., stuff? in some ways it was a traditional _ stuff? in some ways it was a traditional conservative - stuff? in some ways it was a i traditional conservative choice. stuff? in some ways it was a - traditional conservative choice. he used _ traditional conservative choice. he used the _ traditional conservative choice. he used the head room to cut taxes. of course _ used the head room to cut taxes. of course some — used the head room to cut taxes. of course some will say what happens with a _ course some will say what happens with a labour and a conservative you -et with a labour and a conservative you get the _ with a labour and a conservative you get the traditional result, the tories — get the traditional result, the tories win, but people will look at the labour— tories win, but people will look at the labour party and go, is this the i’ili'it the labour party and go, is this the right political choice, given is v n it is a _ right political choice, given is v n it is a big — right political choice, given is v n it is a big gamble not to put

anything _ it is a big gamble not to put anything into the nhs. 1&6 it is a big gamble not to put anything into the nhs. 1% to the nhs and 1% to education. _ anything into the nhs. 1% to the nhs and 1% to education. on _ anything into the nhs. 1% to the nhs and 1% to education. on the - and 1% to education. on the unprotected departments, you look at public health and transport and not point... sorry minus 2.3, according to the obr. that is a big cut? in practice... to the obr. that is a big cut? in practice- -- it _ to the obr. that is a big cut? in practice... it won't _ to the obr. that is a big cut? in practice... it won't come - to the obr. that is a big cut? in | practice... it won't come through. in practice... it won't come through. in practice — practice... it won't come through. in practice that _ practice... it won't come through. in practice that bit _ practice. .. it won't come through. in practice that bit of— practice... it won't come through. in practice that bit of statement . practice... it won't come through. in practice that bit of statement is labelled _ in practice that bit of statement is labelled this will be rachel reeves' problem _ labelled this will be rachel reeves' problem. this is not a fiscal event by a chancellor who expects that he is going _ by a chancellor who expects that he is going to — by a chancellor who expects that he is going to be the one that has to make _ is going to be the one that has to make the — is going to be the one that has to make the sums add up after the budget — make the sums add up after the budget. look, nothing about the pattern— budget. look, nothing about the pattern of— budget. look, nothing about the pattern of politics in last half a decade — pattern of politics in last half a decade would make anyone think that the sharp— decade would make anyone think that the sharp cuts are ever going to be delivered _ the sharp cuts are ever going to be delivered politically. the message of this— delivered politically. the message of this budget was, have a drink, but don't — of this budget was, have a drink, but don't worry, rachel reeves will pick up _ but don't worry, rachel reeves will pick up the — but don't worry, rachel reeves will pick up the tab. it

but don't worry, rachel reeves will pick up the tab-— pick up the tab. it begs the question — pick up the tab. it begs the question who _ pick up the tab. it begs the question who wants - pick up the tab. it begs the question who wants to - pick up the tab. it begs the question who wants to win | pick up the tab. it begs the i question who wants to win the election. it is not home baked problems, the world economy is not stable. and they doubled down on that uncertainty. band stable. and they doubled down on that uncertainty.— stable. and they doubled down on that uncertainty. and that exposed the fact that _ that uncertainty. and that exposed the fact that the _ that uncertainty. and that exposed the fact that the economy, - that uncertainty. and that exposed the fact that the economy, coming | the fact that the economy, coming back to prepandemic levels until 2018. that is a big task. that is more than the term of a parliament. that is the thing, yeah, in some waysm — that is the thing, yeah, in some waysm i— that is the thing, yeah, in some ways... i don't think it is going to be a _ ways... i don't think it is going to be a 92 _ ways... i don't think it is going to be a 92 style _ ways... i don't think it is going to be a 92 style result. but in some ways _ be a 92 style result. but in some ways 92 — be a 92 style result. but in some ways 92 was a good election to lose. if ways 92 was a good election to lose. if the _ ways 92 was a good election to lose. if the labour party won that we would — if the labour party won that we would talk of a very different history _ would talk of a very different history. if i was a conservative or labour— history. if i was a conservative or labour strategist i would want too win for— labour strategist i would want too win for pride, but i would say not too sure — win for pride, but i would say not too sure about that one. if you're riaht too sure about that one. if you're right there is _ too sure about that one. if you're right there is no _ too sure about that one. if you're

