idea for massachusetts. it goes to the quality of our school system and education system. what separates joining this national consortium will absolutely boost the performance over time. >> thank you very much. ms. stein? >> i think the record is actually pretty clear. if you look at the studies of what standardized tests accomplice, they pretty much improved performance on that very standardized test. but in reducing the need for remedial education, mcas that is a deterrent for many students for staying in school

it and can be defeating for students from trying hard. i think it's useful for comparing across schools, but to use it as a high-stakes test is entirely unjustified by the data. coming from the area of medicine, my background, i am accustomed to looking at evidence-based materials and the -- >> time. mr. patrick? >> fred, as someone who personally sting set standardized tests, a number of us -- as some of the persian least thinks -- as somebody who personally stinks at standardized test, a number -- i supported. we are number one in student achievement. we continue to invest in public schools at the highest level in

the history of the commonwealth, as i said, even when there have enormous challenges across the budget because of the global economic collapse. i think it is completely a false premise to suggest that leading the nation in a review of common standards is somehow a retreat from what we have been doing here in the commonwealth, and there is no evidence that it is. so i am proud of our leadership role, i am proud of the fact that we continue to lift standards in the commonwealth and for the country. >> thank you. mr. cahill? >> a good question, and one that will be debated not only in the campaign about as we go forward. i am a firm believer that we need high-stakes tests, we need to raise the bar as much as we can, but obviously that test has not done a whole lot for people in the inner city in springfield in particular. part of the reason for that is that as we spend all this time on testing and trying to refine the test, whether it comes from washington or beacon hill, we are not spending as much money

and time or focus on teachers to give them the tools not just to teach for the test, but also to try to lift these children who come from broken homes and different circumstances than we here at this table to really give those kids, especially those inner-city kids, the tools they need as they go forward. there is a big achievement gap, and the wealthy are doing fine, but the inner cities are not doing as well. i do not want to lower the standards, but we need to give the teachers tools and support. we cannot just say you have to teach this test. >> thank you very much. we will take a brief pause and the back in one minute. welcome back. we continue now with our western massachusetts gubernatorial debate. the question now from barry krieger, we will go first to dr. jill stein. >> a lot of opposition has brought against biomass, wood burning power plants in western massachusetts.

now there is expressed concern about plans for a wind farm on a rage in their town. viewers have asked us to ask you if you favor large wind power projects, and where would you site. do you favor wood-burning biomass plans? >> wood-burning biomass i think is unjustified by the data. it is polluting in terms of its carbon footprint. the studies have been comparing it to call and using them as a standard, so the studies make it look better than it actually is. it is a problem, and it is also very bad in terms of the traditional air pollutants and

the impact on respiratory disease. i think the valley has enough air pollution as it is. biomass will promote excessive use in wasting of those forests. yes, we need wind, but communities should have a role in where wind should be sited. committees have been able to find workable sites themselves, and it is important and we need offshore wind -- communities have been able to find workable sites themselves, and it is important. >> i think small-scaled biomass makes sense. that is what the data seems to point to and there is a process under way of sorting out what the rules are that makes sense for us in massachusetts. for the russell, palmer, and greenfield proposals. dr. stein and i may agree on one thing. in western massachusetts, they seem to think that wind is a great idea for the cape. on-shore wind has a lot of local involvement, the sort of

thing that happened with the project. not seven years of litigation and multiple appeals before we make a decision. so deferring to local choices, the host community and the surrounding communities, one or two levels of appeals is what the wind-citing appeal is about. >> mr. cahill? >> i hope it does not pass and i would not sign the bill if i become governor, because i do not think we should take local control away. i think people need to have some control over their lives come over their livelihoods. it is also very, very costly. it may work in some ways only because of the subsidies of the federal government and the state government, but it is not a path to energy independence. wind alone is not going to solve our problems.

we have a plant in plymouth mideast to be reconditioned and read licensed. we need to look at natural gas and out-of-state sources for cheaper electricity. that is one of the reasons why our jobs are not growing here in massachusetts, because we have the highest electricity rates in the country. they are not going to go down. if you try to put manufacturing jobs back, meeting these energy goals i think will not work and will not help us grow jobs. >> mr. baker? >> i agree with the treasurer on the wind-siting bill. i would not sign the bill if it got to my desk. these are their role locations and we will have to shoot our way through a tremendous amount of national habitat to have the capacity to get in there. one of the highest costs to electricity in the country here, and it affects our ability to grow jobs in many sectors including manufacturing. that is why i do not support

cape wind. i think it's a bad idea. fundamentally we ought to be choosing less expensive renewable alternatives. that is a good deal for deal for job creation, that is a good deal for reducing our carbon footprint. those of the types of issues we should be pursuing. >> next question for mr. patrick. >> governor, it is estimated that the budget deficit for the next fiscal year that begins july 1 is approximately $2 billion. how would you close that deficit, and please be specific. >> thanks for the question because it gives me a great opportunity to clear up misunderstandings. our budget has been balanced in ways that my opposition has criticized, which is that in

addition to the investments we have made to grow jobs and the $4.3 billion in cuts we have made to make those investments, we have used rainy-day funds and federal stimulus funds. but those funds were there to be used precisely this way, in order to maintain essential drop. we had the steepest decline in revenue in the history of the commonwealth. because we made those investments in job growth, education, and in infrastructure and health care, we are seeing the benefit in revenue. we had $200 million as a benchmark in september alone. part of this for next year is going to be the use of new revenue from growth. part of it will also come because with the support we got from the federal government through all this, we were able to back out of rainy day fund

this year and put it back in the bank. >> thank you very much. mr. cahill? >> i think we have had a structurally ballot -- a structurally in balanced budget since i have been on beacon hill. we have a surplus, we spend it if we have rainy-day money or surplus money, we spend it, but the problem keeps recurring. we have to restructure how we deliver health care in massachusetts. we are spending an extra $4.5 billion we were not spending prior to health care reform to subsidize insurance companies that then subsidize people who need insurance companies or are mandated by it. we are spending $1 billion over the next five years, are we money to pay for our highway and transportation employees. that has to end. it started in the mid-1990's, has grown to epic proportions. it is not good budgeting for us to pay for. employees would borrow money because it adds 30% to 50% for each employee going forward. >> mr. baker? >> i am glad you brought it up

because it is an important question. the next governor will face a $2 billion deficit because of this governor. i am the only candidate -- excuse me, jill and i are the only to the bureau candidates opposing reforms -- are the only two candidates who are concerned about performing this problem. i am not going to raise taxes. the governor will raise taxes to solve this problem if he is reelected. that is simply what has happened in the last four years and will happen in the next four years. i will not do that because the families in massachusetts cannot afford it. the businesses cannot afford it. if we are serious about getting people back to work and creating an affordable business climate, we cannot raise taxes again. i have put $1 billion of proposals on the table, and that is where we need to go to

create a structural balance. >> thank you. ms. stein? >> it is pretty simple, actually. if you look at the big picture -- and again, in the big picture, what has been growing while everything else has been shrinking for the past 10 years is health care, which is now 50% of the budget. one out of every two tax dollars is paying for this system. we can save at least $1 billion by moving to a single-payer system. a report came out recently estimating that the state of maine would save $1 billion moving to single-payer. you apply that to our $14 billion budget in health care, and we would certainly gained $1 billion there, the other billion dollars from the tax expenditures which do not benefit, have not deliver the

jobs summit and have not created a healthy, viable economy. we have to use that particularly in our small businesses. that is where we should be providing support. >> thank you very much. laura hutchinson, a question to tim cahill. >> several surrounding states have offered to trim spending by forcing state workers to take furloughs. do you think forcing unpaid furloughs is a good idea for massachusetts? >> no, it is an ok idea but it does not release all the long- term problem because these people are still on the books for next year and after that. i did not support it as a treasurer, but we may budgets work by cutting our administrative costs, by leaving jobs unfilled over the last year. we have a 14% lower budget at our lottery.

furloughs are a short-term solution, not long term. long term, if we have too many employees, we have to find out who is intentional and who is non-essential. -- who is essential and who is non-essential. when it snows out, if everyone things when the governor calls off the work day and says non- essential employees do not come to work, if my people do not come to work, that means they are defining themselves as non- essential. guess what, everyone comes to work, no matter how long it takes, no matter how much snow we have. >> mr. baker? >> furloughs are a temporary solution, not a permanent fix. we need to primarily deal with our fiscal prices -- with our fiscal crisis so that the people do not think the state will come back to them looking for more money. i have talked about a lot of reforms. i have talked about pension reform, agency consolidation. we have 100 operating agencies

in state government. structure was designed in the 1970's. a lot has happened in terms of information technology and all the rest. we should be able to come up with a leader and simpler bureaucracy than the one we have now. we also need to run at reforming our health care -- our welfare system. we also have issues with the health-care system. we spend $3 million on lease parking spaces that are generally and the. $3 million on an empty building. $3 million on -- there are lots of places we can go. >> thank you. ms. stein? >> i agree that unpaid furloughs are not a good idea. we have actually been cutting state workers and public workers by the thousands over the past many years, and i am not -- there is a lot more room to cut. there is the occasional

patronage for a job, but i do not think there is a lot to cut their. i think it adds a real burden to state workers who are actually underpaid. a recent study from umass documented that while they are much maligned, state workers, when you consider their age and experience, they are actually being underpaid. furloughs are not a good way to go after waste. >> mr. patrick? >> we have had to do furloughs, we've had to do pay freezes, got a contract concessions from the unions. we have reduced headcount by over 3000 positions now and cut, and all those measures are

part of $4.3 billion in cuts. in fact, we have closed and balanced the budget not with tax increases. that represents 9 cents of every dollar it has taken to close these gaps, but mostly with cuts and the use of rainy-day funds, the sort of thing that is criticized by opponents. but what has maintain essential services to vulnerable people. you have earned some of the other candidates talk about pension reform, and we have capped pensions and ended the abuse in the pension system. you have heard folks talk about consolidating agencies. we have consolidated or eliminated 20 different agencies. a lot of folks talk. we do. that is why there is a difference. that is why we balanced the budget and earned aa bond ratings from all the independent agencies. >> next question is for mr. baker. >> the government speaker of the house could not come to terms. as governor, would you provide the casino gambling in massachusetts? what is your vision for expanded gambling in massachusetts, and what will you do to work with the speaker to

make it happen? >> i am not a big believer that gambling and casinos are a fundamental solution to any of our economic problems. if we create a more affordable client -- climate in terms of tax and regulatory policy and business costs, those costs will grow and expand. half the businesses in massachusetts, to get them to think they can grow and expand, you have solved the problem and a lot more quickly than you will with casinos. i think a lot of people go to connecticut and rhode island. they have massachusetts license plates, and going to one casino in massachusetts to give them a place to gamble in massachusetts, putting 1000 sloth out there, i think we can do that. but there are other businesses that compete for that and a timid dollar here, and i also worry that we are focusing too much on one solution with the real solution is to cut spending, fix our fiscal problems, and get serious about

regulation and business costs. >> ms. stein? >> thank you for the question, barry. i strongly believe that expanded gaming is not a good thing for massachusetts. one needs to look no further for nevada, the poster child for casino economy, to see where casino economy leads. it is a scavenger economy, and it tends to draw discretionary income from other areas of the economy. when you create a job with casinos, you have killed other jobs, usually in small businesses and entertainment establishments. looking at the bottom, they have the highest rate of foreclosures and bankruptcies and unemployment than other states with high gambling casino resort numbers of casinos, which have similar problems. what tends to happen is when the industry comes in, they tend to get their way.

they are very powerful and influential. massachusetts does not need it. we need green jobs that strengthen our community, make them healthier. >> mr. patrick? >> i think you know my position on expanded gaming. if we do it in the form of destination resort casinos and have few in number, it can be good for us in terms of job creation and revenues, but it is not the centerpiece of our economic strategy. things that were stuck behind it include the economic development bill, enormously important tax changes and extensions of permits to developers to enable them to get on the ground and not have them expire because of the difficulty for getting financing. import measures to make working capital available for small

businesses, to commit small businesses to aggregate and get the buying power for their health insurance costs. we did the autism bill, the core reform, the fourth straight budget was balanced is possible -- there's an awful lot of good work we have done with the legislature. the second session that was the most productive in 30 years. we cannot get together on that, we may yet, but there is a lot of other important work. >> mr. cahill? >> thanks for the question. unlike my opponents, that would be the first bill i signed in january because it creates 15,000 jobs. we all talk about jobs, but when there is a proposal in front of us, we get a little squeamish. jobs are jobs, and i think all jobs have value. we also bring $100 million in local aid. i would like to fight for more money, and we can talk about bringing money back to local aid, but that will do it. i think it's a great way to start by putting casinos, slot machines, two race tracks in eastern massachusetts. one of these casinos would be here in western massachusetts. seems to be a sight that people agree to.

the question goes first to this time. >> this is a question from two leaders of a website of the republican daily newspaper in springfield. in 1996, the governor abolished passenger vehicles having a told between exit 1 and 6 on the massachusetts turnpike. that is between stockbridge and chickadee. the readers want to know if you

would restore those tolls to raise approximately $12 million? mrs. stein? >> that sounds reasonable. i would have to look into the particular is a little more to know. i think that need to find the public highway system and the public transportation system which us enormous problems with the operating budget and maintenance. the problem certainly applies to western massachusetts, but throughout the commonwealth and we need to be able to free up the resources to properly -- >> only 30 seconds. >> the director is happy with

you. >> i do not support bringing the toll of fact. we know that we still have a turnpike and we still have tolls and the rest of the state and we can certainly do this without raising tolls. >> finally, mr. baker? >> i made a commitment not to raise tolls. i think that what we ought to do is generate additional revenue to support the entire length of the roadway. >> closing statements, mr. baker, your first 31 minutes. >> thank you for tuning in and thank you to our studio audience for being here. this is a very important election. people have a clear choice. the governor thinks we're headed in the right direction, but the fact is that there are more

people out of work that any time in recent history. we have the biggest budget deficit going forward that we have had any time in recent history and we have had a tax hike over the past four years and we still have a budget deficit going forward. i think that massachusetts can do better going forward. i think that the choice for voters is clear. i think four more years is what he just have. -- just have. i think that we need to be very aggressive about creating a business climate that can compete with other states because if we do not, we will not get the people back to work. i think that is to be the fundamental focus of the administration. >> if you are happy with the way things are, i would say to vote for the candidates.

if you think that we can do better, i think that there is a historic opportunity to put massachusetts on a different path and to secure green shawms and four teachers of students and for cutting tax giveaways. if you want change, you have to vote for it and that means not voting for the political machines that have gotten us into this mess and that will keep us here. remember, all three candidates are supporting the same policies and this is massachusetts where the huge democratic majority and the legislature can override any veto, even if there is a republican in the governor's office. if you do not go to the voting booth, everything outside of the voting will not count for much. i ask for your vote, and together, we can take our government back. >> thank you very much.

this has been very informative and i hope you get a sense of who we are and our commitment beyond 128 and beacon hill. the treasury has been a commitment to us in massachusetts. almost $400 million have been invested in western massachusetts and in springfield. this is all across the state of massachusetts. particularly in western massachusetts. we do with retirement issues. we will put them here in western massachusetts. we have also invested state pension money here in massachusetts. we created 300 jobs. i want you to look at who is putting his money where his mouth is. this is not just talking about being the governor, but someone

who has actually been and wants to be the governor of the whole state. >> thank you, mr. patrick. one minute. >> nobody is working harder to help us get out of this. that is what a high-performance computing center is about. that is why we are investing in school buildings. it is what bringing liberty mutual and progressive and other companies is about. it is what the road, rail, barge in black cloth is about -- and bike paths is about. it is not about us, but about you. we have a plan, and that is why we are getting progress and making progress. these are cliches and into promises. i know what is good for mrs. -- for massachusetts. they do not.

if you want to be a part of it, then i ask for your support and your prayers and your vote on november 2. thank you very much, and good evening. >> hold your applause for one minute. everyone has been so well- behaved for the last couple of minutes. we have extra time, so that goes to me. we want to thank our audience that has been so well-behaved and so silent. we appreciate it. we want to thank the four members of the consortium. a lot goes into an event like this and they have a lot to -- a lot of work to do this week. we think our panelists for their questions. we think those of you that sent in questions. we thank all of our candidates. we thank you for watching. it may account and get out on november 2. be sure to vote. but you and good night.

[applause] >> boaters had to the polls and less than two weeks. fuddled the key races on the c- span networks with the dates every night all the way up to election day. follow c-span's alexian cover tri through election day. >> senate minority leader mitch mcconnell hit the campaign trail on friday for republican candidates in west virginia. we will hear from senator mcconnell and jon racy and others. from charleston in west virginia, this portion is almost an hour.

>> this evening, we are so pleased to have with us the next senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. from our neighboring state of kentucky. kentucky shares a lot of the same concerns that we do. things like keeping the kohl and the ground and not letting it out of the ground. kentucky and west virginia have the same concern. you have a lot of work to do. with us is senator mitch mcconnell. i wanted to give him a rousing welcome. thank you for your service. thank you for the service to come. >> [applause]

thank you very much. is great to be in a neighboring state. to be perfectly candid, from a political point of view, i have not looked across the border with much optimism for quite some time. we began to sense to -- sense that something might be changing in the mountain state. in 2000, when you put west rigid in the win column for george w. bush, had you not have done that, al gore would have been president. on the same day, [unintelligible] came to washington d has done a fabulous job presenting you. [applause] thank you for all you have done for west virginia and the

nation. the only thing better than one congressman from west virginia is three republican congressman from west virginia. [applause] this is the year to do it. let me just briefly take you back to november of 2008. en though kentucky and west virginia were not supportive, the president was sitting on a 60% approval rating, a 40-seat majority in the house, on the way to getting 60 votes in the senate, which is the magic number. if you he 60 votes, you can do pretty much what you want to. his chief of staff famously said "a crisis is a terrible thing to waste." so what we have seen over the last two years is every left-

wing idea that had been stacking up over the last 20 or 30 years they could not get through it because i was a republican in the white house or a republican congress, they have been jamming down our throats. we watched it all, we have seen them running banks, insurance companies, car companies, nationalizing the student loan business, taking over health care, passing a really bad financial-services bill that every community banker in kentucky and west virginia opposed, and ironically, some of the big boys on wall street showed up for the signing ceremony. they passed a budget that will double the national debt in five years and triplet in 10. you get the drift. they are trying to turn us into a western european country as rapidly as they can. we did not know for sure to years ago how the american people would feel about all of this.

it was not clear. as the leader of a diminished band of 40 in the senate, one vote short of where you need to be to be relevant in the process,1 keeps the oth guys from getting 60, we decided to have a great national debate about the future of the country. we decided that none of this rranted bipartisan support and the american people needed to have a sense that there was a genuine disagreement about the future of the country. along the way, the american people began to get energized and activated. we have here with us at the head table, someone from freedom works. you have been extremely important in all of this and we appreciate all you have done. [applause]

sort of a spontaneous uprising of concern american citizens. you all know that i'm frequently on those sunday talk shows. the host was talking about all of these extremists in america. i looked at her politely and said what most americans think is extreme is what this administration has been doing to this country for the last two years. [applause] cash and trade in particular. that goes right to the heart of the economies of kentucky and west virginia. talk about a threat. you go need to send to washington anyone you are not totally confident igoing to oppose cap and trade, because

it's the worst thing that could possibly happen to west virginia. [applause] in the wake of all this, it has been interesting to watch the other side in this campaign. back when they manage to jam health care through with not a vote to spare on christmas eve, every republican in the house and senate opposing it, the wot piece of legislation passed in my time in the senate, the worst, can't and trade would be the second worst if it were going to get past, but don't worry, it will not get past. [applause] so, they have this dilemma. their consultanttell them you cannot run on any thing you have done. people don't like the stimulus bill.

they realize it only provided a stimulus for public employees and not for the private sector. you cannot run on the health care bill. you cannot run on a financial services bill, you cannot run on cap and trade, what are you going to do? >> they tried for about a week to demonize john boehner. they dropped that after a week or so. they tried running against george bush again. they discovered there is a statute of limitations on running against george bush and that was not going to work. then, they tried foreign money for a while. they tried that for a week or so. just today, over the last couple of days, they are trying another argument.

it goes something like this. this is what my sent senator harry reid said it earlier today. we were so busy with policy that we did not have enough time to brag about our accomplishments. [laughter] in other words, they did not advertise properly. if you go back and take a look at what they were doing, and a president said something quite simila -- maybe their mistake was they just did not talk about enough, did not sell at well. that was not the policies, but all of us ignorant people who did not understand it. maybe it was not our fault, maybe it was their fault because

there are not talking about it enough. let me give you aist of some of the things they're doing back when they claimed they were not talking about enough. this was the headline from a "new york times" -- obama, the omnipresent. cbs, "too much obama obama saturation. the message is it thmessage. barack obama's messages may turn out to be the most salient features of his presidency. politico, april 2009, it is all obama, all the time.

a seattle newspaper -- "all obama, all the time, the president is getting over exposed. summing it up, they are now saying we d not tk about it enough. maybe if we talked about more, people would have a better feeling about it. in the president's first year, he participated in 42 press conference, 100 interviews, 23 town hall meetings, seven campaign rallies, the guy doing this compilation said there were only 21 days when the president had no public or press events. i rest my case. this is not a sales pch problem, it is a substance problem. [applause]

i think what we can fairly conclude, even before the votes are cast on november 2nd is that america is not interested in becoming france. [applause] if you look at the spending and debt and the washington takeovers, americans are genuinely frightened about the future of this country. unless you are african-american whose ancestors were brought here against their will or a american who was already here, we are the sons and daughters of ancestors who are risk takers. they had enoh gumption to get up from wherever they were and come to america, the land of opportunity. they did not come f security, they came for opportunity. throughout history of our

country, these risktakers have built and developed the nation we have today. nothing irritates me more than our leaders going of boron and apologizing for america. we will never -- going abroad and apologizing for america. we will never apologize for america. [applause] and i will tell you this. i still believe in americ exceptional as some. american exceptional as some. that is what is on the line. from the beginning of america to the present, americans always believed they were going to leave behind a better country than they inherited from their parents. when polling started with th gallup organization, they began to ask that question on surveys. do you think you will leave

behind a better country for your children and your parents love for you? for the first time, americans clearly doubt that. we are at crossroads, ladies and gentleman. it is up to us to decide which passed we take. which brings me to west virginia. i hear tell the governor is popular and doing a good job and i know you agree with me that he ought to stay there and do the job he was elected to do. [applause] but this election is who is going to go to washington. where you can have a direct impact on what kind of america we're going to have. theres one candidate in this race i guarantee you can be completely confident will go to

washington and help us stop the obama administration for the last two years of what i hope is his only term. [applause] as some of you may have heard, we first met a while back. i was running for the senate from kentucky and he was running for the senator from west virginia. both of us were little known and had lite opportunity to be victorious, everyone thought. we met in a television studio in huntington, and i'm sure they were checking the box. sec probably told them they had to have these people on to give them a little free time. so they decided to check the box on the same day so they would take care of the kentucky and west virginia box on the same day. i was immediately impressed with

the intelligence and persuasiveness of john. i view this as a long-overdue teaming up. we hope to god washington and number of years ago, but it's not too late. send me my buddy and will help you change this country in the right direction. [applause] john knows that you don't create jobs by borrowing almost a trillion dollars which will have to be paid off our children and grandchildren to the chinese and japanese who lent it to us. that's not going to be a great way to create jobs. he knows that if we're going to get out of thisconomic trough we are in, only the private sector is going to do that. he can tell you, all of us can tell you who have bee dealing

with business people, they are not hiring, they are not expanding because of what ts administration is doing. inact, there was a recent article about the president bringing in small business people to the white house and asking why there are not hiring. they went down the list and it was his agenda. [laughter] health-care taxes, health-care mandates, aggressive regulators crawling all over us. they brought all of these left- wing activists from nonprofits into the government to regulate all american commercial activity, every aspect of it. at the epa, at the center for medicare and medicare services that will administer the new health care bill, the financial regulatory bill, everybody i run into, small business, medium-

size biness, big business, everybody is just sitting there, afraid to expand because they are not sure what is coming at them. they are -- is the certainty and uncertainty that has frozen up the private sector and keeps us from getting out of this economic trough we are in. only the private sector can lead us out of this economic slowdown. [applause] ly the private sector. [applause] you have heard politicians over the years say this is the most important election ever or this is a turning point, i've said in the past. and i believe that the time i said it. but, by golly, i'm having a hard time ever thinking of an election in which more was at stake than this one. our basic american

understanding, that this is to be a land of opportunity is very much in doubt. you know we have gone too far when the president gets lectured by european heads of states about spending too much. [laughter] there is no way i can overstate the challenges the bureaucrats are presenting for l of america. some of you have heard this before. it is a story ronald reagan used tell to illustrate concerns about bureaucratic overreach and intrusion into every aspect of our lives. it is the story of the russian who went in during the old soviet union to order a car from government motors, of course. that's when we never thought we would have the government owning a car company. he goes in to government motors to order a car. he fills out forms and asks the

bureaucrat, when can i expect my car. he says it will be 10 years from today. he said will that be in the morning or the afternoon? [applause] the bureaucrat says what difference does it make? he said the plumber is coming in the afternoon. [applause] these people need to be stopped. this is serious business. we can change america and get us back on track and what you can do here in west virginia is do your part. we've got a lot of close senate races around the country. weould have a really good day, a medium-sized good day, or just a good day. i'm going to be the leader of a larger number. the question is how many. [applause]

i want to close by thanking john for stepping up. [applause] a few months ago, people were not sure this was a doable thing. he has made a believer out of you, he has made a believer of us in washington. we are fully committed to this, all the way to the finish line. help us send him to the united states senate. thank you very much, everyone. good to see you. [applause] [applause]