right there is no way _ too sure about that one. if you're right there is no way the - right there is no way the conservative party can win, they can't go wrong by trying to shore up their base and ensure people who go out feel confident to do it. thank ou. out feel confident to do it. thank you. scheduled _ later this week, we expect the beginning of the highly emotionally charged exchange of hostages for prisoners in gaza and israel, at the start of a four—day pause in fighting, brokered by the us, the qateris, egypt, and the international committee of the red cross. joe biden said the deal would end an unspeakable ordeal for the hostages and alleviate the suffering of innocent palestininan families. we expect 50 hostages, women and children, to be released in what is described as four batches of 12, and in turn 150 palestinian women and children will be freed. a statement from the office of prime minister netanyahu, said that the release of an additional ten hostages each day would result in an added pause day. hamas, which the uk, the us and other powers class as a terrorist organisation, said the deal would give palestinians time to recover

after an intense israeli air and ground assault which its government in gaza said has killed more than 1a,000 people. so could this moment without violence, if it holds, pave the way for eventual peace? here'sjoe. translation: we are at war and we will continue to fightl until we reach all our goals. prime minister netanyahu could not have been clearer — this isjust a pause. but as international pressure for a cease—fire grows, could it eventually lead to peace? since the 7th of october, the hostages' families have been a powerful force, accusing the israeli government of prioritising the destruction of hamas over the rescuing of their relatives. the fact that 50 are now being released will prove to many that negotiations can work. in the end, the combination

of the families and president biden were decisive in pushing the government into accepting a partial deal, only 50 out of the 239 hostages. that said, it all depends on what will happen on the fifth day, whether or not war resumes as if nothing happened and this was just an artificial lull or hiatus or, you know, hamas comes forth with a second possible deal which necessitates or creates the pressures for an extension of the cease—fire. israeli society has undoubtedly been hardened by the horrors of october the 7th. there is a mood here that, eventually, hamas must be destroyed. but it is not only israeli public opinion that will decide government policy. a poll in the us last week found

that 68% of americans now wanted a cease—fire. america has provided israel with essentially a blank cheque for years with support and has not really made any significant demands, you know, in response to providing this blank cheque, and so we are seeing a huge shift in the american population with trying to pressure the white house and congress. however, that has not yet transferred to a change in policy. and for watchers of the region's politics, it is whether that policy changes that will determine if this pause lasts beyond five days. it depends how much pressure is actually exerted on israel. israel has made it very clear since the announcement of the cease—fire that this is simply a cease—fire and this changes nothing in terms of their operational objective, which is to destroy hamas and to ensure that the strip is not going to be governed by anything similar to hamas.

hamas, on the other hand, appear to want to engage in negotiations. they have made that clear from the outset. during the first two weeks of the war, they offered a very similar deal for much less, so it seems as though a lot of the pressure that needs to be exerted needs to be exerted on israel, if we are to guarantee that any kind of serious, permanent arrangement is to be reached. any extension to the current five—day deal would involve more hostages being released and more aid being allowed into gaza. for the norwegian refugee council, any deal is welcome, but... hostages should not be a bargaining chip. all of the hostages should be released. it sets a very bad precedent if you take hostages and then you use them as bargaining chips for a political or strategic goal. nor should the access to civilians be a bargaining chip.

what is this, that we can help children, feed children if there is some specific conditions met on the other side? we have a right and an obligation to have all people everywhere. even this evening, as the pause approached, the fighting continued — adding to the thousands of deaths this conflict has caused. any hostages released, any respite for the civilians of gaza will be welcome, but very few think that this will be the end of their suffering. and since we went on air it has been reported that the release of hostages will not now happen before friday at the earliest and the ceasefire will also be delayed. joining us remotely from washington dc is gerald feierstein, a former us ambassador to yemen, a counter—terrorism expert and senior fellow at the middle east institute thank you very much forjoining us