>> what wonderful remarks. let me point this out. the senator is a busy guy. there are a bunch of senate races around the country right now and we have to bring them home. i would like to think this guy here. i want you to give him a round of applause. without him, we would not have senator mcconnell here this evening. thank you very much. it is very important. the senator is going to slide out now. he is going to try to win a few other senate races around the country. thank you very much. [applause] as you know i have been active with a tea party in the past. there are a whole bunch of groups about -- around the cotry getting active, waking up. there are folks coming to a elections that have never been involved before. i'm excited when i meet the

folks who have ver voted before and there are a bunch of new groups involved. you need to hear from the sky. he speaks across the country. he is an inspirational speaker and we thank him for being here. matt kidrom freedom works. [applause] >> i have no idea how i a race with this prestigious front table, but i will take a one happens. it is a real honor to be here. let me make a prediction -- when we read gather for your 100th birthday, we will be talking about a robust economy, an american renaissance, energy policies that actually allows to pursue all domestic sources of energy, and talking about a fiscal conservative having just finished up his second term as president of the united states. [applause]

my group, freedom works, gives way to much credit for what the media now talks about as the tea party. as this movement developed and people started showing up at town hall meetings, they started walking precincts, somewhere along the way, the media stopped calling as names and decided to read characterize us as a political party, they started comparing us to republicans, they started comparing this to democrats and trying to measure as by those same standards. i think that was ahonest attempt to understand who these good men and women are, but it is a mcharacterization. the tea party is not a political party. the tea party is not running candates. we are not a third party.

the tea party is men and women who believe the government is spending too much money that it does not have, that washington d.c. is getting too involved in things that our constitution prohibits it from getting inlved in, things like taking over car companies, sitting on the boards of banks, taking over health care. things that defy common sense. we know the federal government does not do these things well and our founders never intended for the federal government to do these things all. there has been this rebirth and if you listen to the president of the united states, if you listen to democrats in congress, if you listen to too many folks in the media, you probably think awful things about the two- party. are there any tea party membe in the room?

anyone who is embarrassedo put up their hands? [laughter] it's ok. my name is matt and i am 80 partier. -- i am a tea party year. [applause] what has happened, if you look at the names that have been called, the first thing they said is weere not real. we were phony. there is a guy here rights for the utah -- 40 "new york times named -- who writes for the "new york times" name paul krugman. he called us a phony. then reporters started showing up at town hall meetings, and actually started talking to people. they were shocked to discover that these are real people who live in real congressional districts and have real concerns about what our government is up to. so we were not funny anymore.

suddenly, we were being manipulated by some shadowy syndicate of internation corporations. what ever was. we were just a little too simple to understand the blessings of big government and we were being manipulated into doing something we should not be doing. that did not stick. then they started calling us nasty things. you have heard the ml. we have been called domestic terrorists. think about that for a second, how offensive that is. imagine if we had thrown that accusation that the other side. the firestorm therwould be. even public radio would be upset with us. [laughter] they keep calling us names a leader mcconnell talked about this. as you get close to the

election -- we have a major fire here up front. as you get close to the election, it seems like the president and the democrats rollout a different accusation every day. it is as if they're casting around, trying to find the one silver bullet, the one named they can call us that will give the democrats to show up and get all the tea party activists to stay home. it is a sign of desperaon and it is a genuine misunderstanding of who these folks are. >> i'm sorry to interrupt you, but we have a fire going on down here. we have some birthdays' here, and don't move, you are coming back. we have some birthdays. birthday is today. join me in singing happy

birthday. happy birthday to you. happy birthday to you. ♪ [applause] >> i'm sorry. we had fire going in the front and somebody has to blow this out. before the sprinklers, on. [applause] >> you have to try again.

let's move the cake. it's always a surprise. >> the does anyone have any idea what i was saying? >> is anybody worried about the carbon for a print of that take? -- carbon footprint for that take? the careful, the epaill show up any minute. there have been all of these misunderstandings and most of them have been political. that thing is going to catch on fire. there have been all of these politically motivated accusations and i think most of them, people understood they were not speaking the truth. they're trying to smear was a rising political movement and

they have not succeeded. i saw this monday in "politico." this is the paper you have to read when you are elected to understand what the washington establishment is thinking. different pays story -- the front page story is about over 100 house seats now held by democrats are up for grabs. >> it turns out it was actually 103. three democratic house seats are so undemocratic they don't even count them as pickups. if you look at the senate, and i look at the map, i can get to 12. i can get to 12, and one of those seats is sitting right here.

[applause] if you look at traditional measures of voter energy, her a recent poll suggests tt one out of three people that record to show up on election day ourself identified the partyers. that is an amazing number. think about how much these folks can impact elections at the margin. but i understand one thing. these folks are not republicans. they are not democrats. they are not partisans in the traditional sense of the word. they are notified by the idea that the constitutional matters. they are motivated by the idea that the government should not spend money did this not have.

the american people cannot heat their homes or drive their cars. that is radical. we are against that. these are the kind of things that motivate the tea party. there is a genuine misunderstanding. i talk to folks every day and they discover i and part of this wild group of activists known as the tea party. people are genuinely confused. you think about port president obama. this is a guy who cannot conceive of a solution to a problem without appointing a czar to fix it. i suspect if you had to fix out and make a sandwich, he would think that we would need a bread

czar to allocate the number of loaves per precinct in america. this is how these guys think. they think about really smart people in washington d.c. tellg all of us what is best for us, telling us what to do. we cannot possibly do it for ourselve think of the tea party as the polar opposite of that. here you have millions of people all over the country who have come together voluntarily, bringing their own energy, their own personal knowledge, their relationships in their communities. somehow these folks have come together in created something that is bigger than themselves. what is that starlight? that sounds like the market process, does and it -- what is -- what does that sound like? the they think about top-down

hierarchy's. what is going to happen on election day? i think there is a seemed -- energy amongst republican activists who did not think we had a chance. there are a lot of independents who have joined us, a lot of democrats with buyers' remorse who have joined together around a set of ideas that matter. you see this in the polls and traditional measures of politics. things that are candidates never had going for them in the past. there is also an unseen thing going on that is going to produce a profound impact on november 2, i believe. that is this local community network that has oanized literally in every congressional district across the country. it is what howard dean used to

brag about. it is a real 50-state strategy that allows candidates to stand on principle and be competitive, even in barney frank's district. there are a number of democratic chairman all across america today fighting for their congressional district. they have never had to run the race in their entire careers. it is these folks that are walking precincts that are doing door hangers, putting up yard signs, taking their country back. that is going to be profound on eltionay. and thank god, not a moment too soon. our country is literally at a tipping point. we have talked about this tonight. if we don't fix all of these problemsoday, we won't have a country anymore. we have to do this well. to me, november 3 is far more important than november 2. november 3 is the day that this

new generation of legislative entrepreneurs starts to think out how we turned political promises into legislation in bill those coalitions inside washington d.c. think about what 10 or 12 new centers can do to change the conversation on the senate floor. [applause] think about what 50, 60, 70 new republican freshmen house members can do to change the conversation on the house floor. [applause] and think aut the grass-roots army that is going to be there for them when they stick their necks out, when they make tough decisions and start pushing his agenda. we have an opportunity to offer a vivid, positive alternative to the policies of barack obama,

nancy pelosi, and harry reid. it is these freshmen who will provide that energy. i would say to all of the two- party and those who were too embarrassed to hold our heads up that they were t party, our job starts on november 3. we have to support our guys when they do the right things. if they start to get cozy in washington, we have to remind them how they got there and what they are there to do. i hope you guys a pick up some yard signs, pick up some door hangers, and let's take back america on november 2. [applause] >> we thank you for allou do out there. and happy birthday. we actually had that plan.

we have television cameras back there. we want this to be interesting for television. our friend and west virginia's friend, the congresswoman. >> thank you. [applause] thank you all. thank you for those great words. riding on the bus myself, the crowds that were generated in the parts of the tour i was on, a lot of tea party activism and enthusiasm brought those crowds out to see us on the bus. it is a real phenomenon. i feel like west virginia, this is our time. west virginia republicans, this is our time. [applause] to take our country back, to

take it to the values we believe been, to the personal responsibility, to be ae to have a future for our children. charlie and i are brand-w grandparents of a baby girl. i keep talking about her. she is so cute. for me, we would not be here if it were not for a lot of folks in this room. particular, thank you, but, for your dedicated support for me. that is what you are doing here tonight, putting that stamp of approval on all the folks on the ballot. you are saying i believe the news so much that i am willing to put my name with your name and talk to my friends and neighbors and sayo them, this is our time, the time to take our country back,o make the statement at the ballot box and to make west virginia so that

senator mcconnell, he will want to come over to west virginia to see how we do it and how we know how to organize and get the message out. this is a wonderful crowd for that. we have a lot of problems and we have heard a lot about them from matt and from senator mcconnell. he is a good luck charm, because i met him probably one. week before my very first election. o else was there that night? he was a good luck charm for me and he will be for you as well. he sees everything across the country. i really pleased that he was here with us tonight. we have a situation that is devastating us here in west virginia and across the country. when your neighbor loses a job, that is recession. when you lose a job, that is depression.

when nancy pelosi loses he job, that is a recovery. [applause] so all the issues, overspending, cap and trade, those are the things i have been a solitary voice most of the time in our delegation saying no, this is not right for west virginia and for the country. we need to work and make it better for what people need, want, and feel is in their best interest. that hasot been what we have seen in washington. i need a couple of friends from west virginia in washington d.c. [applause] we need a voice in the u.s. senate. we need a good, solid, conservative vote every time. he has been up front and has been a great champion for us. you want to talk about job

creation? that is what john has done his entire professional life. now is the time we need that kind of energy in the u.s. senate and also to protect our interests in west virginia. let's work hard to make sure regret that voice in the u.s. senate. david mckinley is working hard. i am sorry he is not here with us tonight. he is the energizer bunny. mary is always right there with him. they are running a great race with a lot of energy, but it is going to boil down to election day, just like everybody else's race. i will finally have somebody to sit with from west virginia on my side of the aisle. that will be a great day. [applause] spike maynard, i have gotten to know you so well over the campaign. he has been a wonderful campaigner. he has such talent being a

former supreme court justice, and has a great sense of humor at the same time. it is time to say so long to the entrenched incumbent and sent spike maynard to the house of representatives. [applause] with that, i want to say from the deepest part of my heart, and has been an incredible honor and privilege to serve in congress for 10 years. i have been entrusted with you to go to washington and vote for you and your families and businesses a near future. i want to continue to do that, but this is our time. let's take our country back. thank you. [applause]

>> is also a great privilege to bring to the podium the next united stas senator from west virginia. [applause] >> thank you very much. i told a high school class the other day, the louder and longer you applaud, the longer you stay out of glass. i had a standing ovation for five minutes. when you have of the leader of the united states senate, senator mitch mcconnell, come to charleston, west virginia to support the entire cast of west virginians, that is a real kudo. bi phillips, thank you very much.

matt, thank you very much. you have absolutely help our campaign immeasurably. i respect what you do and am very proud to be a small part of the tea party. thank you very much. [applause] had thbirthday. how many is it for you? [laughter] you don't know? her birthday and our anniversary of three days apart. we were married 32 years, is that correct? [applause] liz got here late, she was marching in the homecoming parade. how many young people did you have with you? 55 junior walker, a very good.

how many of you got to see not a debate thether not on public television, not a debate but a forum. liz raese was there, and right in front of the governor. he knows where you live, doesn't he? that is just a guess. chellie made a wonderful documentary on what we are going to do if we could give her some friends in congress d the u.s. senate. how many of th recently heard barack obama come out and y that if the republicans take over congress, i am going to have to go head-to-head comt. anybody heard that? wow, can you imagine barack obama going hand-to-hand combat? [laughter]

i cannot. let's just look at that. how many of you remember another leader that we new cult ronald reagan? do you rememberonald reagan? -- that we called ronald reagan? do you think he would make a statement like that? i don't think so, because ronald reagan was a leader. he and tip o'neill got together and said let's start cutting some regulations. let's start cutting some taxes and get this country moving again, and by god, he did it. that is a leader. i want to tell you one story about or reagan. liz and i were in the company of michael reagan. he said when we had a situation when reagan first went into office, it was called grenada.

we had 275 of our children trapped in a school system over there. they were invaded by the communist party. reagan sat there in his office in washington, and caspar weinberger came in and said mr. president, we have 275 of our children locked in a school right now, surrounded by communists. caspar weinberger then said president, what you want me to do? reagan said well, let me go in to my other office and let me think about that for 30 minutes. so he went into his other office and sat there and came back out in 30 minutes and told caspar weinberger, alboin and get them. that quick. the war, if it was cald a war, lasted a day and have, and our

marines went in and got them. nothing politically correct about any of this, was there? there were no rules of engagement. already murphy could have been right there. guess what happened, we got them back, didn't we? so caspar weinberger walks in the very next day and said president, i have often wondered, since we were victorious, why did you need those 30 minutes to think about the situation? reagan scratched his head and said well, i just thought to myself, what would john wayne do? [laughter] could we use a little john wayne right now? i think so. [applause] the greatest thing of what reagan did is he showed us you

could turn it around. how many of you remember the malaise speech? and then there was the misery index. and then jimmy carter would say let's turn down the thermostat and everybody can freeze to death. ronald came in and did something very unique. senator mcconnell talked about american exception lissome. he said the same thing that i say. we are exceptional people in this country, are we? we are exceptional people. [applause] senator mcconnell said something else. he said that our forefathers and foremothers came to this country yester day because ty were exceptional people.

they were not satisfied with where they lived, whether that was too much taxation or too much regulation. they said we want to be exceptional. and they came here and they made the most exceptional country in the world. that is what role reagan believed. he believed inmerican exceptional listen. let's contrast that right now with what barack obama thinks about that. when he was asked early in his presidency what he thought of american exception listen, this is what he said. he jetted his chin up at the ceiling. he had to teleprompter right here. he said yes, i believe in american exception listen, but i also believe in german exception listen and french exception lissome. what does this tell us?

he does not know what it is. he doesn' believe in american exception lissome. ronald reagan did. what did he do? he took interest rates that were almost 19%. he took the situation with inflation that was almost 20%, and what did he do? he turned around, because he believed in america. everything that senator mcconnell said is very true. but we have in this country are all self-inflicted wounds from people that are in congress and the u.s. senate tt looked after their own best interest and not yours. not yours. [applause] we have a wonderful opportunity in the state of west virginia to really get on the map. it is like when bob huggins to gust the final four. it is like when we had a

wonderful golf tournament this year. held out november 2? how about spike maynard, david mckinley? [applause] if barack obama can go hand-to-hand combat and west virginia gives him a little message. i think that would register all across the united states from here in a coal producing state that is going to stand up and tell him what to do with cap and trade real quick. that can happen real quick. [applause] when congress is taken by the republican party, which it will be, we are going to have a new leader in congress, aren't we? his name is probably going to be john maynard -- john boehner.

what happens when he is the leader of congress? who sets the plate? that means obamacare will be a lot of trouble. cap and trade, in a lot of trouble. stimulus money, going back to the treasury. card check, in aot of trouble. that is what we want. that is what america wants. that is what the tea party once. that is what our children want. we are in the position in west virginia right now to go to the final four. this time, not fourth place, this term first place. we win, you lose. thank you very much. [applause]

needs to change to support the aspiration and expectations of today's population rather than the population of the 1950s. the spending review is under pinned by far reaching reform of programs from public service reform. we saw over the last decade the more money without reform is a recipe for fail year and less money without reform would be worse. we began by squeezing every last penny we can find from waste and administration costs. our ambition in this review was to find 3 billion pounds of savings from the administrative budget. with the help of the green review and the work down by the minister, i can tell the house we have gone further than we ought possible in cutting costs. services are integrated, and the administrative budget of every min government department is cut by a third.

the result is this, we promise three billion pounds in savings, we will deliver 6 billion pounds. of course, there is a very understandable concern about the reduction in the total public sector head counts resulting in the measure of the spending review. we believe the best estimate is the one set out by the independent office of sponsibility. they have a head count of 490,000 over the spending review period. that is a over four years and not overnight. it's achieved by natural turnover. this suggests a turnover rate in the public sector, but there will be redundancies, and that is up to the decisions of the employers in the public sector. that is unavoidable when e country has run out of money. we feel responsible for evy individual who works physical government, and we always do

everything we can to help them find alternative work. in fact, in the last three months alone, this economy created 178,000 jobs. we should remember that unless we deal with this record budget deficit precisely, many more jobsill be in danger both in the private and public sector. the cabinet of this and treasury oversees the program. both departments will lead by example. the office budget is reduced by 55 million pounds by 2014 and 2015. additional allocations are provided to fund reforms and projects, community organizers and launch the services that give young people for the first time a right of passage to citizenship. in recognition of the challenges faced by the voluntary community sector, i'm establishing a one

year, 100 million pound transition fund for those facing real hardships. treasury sees the overall budget reduced by 33% sharing in the department's enormously expensive psi building that signed up to by moving parts of the cabinet office into the same presence. the chancellor is a royal trustee, and i want to say something briefly. as i outlined in the budget, the ten year settlement expired this year, and no provision for a new settlement has been made when he ended office. her majesty agreed to next year. going forward she agreed the total royal household spending falls by 14% in 2012-13 while grants in the household is frozen in cash terms. in order to support the cost of the giant jubilee which the country is looking forward to celebrating, there will be an

additional facility of 1 hl pounds. after that the royal household receives a new support gran linked to a portion of the revenue of the crown of state so that my successors do not have to return to the issue as after as i i have had to. mr. speaker, this review is reshaping -- order, order, all of this noise makes progress slower and steps times that would be available to the chancellor. it's unfair and uncourteous. >> review is aping our public services. there needs to be a dramatic shift in power. ..

and we will encourage new providers and adult social care early years and road management. for local government, the deficit we've inherited means an unavoidably challenging settlement. there'll be overall savings in funding for councils and 7.1% for four years. but to hold councils we propose a massive devolution of financial control. today i confirm -- today i confirm the recent scene of a local government revenue grants will and from april next year.

the only exception will be simplified schools grounds and a public health ground. outside schools and the fire service, the number of separate core drugs that go to local authorits will be reduced from over 92 fewer than 10. counsels and leaders will remain accountable, but they will no longer have to report on 4700 local area agreement. the local government settlement include spending fornext year's council tax breaks to help families with their budgets are tight. we're also introducing tax increment finance powers, allowing councils to fund key projects by borrowing against future increases and locally collect good business. some in local government have ncerns about the financing of social care. i can announce the grant funding for social care will be increased by eight additional 1 billion pounds by the fall year of defending any further 1 million pounds for social care will be provided to the nhs t

support joint working with councils of elderly people do not continue to fall betwe the cracks of two different systems. that's a total of 2 billion pounds of additional funding for social care to protect the most fundable. mr. speaker, we will also reform our social housing system, ford is currently failing to address the needs of the country. over 10 years, more than half a million social rented properties were lost. we did was to shut up, there was unable to move. and why generation ago, only one in 10 families and social housing had no one working. this results to one and three by 2008 and nine. witcher future housing is more flexible. the terms for existing social tenants in iraq levels will remain unchanged. new tenants will be offered intermediate runs at around 80% of the market rent. alongside 4.4 billion pounds of capital resources, this will enable us to build up to 150,000

new affordable homes over the next fou years. we will continue to improve the existing housing stock to the decent homes program and we wl reform the planning system so we put local people in charge. we reduce the burdens on house builders and encourage more homes to be built with a new homes bonus. within an overall resource budget for the department of communities and local government that is ing reduced to 1.1 lean pounds every. , priority will be given to protecng disabled facilities grant. this will go alongside a 6 billion-pound commitment over the four years to the upporting people program, which provides health and housing costs to a dozen of the most fundable people in our communities. in recognition, an important service by the fire rescue service we decided to eliminate reductions in return for substantial operational reform. mr. speaker, let me turn now to reforms in our security and

defense. yesterday i run off to the prime minister set up the conclusions of such a chicken defense review. he explained in detail how we will protect british people come and deliver international obligations and secure british influence around the world. the spending review provides the resources to do just that. the budget for the ministry of defense will reach 33.5 billion pounds in 2014, 15, a saving of 8% over the period. on top of the sentiment, we will continue to provide the resources that are forces in afghanistan require. in the chancellor i believe strongly if we ask our brave servicemen and women to risk their lives on our behalf in active combat, that we will give them all the tools they need to finish the job. so mr. speaker, our international influence and are committed to the world are not only determined by your military pabilities are diplomacy and element policy matter, too. savings of 24% in the foreign

and commonwealth budget will be achieved over the review period by a sharp reduction in the number of whitehall-based diplomats and back-office functions. though they focus on helping british companies with exports and secure jobs at home and with the help of u.k. t.i. will attract significant overseas investment to our shores. i can also confirm this coalition government will be the first british government in history in the first mor country in the world to honor the united nations commitments on international aid. the department of defense and national development budget will rise to 11.5 audience pounds over the next four years. overseas development will reach 7% of national and 2013. this will half the number of death scores by malaria, stabilized at 50,000 women pregnant beach and 250,000 newborn debuts. whether working behind the counter of the charity shop or volunteering abroad or contributing taxes to her aid budget, britain can hold their heads up high and say, even in

these difficult times, we will honor the promise we made for some of the poorest people in our world. our aid budget allows britain to lead in the world. it may be protected from cuts, but not from scrutiny. i've agree with my right told friends come in the development secretary, a kind of reform that reduces administration costs to have the global donor average in the h. programs we inherited in china and russia focuses on conflict resolution and creates an independent commission to assess the impact of the money we commit. mr. speaker, let's now turn to security at home. attacking a citizen is a primary duty of governments. our police put themselves in harm which make the rest of his face and we al democratic to hear it but no public service can be immune from reform. her majesty is found in his recent report this mitigates the risk of a major police budgets without effect in the quality of

front-line policing. and tom windsor is leading a review of terms and conditions which will report on how the police service could manage its resources to serve the public even more cost-effectively. using independent full cost for the present, the settlements i'm proposing today will see police spending falling by 4% each year. by cutting costs and scrapping bureaucracy, were saving hundreds of thousands of police man-hours. our aim is to avoid any doctrine of visibility and availability of policing our streets. our nw national security strategy juds terrorism to be one of the highest risks facing this country. therefore, i am prioritizing counterterrorism over the reiew period both in the home office budget in a single intelligence account. we have been assuredthis will maintain operational capabilities against both al qaeda and its affiliates and against northern irish terrorist threats. this will enable us to meet the terrorist threat and to protec the olympic games in 2012.

overall, the home office budget will find savings of an average of 6% a year. the ministry of justice budget willeach 7 billion pounds by the end of the four year period with an average saving of 6% a year. a green paper was that our proposals to reform sentencing and kidney earlier to give treatment to mentally ill in these private providers reduce reoffending. 1.3 billion pounds of capital will also be provided over the period to maintain the existing prison estate and fund essential new build projects, the plans for a new 1500 police prison will be deferred. the law office department would use its budget by a total of 24% over the period, with a crown prosecution service greatly reducing the inflated cost a peer reforms will also be required to streamline commode justice system, close underused courts and the legal aid will. we do need fair access to justice, but provide it at a fair cost for the taxpayer.