tonight. thank you very much for “oining us toniaht. , , . ., tonight. first, we did expect that the release _ tonight. first, we did expect that the release of _ tonight. first, we did expect that the release of hostages - tonight. first, we did expect that the release of hostages and - tonight. first, we did expect that the release of hostages and the l the release of hostages and the transfer of prisoners would happen tomorrow, but it is delayed to friday. should be read anything particular into this? i friday. should be read anything particular into this?— particular into this? i think only that these _ particular into this? i think only that these agreements - particular into this? i think only that these agreements and - particular into this? i think only that these agreements and the | that these agreements and the implementation is always very complicated. i understand that on the israeli side there is a requirement that they give the courts an opportunity to review the individuals who are released from israeli prisons and that there be a delay in the process. it is always a very difficult tango that the two site are going to be in.— very difficult tango that the two site are going to be in. let's look at the negotiations _ site are going to be in. let's look at the negotiations and _ site are going to be in. let's look at the negotiations and who - site are going to be in. let's look at the negotiations and who have been leading in the negotiations. we have the qataris leading edge. where have the qataris leading edge. where

have the qataris leading edge. where have the americans being within the negotiations? have they been exerting a lot of pressure on israel? i exerting a lot of pressure on israel? ~ ., exerting a lot of pressure on israel? ~ . . ., , israel? i think that clearly the israeli government _ israel? i think that clearly the israeli government has - israel? i think that clearly the - israeli government has responded to what they are hearing from the joe biden what they are hearing from thejoe biden administration. that what they are hearing from the joe biden administration. that was what they are hearing from thejoe biden administration. that was an important component. and also of course the us has been very much involved with passing messages through the channel to hamas and among the four or five parties, through the channel to hamas and among the four orfive parties, the israelis, hamas, the us, qatarand egypt playing a role, each of them passing messages, coming up with ideas and trying to get the two key parties, israeland ideas and trying to get the two key parties, israel and hamas, ideas and trying to get the two key parties, israeland hamas, onto ideas and trying to get the two key parties, israel and hamas, onto the same page. but parties, israel and hamas, onto the same page-— parties, israel and hamas, onto the same nae. �* ., . , ,, ., same page. but how much pressure do ou think same page. but how much pressure do you think president _ same page. but how much pressure do you think president biden _ same page. but how much pressure do you think president biden is _ you think president biden is putting on benjamin netanyahu just now? probably quite a lot, for a couple

of reasons. one, as you know, there are among the hostages us citizens and that is an important factor for president biden. then the other point, which your correspondent noted, is that there is a strong view in the united states in favour of a ceasefire. the president needs to respond to that, particularly within his own democratic party. just on that, the increase in support for a ceasefire in america, how much do you think would thejoe biden administration like to see a government in israel without benjamin netanyahu at its head? fin. ben'amin netanyahu at its head? oh, i benjamin netanyahu at its head? oh, i think that benjamin netanyahu at its head? ct i think that has benjamin netanyahu at its head? (31, i think that has been benjamin netanyahu at its head? 1,u i think that has been a truism benjamin netanyahu at its head? 01 i think that has been a truism for many, many years. the reality is it is not so much what the united states want to see, but what the israeli people want to see. there seems to be a strong mood within the israeli political environment to see

new leadership on their side. you robabl new leadership on their side. you probably heard jansen they're saying it is dreadful to have hostages as a bargaining chip, but it is the reality, isn't it? i wonder if you can see when the initial 50 hostages are transferred, and as you say it is a very delicate system to get prisoners out and to get the hostages out as well, what are the chances do you think if this is a successful manoeuvre for the offer from benjamin netanyahu to say ten hostages each day and you delay any return to violence? what do you think there is of a chance of a very narrow corridor to some kind of peace? narrow corridor to some kind of eace? ~ , ,., , narrow corridor to some kind of

eace? ~ , ~' , peace? absolutely, i think it is something _ peace? absolutely, i think it is something and _ peace? absolutely, i think it is something and it _ peace? absolutely, i think it is something and it would - peace? absolutely, i think it is something and it would be - peace? absolutely, i think it is| something and it would be hard peace? absolutely, i think it is i something and it would be hard in my