mr. speaker, all the reforms i've spoken of, to whitehall and the wait is provided to local governments, to defense nd security and justice system will improve the value for money for taxpayers and the service provided for the public. and next month, each government department will publish a business plan setting out his reform plans for the next four years so that priorities are clear in the public can hold them to account. reform isone of the guiding principles of the spending review. and so too is fairness. let's be clear. let's be clear, there is nothing there about running huge budget deficit. and burdening future generations of the dead were not prepared to pay. how ironic it was the last lour prime minister himself who once observed the republic financed this must be sustainable over the long term.

if they're not, then it's the poor who will suffer the most. and that s why -- nobody here is in the chamber today. that is why we are restoring order toward public finance is before that's a lot tohave been. if your government deals with the deficit decisively on that it's over going to do. and they fear government ensure those f the broader shoulders are the greatest burden. the distributional analysis -- the distributional analysis published today shows that those on the highest ends will contribute more towards its entire fiscal consolidation. not just in cash terms, but also as a proportion of their income and the consumption of public services combined. mr. speaker, i completely understand -- [inaudible conversations] mr. speaker, i completely understand the public's anger of the banks that were so

appallingly regulated over the last decade. and no longer concerned brought such damage to our economy should be contemplating paying high prices. we are overwhelming the systm so the bank of england with its clout in reputation has been in charge. we look at the structure of the industry and next year we will receive its reform. today we set out very clearly to take on a project is in the banking indust going forward. we neither want to let tanks making a fair contribution, nor do it to drive them abroad yet many hundred of jobs across the whole united kingdom depend on britain been a competitive place for financial services. so ourim will be to extract the maximum sustainable tax

revenues for financial services. those maximum revenues should be not just in one year, butver a period of years. we have our deepest that in the face of opposition to introduce a permanent levy on banks. legislation will be published tomorrow. once fully effective, the permanent levy will raise more each year and a rear for the extractor than the one you bought a fax of last year. i know the previous chancellor now it is at a field to curb behavior and was not sustainable. however, we want but not by the letter, bikes. period and a year ago the previous government in a fanfare that it would require banks to sign up to the code of practice taxation. mr. speaker, that's about it or how many the config and banks actually signed up. the answer is for -- four out of 15. that is what happened when they were in office, al talk and no

action. >> here, here. >> i'm instructed to brother to work with the banking sector to return to many banks of the code of practice by the end of next month. we will also address the situation under the last government for the gas attacks as those unpaid group considerably. so when the spending view while the hma budget will fight resource savings of 15% for the better use of technology, greater efficiency and better ideas. we'll be sending 900 on target tax evasion and fraud. in this institutional mind hundreds million and is expected to help us collect a missing 7 billion pounds in tax revenue. nor will fraud in the welfare system be tolerated anymore. we estimate that 5 billion pounds a year is a must this way. 5 billion pounds of others have

to work long hours to pay their taxes. this week we published our plans to step up the fight to catch benefit ease and deploy it uncompromising penalties here they are. that brings me to the wider welfare budget. [yelling] a civilized countries provide to the families 2% and most honorable hopes those who look for work and supports those in retirement. and that is why one of the first tracks of this was the relink the basic state pension to earnings and guarantee a rise each year by earning to to and half%. [shouting] never again will those who work hard all their lives be insulted with the state pension increase of 75 cents. >> here, here. [shouting] >> for this guarantee, mr. speaker has to be paid for at a time when people are living much longer than anyone

predicted good we should celebrate that fact, but also confnted. alternatives report o functions that an more generous state pension has to be increased by the pension age. even since its publication, life expectancy has risen further than predicted. before the budget we wants to repeal an increase in the state pension age. and that is now concluded. the state pension age for men and women will reach 66 by the year 2020. this will involve a gradual increase in the state pension age from 65 to 66, starting in 2018. and it will mean an acceleration of the increase in the female pension age already underway since this april. 2016, the rates of increase will be three months in a report, rather than the current plan of one month and every to appear freeze in the ate pension age is what many, many countries save over 5 billion pounds a

year, money which will be used to generate basic state pension as we managed demographic rushers. we also use interim report from public service commission. i'm sure the whole house -- [shouting] >> mr. speaker, ensure the whole house will want to thank john hutton and independent piece of work. [shouting] >> mr. speaker, i welcome his findings and i hope it will form the basis of a new deal, the balances, the legitimate expectations of hard-working public servants bring peace and requirement with an equally legitimate demand of hard-working taxpayers that they do not pay unfairly for it. and i think the elements of this new pension deal are clear. we should expect the public service pensions of defined in a

fit and a waste to theottom of pension provision. we will public service to be a gold standard. at the same time so we should expe they should be much more affordable. when the public's pensions were established in the 1950's, taxpayers may top the contributions. today they make up two thirds of the contributions and the unfunded bill is set to rise to 33 billion pounds by 2015, 16. so i think we should expect as john hutton is that there has to be an increase in employee contributions. although i also agree with john hutton that this should be staggered unprogressive. that means the lower paid and those in the armed forces or protect good and the hghest paid public servants should get the largest benefits to pay the highest contributions. we will await the full commission report next spring before coming to any conclusions on the defined benefit and the progressive contribution rise. we will also launch a consultation on the fair deal policy as he recommends.

but we'll carry out his interim report suggests a full public consultation ow on the appropriate discount rate used is that contributions to these pensions. from the perspective of filling the hole and e public finances, we will see changes that deliver an additional 1.8 pounds of savings per year in the cost of public serice pensions by 2014, 15 and over and above the plans but to us by the last government. it is also clear the current final salary penion terms for mps are not subantial or we anticipate the current scheme will have to end. will make a further statement following the publication of lord hutton's findings. the welfare system is also there to help people of the working age when they find their job, have a disability, started families and need help with low pay. but the truth as everyone knows is the welfare system is failing many millions of our fellows. people find themselves trapped in an incomprehensible outward benefits system for their ntire

lifetimes because it simply does not pay to work. this robs them of their aspirations and opportunities and toss the rest of the country fortune. welfare spending now accounts for one third of all public spending. benefits also soared by 45% under the previous government. in some cases, the benefit bill of a single out of work family has amounted to the tax bills of 16 working families put together. this is personally unsustainable and unfair. the last government from its reform and flunked it. we will deliver. someone >> my right old friend, the secretary said enough proposals with my support to replace all working age benefits and tax credits with a single dashed single, simple universal credit. the guiding rule will be this. it will always pay to work. those who get work will be better off than those who don't

it represents the greatest reform to a welfare state regeneration. it will be introduced under the next two parliaments at a pace that ensures we get this right. i set asidmore than 2 billion pounds of the spending review of resource is to make this happen and it will go alongside her new work program which we are also planning today. dried on the skills of the voluntary sector in private providers, and the will provide intensive help and support for those who could look for work but currently lack the confidence of the skills that try to the department for work and pensions what makes savings to help deliver these gains by increasing the use of overhead, but we will also be seeking substantial savings from the rest of the 200 blion-pound benefit bill on top of those already advanced in the budget. as i said in june, the more we could save on welfare costs, the more we could continue other more productive areas of government spending.

and the massive public consultation for conducted ove the summer, the overwhelming message we received is the british people think it's fair to reform welfare bills and reduce them in order to protect important public services. so today, i announce these further welfare savings. we will kindly at that contributory employment for those in the work-related neck to be the group to one year. this is double the length of time for interbreeding jobseekers allowance. will increase the age threshold for the shared roommates and housing benefit from 25 to 35 so the housing benefit rules reflect the housing expectations of people of a similar age, not on benefits. we will give local authorities greater flexibility to manage council tax together with direct control at a council tax benefit with a note will budget would reduce by 10% from april 2013. we will find the rules for the mobility and car elements for disability living allowance paid to people in residential are,

generating savings and enabling us to continue with this important benefit. we will freeze the maximum savings credit toward an pension credit for four years, thereby limiting the spread of means testing of the income distribution on tax credits we will further control the cost of tax credits by freezing the basic and three-hour elements to three years. we will change the working tax credit eligibility rules so that couples with children must wear 24 hours of the week between them and we will return the child care elements of the working tracks credit to his previous 70% level. we will also introduce a new cap on benefits. no family that doesn't work will receive more in benefits than the average family that does go out to work. [shouting] >> here, here. >> is tough but fair. those in living allowance working tax credit or the war with those pension will be excluded. taken together, all these welfare measures they've outlined will save the country 7 billion pounds a year. but mr. speaker, we want to

ensure that low-income families with children are protected from the adverse effects of these essential savings. because this government is committed to ending chid poverty and i can announce -- [shouting] i can announce today that i am increasing the child element to the child tax credit by the 30 pounds in 2011, 12 and 50 pounds in 2012, 13 about indexation. this'll mean annual increases of 180 pounds and 110 pounds above the level promised by the last government. this will provide support to for millions lower income families and i can confirm that using the same model we inherited, the spending review has no measurable impact in child party over the next two years while we await the conclusions from report by the right old member. [shouting] mr. speaker, but they now turn to the universal benefits. mr. speaker, i have macon

difficult decision to remove child benefits from families with a higher rate taxpayer. i wish it were otherwise, but i simply cannot ask those watching this, earning just 15,000 or 30,000 pounds a year to go on paying the child benefit of those earning 50 or 100,000 pounds a year. the death of the last labor government money to make sure the better off in society also make a fair contribution makes this choice unavoidable. and it also means that no further changes to child benefits are required. child benefit will continue to be paid in the normal way to the great majity of the population from birth until a child leaves all-time education at the age of 18 or even 18. we can afford to do this because according to the latest independent estimates we've received from the ofce of the budget responsibility, removing child benefit from higher rate taxpayers archer saves britain to an half billion pounds a

year. we also keep the proposal benets for pensioners in recognition of the fact miniport card and save target all their lives. free eye tests, free prescription charges, free tv license is for the age of 75 will remain exactly unbudgeted followed by thprevious government as promised. [shouting] >> here, here. >> i am also turning -- mr. speaker, i'm also turn a temporary increase in the cold weather payments introduced by the last government into a permanent increase. [shouting] in my view, higher cold-weather payments should be for life, not just for general election. [shouting] [shouting] mr. speaker, and so too are the

promises we make on the national health service. the only intrinsic heart of the fabric of our country. it is the emdiment of a fear society. this coalition government made a commitment to protect the nhs and increase health spending every year. today we honor that commitment in the fall. total health spending will rise each year over and above inflation. this year we are spending 104 billion pounds on health care capital combined by the end of four years will be spending 114 billion pounds. we can afford this in part because of the decisions on welfare they've just announced. and also because we've made tough decisions in other parts of the code budget. but to govern is the national health service. [shouting] that does not mean bermudian health department offered a reform and waste and inefficiency. productivity and health services fell steadily over the last 10 years and must not continue.

a 2014, were aiming to save up to 20 billion pounds a year i demanded utter value for money. but the money we save will be reinvested in the nation's health care you as the independent forecaster published in the budget show, we need to make the savings to deal with the region populatio and the rising cost of new medical treatments. but there are also new services we can offer a new cancer drug fun will be provided. spending on health research will be protected and will prioritize work summitry before dementia. will expand access to psychotherapeutic and those with mental on us. we will fi a hospital schemes including the royal oldham and the west camera land for health spending as for other spending announcements. they will be consequential alcations for scotland, wales and northern ireland. ..

bar to. i confirmed today that we will provide the northern-- with 25 million pounds of cash and a 175 million-pound loan to help those who have lost their license-- life savings. we will also help those across the united kingdom who have lost money as a result of the

collapse of equitable life. for 10 years the equitable life licyholders have fought for justice. for 10 years or less government delayed and denied. it is time to write the wrong for many many thousands of people who did the right thing, to save for their future, tried not to depend on the state and then with the innocent victims of a terrible failure of regulation. so let me make it clear, i accept the findings of the parliamentary ombudsman in full. i've read the advice of sir john chadwick and i thank him for it but i do not agree with the level of compensation his analysis suggested. i agree with the ombudsman that the relative-- is the difference between my policyholders receive from their policy and what they would have received elsewhere. the parliamentary ombudsman has recognized a balance has to be struck between being fair is to

policyholders and fair to taxpayers particularly when many budgets and benefits are being cut but many we payout has to come from general public expenditure. i have decided their amount to pay out in total is in the region of 1.5 billion pounds, two-thirds of which will be found in the spending review period. with profit annuities are particularly hard hit as they were retired and were unable to move their savings elsewhere. as result the government will cover the cost of the total relative loss coveed by these deserving people. the team will start making payments next year. mr. speaker these measures and our welfare reform means it will always pay to work. the benefit savings will help us protect key public services like the national health service so there is help for those who have lost everything. these are fair decisions consistent with the second principle of the spending review.

mr. speaker, the third and final principle centers on growth and promoting a private sector recovery. by restoring macroeconomic stability we have brought certainty to business. we are giving businesses the frdom to compete, and today's review builds on the steps because even when money is short we should prioritize those areas of public spending which are most likely to support economic growth. that is what we are doing with the department of business innovation and skills. and administration will be cut by 400 million pounds, 24 quangos, lower priority programs will be abolished and eployers will have to contribute more to further education but this means that today i can announce the largest ever financial investment in the adult apprenticeship. an increase of over 50% from the previous government, helping 75 thousand by the end of this biz

-- spending review period. we will make investments in the post office network and permit-- attacked post-offices. including our plans to provide financial support to encourage those from the poorest households to stay in education. our universities are the jewels in our economic ground and it is clear for you want to keep our place near the top of the world, then we need to reform our system of funding and reject, as we said beyond the-- be unworkable idea. clearly federal graduates will have to pay more and this will enable us to reduce considerably the contribution to general taxpayers have to make to the education of those who will probably end up burning much more than them. overall annual savings of 7.1% will be found from the department for businesses budget

within those savings the secretary of state and i have decided to protect the budget. ringing the world leader in science research and that is vital to our future economic future. that is what i'm proposing we do not cut the cash gains for the science budget. will be deteed b 6 billion pounds a year. building on the review of science spending, we have found with te science budget significant savings of three and 24 million pounds can be found for efficiency. with this relatively protective settlement i'm confident our country can increase over the next four yars. we will also invest 220 million pounds in the u.k.'s census for medical search and innovation from the moleculr biology in cambridge, the animal health institute in felt right. research and technological innovati will also help us with one of the greatest challenges of our time, climate

change, and it will support new jobs and low-carbon industries. so today even in these times we commit public capital funding capital funding of up to a billion pounds to one of the world's first commercial scale carbon capture storage demonstration projects. we will also invest over 200 million in the development offshore wind technology and manufacturing. yesterday protesters scaled the treasury urging us to proceed with their idea fora green investment bank. mr. speaker it is the first time anyone has protested in favor of that bank. [laughter] i have set aside in the spending review 1 billion pounds of funding for that bank but i hope much more will be raised in the from the private sector and from the proceeds of future government asset sales. for britain to be a leaer of the new green economy creating jobs saving energy and reducing carbon emissions. we will also introduce

incentives to help families reduce their bills. we will introduce a funded renewable green deal that will encourage efficiency and know up front cost to homeowners and allow us to phase out the warm front row graham. overall the total settlement for the department for energy and climate chnge will fall by an average of 5% a year but there will be a large increase in capital spending, partly to meet unavoidable commitments on nuclear decommissioning. we will deliver resort savings of an average of 8% a year but we will fund a major improvement in our defenses and coastal erosion of-- erosion management for 145,000. mr. speaker our heritage and sports will have enormous value in their own right but are rich and varied cultural life is also one of our country's greatest economic assets is. it will come down to

1.1 billion pounds by 2014 and 15. administrative costs are being reduced by 41%, 19 quangos will be abolished or reformed. all of this is being done so we can limit for your reductions to 15% in core programs like her national museums, the funding provided to our arts and for england's whole sport plan. we will complete the new world-class building inspections for the take gallery and will provide details for service projects early. i can also announce today that in order our nation's culture and hitage main available to all people continue to fund free entry to museums and galleries. naudible conversations] mr. speaker, mr. speaker, there are also ongoing provisions of

the 9.3 billion pounds of public funding for a safe and successful olympic and paralympic games n london in 2012 and we have to approach the bbc ensure that day to make that contribution as a publicly funded organization savings during the spending review. i am pleased to confirm that this week we have struck a deal. the bbc, the bbc will take from the government the responsibility for funding the bbc world service and bbc monitor as well as part funding. this amounts to some 340 million pounds of savings a year to the exchequer by 1415. to ensure the cost of these applications is not passed on, the bbc has agreed a funding deal for the full duration of its charter review. the licensee will be frozen for the next six years. this will help almo every

family and is equivalent to a 16% savings in the bbc over that period similar to the savings in other major cultural institutions. the bbc has also agreed to reduce its lifespan and make no further encroachments into local media markets to protect local newspapers and independent local regular tv. and they will contribute to the 530 million pounds we will spend in the next four years to bring broadband to rural hearts of our country for the private sector will take longer to reach. pilots will go ahead and-- all of this will help encourage the growth of our creative industry as a key part of the new economy we are seeking to build. history speaker, after our-- matt the department for transport will receive th largest capital settlement. for the next four years we will

invest over 30 billion pounds in projects, more than was invested during the past four years. 14 billion pounds of that will fund maintenance investment on our railways, direct subsidies will be reduced for concessionary fares. the cap unregulated rail fares will rise of rpi to 3% but that will help his country afford new rolling stock as well as improved passenger conditions. more of the money will be allocated next week, but i want to tell the house tod about some of the projects that will go ahead. let's remember even after the tough spending settlements the country still going to be spending over 700 billion pounds a year so in yorkshire capacity of m. 62 will beexpanded, 90 billion pounds will be spent to build rail platforms and will also improve line speeds. in the northeast 500 million pounds will refurbish e metro and the-- in

the northwest, we will invest in rail electric-- like a vacation between manchester and liverpool preston and we will provide funding for new suspension bridge. rail and roads and scottish executive, but i can tell th house the major investment in new poor will go ahead and the m-1 and a 46 with the improved. in the west we will extend to the metro and completely redrew the station and in the southwest we will fund improvements on the empire than m4. in the east of england colleagues will be delighted to know they pay 11 to norwich will be upgraded. [laughter] and around london we will widen the am 25 between 10 different johnsons and completely improve the-- and in london on top a major investment in our capital city infrastructure will take

place. crossrail will go ahead and fines will be upgraded for the 21st century. this is nothing like a complete list because next week we will be putting out more up more details a yes we are saving money and putting the state on a more sstainable footing but even then we will be spending tens of billions of pounds on britain's future infrastructure. the secretary of state will set out our national infrastructure plan so the private money is also put to work in building for this country the economic infrastructure our businesses need. our regional growth fund will also help us adis promised a billion pounds has been planned for the next two years money to lead private investment in areas of country where it has been absent. i can announce today i'm providing close to half a billion pounds extra in the third year for the regional growth fund. long-term investment in the capacity of our tansport, our science, green energy will also help move britain from its decade-long dependence on one

sector of the economy in one part of the country and they ruined that has led to. mr. speaker, the ost important ingredient of a 21st century economy is well-educated children who believe in themselves and aspire to a better life whatever their background. in june, after the budgt when the chief secretary and i turned our attention to how to allocate spending between government departments we set ourselves a goal. we wanted to see if it was possible ven when spending was being cut to find more resources for our schools and their early year education of our childn. i can tell the house that we have succeeded. it is meant other departments taking bigger cuts bu i believe strongly that this is the right choice for our country's future. there will be a real increase in the money for schools, not just next year or the year after as the last government once promised but for each of the next four years.

the udget will rise from 35 billion pounds to 39 billion pounds. even as people-- increase we will ensure the cash funding per pupil does also and we will look at the different ways in which money bring so schools can decide how to best spend their money. we will also introduce a new 2.5 billion-pound pupil premium that supports the education of disadvantaged children and which will provide a real incentive to good schools to take peoples from poor backgrounds. this pupil premium is at the heart of the coalition agreement and it is at the heart of our commitment to reform and economic growth. parents, teachers and trinity groups will be supported if they wish to establish preschools. we will fund an increase in places for 16 and 19-year-olds d ce the participation age to 18 by the end of the parliament and that enables us to replace educational maintenance that will target

support an we are also providing support for the ear years of our children. the increased entitlements to 15 hours a week free education for all three and 4-year-olds introduced under this government will continue. servic will be protected and the program will be focused on its original purpose and we will help them further by introducing for the very first time 153 hours of early education and care for all disadvantaged to-year-olds. so that these children have a chance in life like the rest of their classmates for school. overall the department for education will be required to find savings of many-- 81% a year. central ministry shall be cut by one third and five quangos will go for the capital budget to bear the share of the reduction but as the house knows, we have had to phase out the hopelessly inefficient and overcommitted

building schools for the future program. but, 15.8 alien pounds will be spent to maintain the school and rebuild and refurbish 600 schools. i repeat, the resource money for school, the money that goes into the classroom under the broadest definition including all the main grounds will go up in real terms every year. it is a real investment in the future of our children and in the future growth of our economy too. mr. speaker, but may conclude. the decisions we have taken today, the decisions we have taken today bring sanity to our public finans and stability. day deal decisively with the largest budget deficit in the house of commons has ever had to face outside of a wartime. we have had to make choices, choices about the things we support and today i've announce

real increases in the nhs budget and the resources of schools as well as new investments and the economic infrastructure our economy and i pronounce real reductions in waste and reforms to welfare and hose will reshape public services to meet the challenges of the times. i think it is the right choice. mr. speaker i have one final observation. during the process of the spending review i've received many submissions including one from the party opposite that the average cut for unprotected departments should be set at 20% over the coming four years rather than the 25% that i anticipated in my jim budget. i've examine this proposal carefully and i've consulted the published documents of my predecessors and because of our decisions to reform welfare and the savings we mad under their interest i'm pleased to tell the house that it has been possible and the average savings in the departmental budgets will be lower than the previous government implied.

and mr. speaker instead of cuts of 20% there will be cuts of 19% so i thank them for their support and i look forward to their votes. mr. speaker, this government will face the worst economic inheritance in modern history. it will threaten every job in public service in the country but we have to put the national interest first. we made the tough choices, we protected health in schools and investment and growth. we have reformed welfare and cut waste. in nature we are all in this together and we have taken our country back from the brink of bankruptcy, a stronger itain starts here and i commend this

order.nt to that. alan johnson. >> mr. speaker, mr. speaker. >> order. the house needs to calm down. is getting a little over excited. there is a long way to go. alan johnson. >> remember well the end of the emergency budget in june when the chancellor finished on talking about this being progressive and fair. it only took fiscal studies 48 hours to show that it was solely unfair that the burden, that the burden of the emergency budget fell two and a half times on the poorest as on the riches, and we have seen people cheering the deepest cuts to public spending

in living memory. in living memory. the deepest cuts in living memory. mr. speaker some people sa this is their ideological objective. not all of them, not all of them but for many of them this is what they came in politics for. as we order-- you are getting quite overexcited. you must calm yourself and remain calm. it is you and your interest in the house is houses interest. alan johnson. >> today is the day the abstract figures and spreadsheets turn into people's futures, peoples jobs, people's pensions, people services, their prospects for the futureand the day the

statistics which were dazzling coortably in the lap of the chief secretary yesterday actually have become the uncomfortable truth for many people and families throughout this country. we hear e chance mr. speaker on every occasion. the people opposite our deficit, they paddle, they paddled. they peddle the whole series, they peddle the whole series to the british public. the most incredible myth of all is that the biggest economic crisis is the great depression is the fault of the previous government. the string is pulled and away they go. [laughter] the chancellor says we brought written back from the brink of bankruptcy. well, well, perhaps the

chancellor will confirm. fact one with a global crisis hit, the u.k. had the second lowest debt of any g7 country. facts number two, the last government inherited a dead interest level in every pound of tax ceived and even after a world recession we bequeath a figure of 15% lower. the interest rates, that the u.k. paid on its debt have been falling since the beginning of the year. the chancellor in the interest of accuracy, and the interest of accuracy, can confirm those specifics. when the last-- to place mr. speaker 2007 the right honorable member was the shadow chancellor. was he calling for reduced public spending? was he calling for regulation of

the banking industry? two things about 2007. first of all i read the right honorable members contribution. indeed, instead of arguing for reduced public spending, he argued that we were spending too little. in 2007 he complained that we were slowing the growth in health and education expenditure. indeed, his party supported every penny of our spending plans until well after the collapse of lehman brothers and america instead of the disastrous chain reaction that caused the global recession and in 2007 far from calling for regulation of the banks, they were calling for deregulation of the banks. the right honorable member had produced a report on the office of the leader of the opposition at the time, who had called for

greater regulation of the banking industry, so we need to get these facts right mr. speaker. the emergency budget is unavoidable and fair. we know, mr. speaker that it was unfair because the ifs produce the statistics with devastating accuracy a few hours later and we also know that it was avoidable. the deficit has to be paid down mr. speaker. >> here they go again. here they go again. >> telling them when to stand up and what to say. the chief whip does not have to move. [laughter] so today, we do need to bring the deficit down. mr. speaker, two days reckless

gambles with people's livelihood runs the risk of stifling the fragile recovery. the ridiculous analogy of credit card debt insults the intelligence of the british public. in countries around the world hadn't run up debt, that is what the fiscal deficit is by the way, if they hadn't run up the debt to restrain their economy people would not have lost their credit card, lost their jobs, lost their houses and would have lost their savings. mr. speaker, the liberal democrats know this. they argue that, when speaking with the electorate of the deputy prime minister argued this. then he discovered greece. in the period etween the closing and his ministerial car door opening, the deputy prime

minister, the deputy prime minister discovered a different approach to this. the liberal democrats, every single one of them, elected this house on a platform that in the context of reducing the defcit -- the chancellor has a list of-- he mentions all the time. he made a long list. he left out-- let and he curiously failed to mention the other countries that do not support these measures. perhaps that is what he why he calls himself a one nation tory. [laughter] here is another supportive quot take this down and use it in future briefings. the measures we have taken have been commended by international

bodies such as the european central bank, the european commission, the imf nd the oecd. they have also won the approval of the international market. that was the irish minister of finance. [laughter] when he told the irish parliament that his plan means that they have turned a corner and four months later they slid back into recession. mr. speaker, the concerns of those watching this announcement today went beyond their misrepresentation-- they will be interested. they will be interested in whether they will stay at work, whether they will stay in their homes, whether they will stay safe on the streets. we hope the expected lot-- job losses are around 490,000.

mr. cooper reported last week that million jobs are at stake becase the impact on the private sector is just as severe. is not the case that at the same time as they are throwing peopl t of work, the government is reducing its support to help people return to the workplace. i applaud the secretary of state for work and pensions and his ideas and his efforts to do what we were seeking to do which is to work make-- make work pay. the right honorable member often ys credit for what we did when we were in government. the fact is though, but the proposals today, they have actually made it harder for people to return to work because of the changes in working tax edits, because of the changes they made to support the working parents, because of the huge, huge increase in fares for those who have to travel to get to their jobs. this whole point i'm afraid the work and pensions secretary has

had his job made harder today's announcement. on housing the chancellor has announced the retreat of central government from any role in building new affordable homes. i asked the chancellor, can he tell the house how many jobs will be lost in the construction sector as a result of his decision to end, all that and capital funding for house building. crime which has fallen dramatically after the last 13 years, heard with the chanllor said about the hmi see rort, but the-- is not protected. dealing with counterterrorism and policing, it seems to me that the public will be worried that they will lose more police on their streets. mr. speaker, as i said spending has to be reduced but the front-line services-- spending does have to be reduced. but the front-line services on

which people rely a must be protected. we support moves to ring fence to help the budget. the point about the health service is in having their budget protected. it is taking two to 3 billion pounds out of that budget to pay for a top-down structural reorganization. the party opposite holds the public in their manifesto would not happen. this is a top-down organization to end all top-down reorganizations and we are already seeing the loss of jobs in the national health service as a result of this and on education, the right honorable member, the chancellor mentioned the premium is going to be funded. there are stories there are stories already out there about teachers and teaching assistants losing their jobs as result of today's announcement. we are going to have to look at

the statistics very carefully. we are going to have to look at the full prince before we can see what is happening on education. the chancellor has said that they will keep a version of education. it is the single biggest contributor to listing the number of children that was introduced by a labour government. he is told us that there will be some changes, but will be introduced in some form but he doesn't say how. neither does he say on removing incentives what effect that will have on sure star because sure stars crucially important to ensuring we have a mor progressive society. and mr. speaker, on the nhs, this real term increase we believe will be more than swallowed by the cost of the reorganization. it would need good at the chanceor would confirm that the baseline for the and a chess will reflect the actual budget this year.

mr. speaker, without growth the job of getting the deficit down becomes impossible. a rising-- mans a bigger welfare bill and less tax coming in. a cost of at least half a billion pounds for every 100,000 people thrown out of work at the government's approach. soap to get the deficit down the starting point for. >> jobs, jobs, jobs and that remains mr. speaker's the core of the difference between us and the government. the ministry of justice we were told are going to see a 14,000 job cut. does the chancellor agree with the department's assessment that the vast majority of those 11,000 will be from the front lines? can he confirm that 230 million pounds of taxpayer fus have been earmarked for redundancy costs in that department alone and what is the total scale of redundancies

expected across the public sector? what will the total redundancy bill be? thankfully-- we know the treasury has provided him with-- share them with the house. mr. speaker, mr. speaker, mr. speaker can the chancellor confirmed that the poorestill still bear a greater burden than the richest with a middle squeezed even further and that women are shouldering-- does he still claimed that these measures are progressive and fair? mr. speaker there is an alternative approach. the chancellor finished, the chancellor finish by suggesting that their cuts were the same as ours. this is complete, this is

complete, even more under complete nonsense mr. speaker. for two reasons. first of all, the party opposite calculated this 20% figure by some-- that stretch the limits, stretch the limit of the credibility of a protected department. secondly because the chancellor hasn't caught up with the act that we put forward a whole series of measures where we agreed for interest on the increase in capital gains tax, where we agree that there should be changes, where we agreed that there should be changes in welfare. the chancellor hasn't caught up with the statements we have made concerning the welfare bill. we came into this debate and we'll look at the further measure's the chancellor has announced today. we came into this debate with departmental cuts have the level of those that they are proposing. mr. speaker, the spending review

is not about economic necessity. it is about political choices. the chancellor argues that labor would have done nothing about the deficit. he goes on to say- he can't have it both ways in both arguments but actually manages to be wrong on both counts. the difference between us is that they were moving almost twice as much from department budgets and we were looking for a much more gradual, much slower reductions which did not stifle the very low levels of growth we have in our economy. their rush to cut the deficit endangers the recovery and reduces the prospect for employment in the short-term and for prosperity in the longer-term. we believe we can and should sustain a more gradual reduction securing growth. i don't believe that the chcellor or the prime minister

sufficiently understands the worries and concerns of families up and down this country and i think those worries will have multiplied considerably as a result of his statement today. >> the chancellor of the exchequer. >> mr. speaker he is a nice guy but he is in the wrong job. frankly, i remember, remember the family would have done a lot better than that and might have even asked-- but let me respond to what he said. he is talking about a plan b. he hasn't even got a plan a. there is a complete denial of the fact that this country is the largest budget deficit in the g-20. he made no acknowledgment of the fact that the credit rating agcies when he was in the cabinet was looking at this country, noaa college meant art market interest rates was the same and frankly his statement defending e economic policy of the last labor prime minister is

totally, totally irrelevant to the questions put before the house today in the proposals we have set out. he kept sayg we want to reduce the deficit. he didn't agree with a single measure that i set o. he did not propose a single savings. he is a deficit denier. we have been told for a whole year we would get labour deficit reduction plan. before the election, he said don't worry it will come after the election. we were told it would come after the leadership-- and then this morning a member of the cabinet said on the radio we are not going to do an alternative to the spending review. then i got his message and the chamber fat eight minutes past one this afternoon, when the chancellor was in the chamber, he sent an e-mail to members of

the public. saying i'm going to be asked of you. being in opposition does mean we have to set out clear alternatives. and then he said, please share your thoughts with us. [laughter] they were in government until six months ago. they sat around the cabinet table as deficits incease. six months later they have not put forward a single idea for reducing the budget deficit. it is absolutely pathetic. now, he is dismissing, despite the fact that he said, he dismisses the verdict of the imf, the ecd, the cbi and ambers of commerce the european commission. i don't know whether he saw the

35 leading employers in this country, people like the leaders of asda and microsoft and totallyirrelevant that the business in this country. the person they used to be a supporter. all these people wrote to the national newspaper saying addressing the debt problem in a decisive way wou improve business and consumer confidence and if he actually wants to ignore all of those people, what about tony blair? i got total silence n the benches from the man who wants three general elections. tony blair said this and i think he was in the cainet when tony blair was prime minister come the danger now is this. if government doesn't tackle deficits, it means big taxes in the future. the prospect which reduces confidence investment and

purchasing power and this then increases the risk o a prolonged slump. he used to be a blairite. at least they members have been fighting tony blair all of his career. but he used to be a supporter. so he has dismissed all the leading businesses and all these international organizations and tony blair. let me answer a couple is specific questions. the first one is this. he asked about police numbers and of course this is a challenge. of course, but we believe with the advice from this report there will be no reduction in the availability and visibility of policing but he was asked during the election-- this is what the man who was home secretary before the election said in the election.

on the daily politics show. can you guarantee if you form the next government the policing numbers wn't fall? no. so what is the basis on which he makes his argument? he talks about the national health centers and he said he agreed with our decision. presumably this is the same shadow chancellor who said recently there is no logic censer rationality to this politics. [laughter] heays he rejects the definition of the labour government. the number is from the fiscal study, and he suggest that i haven't paid attention to the announcement he has been making this week. it is true i've been quite busy, but i have actually paid attention to what he said. not many people got a chance to question him about his policy

but he said taxes need to be increased and then when he was asked which taxes he said he was open-minded about them. that is a polite way of saying he hasn't got a clue. [laughter] mr. speaker he waonce the great force of-- dreamed up by the new leader of the opposition. he said earlier this week in a press conference at being an opposition was not about pretending to be in government. now know how right he was. >> andrew tyree. one of the most radical and most on both sides of faith house agreed necessary shakeup whatever the scale of shake of people. i particularly welcome the re-examination of the efficiency drive, the excellency announcement on equitable life and on the bbc. did committee will be look into

far greater detail than it has in the past at the pressures is decisions and particularly the way to prioritize between departments and also at the ring fence. we will also examine the chancellor's analysis in the gym budget presented as a progressive. i would be very grateful if the chancellor could confirm that the csr is also progressive. i would also be grateful if he would say something aut his plan to d. -- deed actualize the bank. >> first of all can i tag him my honorable-- for the welcome he gave and the contribution the bbc will make in the difficult choice that we have all got to make in this parliament about what is a fair settlement and i think particularly helping the-- is a good thing and as they say theyound three tim as much money as john chadwick

recommended. on the two particular points on ring fences in the end ring fences are about priorities. we call them ring fences. we have made a choice a a coalition government. we have chosen certain things we are going to cut but we have chosen also to spend more money on health care, more money on resources for school and those are choices and in the end that is what politics in a democratic kutcher about. finally on the distributional impacts, and he will know that we are the first government to attempt to do this, publish distributional analyses in the book which i have published as well today and i very much welcome the treasury select committee's inquiry which i know he will conduct on the spending review. what we have done is use the methodology that is used in many other countries to try to

advocate the benefit and the kind of public expenditure as well as the directing, facts on some of the benefit changes and they think as you will see we believe it does show that it is broadly progressive at the top quintile pays the most and broadly fled across the other quintiles and the same is true of some of the expenditure decisions that are very much welcomed the select committee's inquiry and work on this. as they say a saves t first time they british treasury has attempted to this and we very much welcome this committee's input or kos be the right honorable seeking to catch my eye would like to accommodate as many as possible but i issue my usual exultation to brevity with particular economical replies from the chancellor of the exchequer, mr. michael meacher. >> cutting the deficit, why did the chancellor ignore the

economic dividend which could yield at least 60 biion pounds in extra government tax revenue over the next five years? why did he not taxed at all the 1% superrich whose wealth has quadrupled over the last decade and why did he not introduce a major blic sector as well as private sector, jobs and growth program which would work most effectively cut benefit paymts and increased tax revenue? >> the first thing i would say to the right honorable gentleman is we believe very strongly as to the major employers his country and the people internationally who look at this economy that dealing with the deficit is essential for sustainable growth. putting the british economy unsustainable footing and a public audiences on a sustainable footing so that we can create jobs in the future and this economy can grow. he talks about taxes and talks about taxes on the to1%. we introduced an increase in the

capital gains tax but the truth is not everyone in my party was particularly happy with that but the party opposite had 13 years to do that, 13 years. all those budgets and now the shadow chancellor says we support the capital gains increase. i would like to know in 20 or 30 years time will they ever ray siing cabine we took a decision to increase capitalgains. last week i published a proposal for increasing tax on the highest pension contribution in this country, to 4 billion pounds tax not an easy thing to do and we have done that. we also accepted and lived with the previous government decision to increase taxes to 50%, cannot an easy decision to do and i'm not somebody is in favor of higher martial tax rates but i'm determined that all contributions-- make a

contribution but they people at the top and finally on the disposal of banks at the moment we are not in position to do that but we of course monitor the situation whole time and i am keen to create a more competitive banking sector at the end of this process which is one of the reasons why we set up independentcommission. >> thank you mr. speaker. could the chancellor tell the house how regionalization will help as announced by this government? >> what i would say to my honoble friend is i think we have much more focus on local area partnerships that are going to help everybody which i suspect will rather neglected by the regional developmental agency because that is not where the acon was. a lot of dances would have been on on the metropolitan census. the countryside would have been

would have been i suspect ignored d one of the advantages of the regional growth fund is that we can focus on particular areas where we want to get more involvement and eate jobs. >> can i tell the chancellor, the misery and the devastation that occurred in my constituencn is given today is going to be a repeat in the people that will suffer the most despite what he ha sai ill be lows with the lowest income. wi be a day of tragedy for the british people. >> the honorable gentleman was never known for overstatements but i will just say this, we know a situation where unemployment is rising where we have had the biggest-- in a generation the biggest banking crisis thanks to the way this government ha gone has regulated the banks, and huge

budget deficits and frankly, every single member of the labour party has to propose an alternative plan because it is very difficult to make choices so you can only attack is planned if you have got an alternative. >> i welcome the government's commitment to end child poverty. but can i draw attention to the coalition program and rented housing? hundreds of thousands of families will be adversely affected by the removal or cutting back of housing benefits. would he confirm that local authorities has a statutory duty --.

>> what i would say to my honorable friend the housing has been rising very rapid pace and frankly anyone doing my job would have to address this bill. we hope to do it in a way that i believe is fair and balance to protect constituency for the needs of those who are in receipt of housing benefit as well and i want to say in a social tenant because there is that a lot of speculation, we are nochanging the agreement for people in existing social tenant's and what we are saying is the new tenants we will have to have something more like the market rent. and i have to say this was a policy of the last government. r the honorable gentleman, it was the stated policy of the less government to increase over time social rent o approaching market rents. that was the policy of our government and as i said we try

to protect existing-- but it will help out more social housing. why did they fail so miserably on building social housing? >> the chancellor-- cuts of 81 billion. was no detail at all it will be achieved, causing huge anxiety to those who depend on the services and the private sector firms who are ndent on public contracts. i believe this is reckless, cuts to fasten the cuts to deep. one question for today, how does he possibly imagine after his statement today that a direct cut to the scottish block for a billion pounds can do anything other than weaken the ability of scotland to recover in a difficult economic times? >> i would say to the honorable gentleman first of all we have

preserved the bonnet funding arrangement and second this is the increase on the national budget in england in the schools of both-- england that have helped in terms of the funding settlement for scotland and what we are seeking to do is to put the united kingdom eonomy on a strong sustainable footing so they can be growth in scotland and in the rest of the country and i would make a final observation that i think people are pretty clear in this house and indeed in scotland that scotland has been in the pendant given the scale of the banking crisis. >> rert alfond. >> my constituents welco the public spending statement particularly their resources-- and healthy young children. do you not agree that my constituents would rather have lower taxes and more public rvices then paying off the public debt? >> my honorable friend is right,

this country is spending 120 million pounds a day on debt interest that while the pet projects now has suddenly discovered, now has discovered discovered -- massachusetts this the large labor government inherited it cold deficit and what we have been led is the worst economic inheritance of the need government has and unfortunately we have to deal with that but we are doing it as two parties working tother to clean up the mess and the people -- the goal that i have inside is a more prosperous sustainable economy and the public finance situation which is deliverable and affordable to the people. >> the chancellor told us we could expect 490,000 public sector jobs to go in the next five years.

another half a million private sector jobs will go so how does putting more people out of work who no lger pay tax or housing benefit budgets cut the deficit and had to growth? >> i make a couple of observations. first of all the independent budget is quoting their forecasts, forecast that unemployment will fall in this country in more private-sector jobs will be created. second she must accept this even a monks the deficit deniers and labour party and they admitted this during the general election that there would be a reduction of public sector headcounts of e labour government. i don't know of she rees with that are not, but that is the truth and we have had to make some decisions that there is a high turnover in the public sector anyway so we hope a lot of this can be accommodated i-- there will be redundancies and i think the party opposite except

there would have been redundancies under their plan. we will do everything we can to deal that situation help those people find work but in the end the current size of the bdget deficit means we have to build the situation and let us remember this government came into office with unemployment rising and that is what we have had to do it. the shadow chancellor is very good at his jokes. the response in the confusion about fiscal versus structural, i wonder if the chancellor can help him explain the difference between fiscal and structural deficits. >> members must get into the habit of asking questions about the policy of the government, t about advice from shadow ministers. let's get that straight. >> thank you mr. speaker the secretary failed to answer the question by my rightful

friend about the extraordinary 11,000 reduction in the number of frontlines staff. will the chancellor confirm this runs completely counter to that which the prime minister said on the second of may about the protection of front-line services but it can only be a gamble with the security and safety of the british public and either way after his successf fight against crime. >> well, i just say this to the right honorable gentleman. obviously i don't agree with him. all government departments have had to make savings. if he had been in the cabinet, if is he really time he somehow the ministry of justice would have been protected from any reduction? [inaudible] [laughter] >> let me say a couple of things. first of all is a member of the cabinet he-- as i remember part

of the health service two years for real increases in school funding and i think you meant the promise some police numbers but the secretary ditch the promise. the ministry of justice has to make a contribution. he says not on the scale but over the next four years the decisions we make on welfare, the actual reduction in nonprotected deparents would have been a greater under his government than under hours. it is minus 90% in our figures and of course the ministry of justice is part of one of those nonprotected areas. >> james morris. >> the chancellor statement today, particular another many hard-working people my constituency who will support the welfare reform. would he agree with me that the well formed proposals being

introduced are vital by the adoptions of the previous government? >> my honorable friend is absolutely right. these desions are ital to provide economic stability and to make sure britain doesn't go back to the brink of bankruptcy and what i say to my noble friend and his constituency, many of whom work extremely harr taxes that it is not acceptable for those taxes to go into the debt interest that we pay to foreign creditors when we really want that money being spent here at home and that is what this is all about, trying to reduce the debt and bring economic stability and do it by reforming a welfare state which frankly ground control and we have taken this decision today. if people have alternative decisions, they can put them on the table. ..

and will the represent apply to existing tenants to seek to move home, in which case, that would be a disincentive for mobility? >> well, i'll say this to the honorable gentleman. first of all, on the housing benefit, we have had to take some difficult decisions, but i think they are fair. we have sought to -- and, of course, the universal credit we're introducing will mean it always pays to work. the housing benefit is part of that. can i say this? the communities and low government will be setting out in detail these reforms. they're set out the -- the principles are set out in the document. you can look at those. as i said, existing social tenants will be protected with their rent agreement. >> simon hughes. >> the government rightfully took decisions to deal with the deficit left by the international recession by the

banks and by the outgoing labour government. can he confirm that the policy of this statement today is not just for those that the broadest shoulders carry the biggest burden, but in addition to children, petitioners at the house holding on the lowest incomes will be the most protected, and that will be supported by the assessment of the impact of the budget and of the statement that he has made in the house. >> well, what i say is this -- first of all, the poorest suffer when a country loses control of its public finances. that was indeed the assessment of the member, and it was one of the few things he said that i actually agree with. so i think his constituents benefit from a government trying to deal with this economic problem, and frankly, a structural deficit -- someone asked me a question -- it doesn't go away when the economy grows, and what the project seems to be rising is in four years' time, getting up and announcing the next four-year program for cuts,

which i don't think will be doing this country much good. very specifically, on pensioners, of course, we've taken this big decision to link the pension to earnings. we've also protected the pension credit, and what i would say to him generally is that, yes, there have been some difficult decisions on welfare, but i've sought to protect the most vulnerable, and i think our overall welfare reform will help give incentives to many in our country who currently don't have them to seek employment. >> it's very disturbing that this statement simply does not disclose the extensive cuts being made to transport, except it is clear that there will be a massive increase in both trade and prosper. how can this help economic recovery, including the ability of people to get to work? get t? >> well, but i would say to the lady is we are spending more on projects in the next for years that we have in the last four

years. i've made every effort to prioritize transport spending and that is led to other questions. and said she is a liverpool mp, i thought she might deweese welcome the gateway project, which i'm an mp and the northwest and i can see we've been talking about the mosey gateway for a long time. it's going out. >> to richard harrington. >> mr.peaker, with my right honorable man confirmed to me that today's nnouncement is to take public expense back to 2000 levels, not 880 levels like some oppositi would imply. >> i honorable friend is absolutely right. >> can i ak in the northern island house one of the reliance on the public sector in these councils hit pretty hard? can i have the chance to win the governments tend to ing forward their promise proposal to rebalance the comity in northern irland as northern

island exactly? >> well, i would say to the honorable lady, of course they're difficult decisions today. because of the decision we took some english education, did you get a relatively favorable settlement combats and in parts of the country. of course it made that decision should have a presbyterian show society where we want to work with the developed administration to make sure that people for a long time have had no concerts and take get certainty and money for the savings that they have lost. my rubber friend, a secretary from north island races and issues about growth and investment in northern ireland as i'm sre the honorable lady knows he is lots of ideas for stimulating ecnomic activity. i believe later this year he's going to bring forth his proposals and we cannot take that in the debates. >> the least bank shot. >> the shadow chancellor has

missed the deficit must be reduced. he is fairly sober rest by this has an e-mail on a postcard please. [laughter] >> a very brief revised. >> and grateful elizabeth kendall. >> at a local council spending by 28.4% over four years for decimate services. and allowing council to borrow business rates will further widen inequalities as there is re private businesse to improve services. can the chancellor explained to me and my constituents how this is fair? >> well, i'm sorry the honorable ladies against more freedoms and make solid decisions -- all decisions with the increment financing proposal that i put forward is more freedom for local government along with the other decisions we've taken down

on the ground. but as i said, this is a challenging settlement or local government. again, the labour party created this budget deficit and if the labour party doesn't have a plan, frankly it's n no position to criticize those who are trying to sort out this mess. >> increasing adult friendships, commitment to the digital onomy to ruling investments in the green investment bank, protecting the sans budget. do not these encouragement -- do not these demonstrate that for the coalition with every fiber of our being that we believe the only way fward in this country is a private-sector led recovery, which would generate real wealth and real jobs in the 20th century? >> well, first i ree with my honorable friend and i would say this. we have made every effort to protect the assigned budget.

it was one of the things we strain to achieve. and i say come at the efficiency proposals put forward are implemented, that will lead to a real increase. we've also been able to confirm the synchrotron project. oxygen is extremely well represented and is not one of the counties got it the full pilot. but i hope that these pilots are successful will be able to roll it out in other rural parts of england. >> to massive cuts to local councils of30% over the next four years. now will be according to the independent news philanthropy capital organization cuts to charitable organizations are between 3.25.1 billion. these provide essential services to many of the most vulnerable people in our community. but actual the chance to take to

ensure the prime minister doesn't end up smaller, weaker at 1000 of the most laudable citizens at risk? >> well, we've still provided some additional resources. i mentioned earlier on my speech for the voluntary sector through the transition fun on the local government. she used to be a member of the cabinet. she knows well that some difficult decisions re required to reduce the deficit. she's got other areas of government spending, she would rather tell me what they are. but frankly in our question she didn't volunteer any. >> jesse norman. >> thank you come mr. speaker. may just say also the people in rural counties everywhere how thrilled i am to see this new super vote by pilot. it's obviously magnificent news. may ask whether made a difference the previous fundamental savings review had not been implemented when he came to see the problem

face-to-face? >> well, it did ke a difference and of course i found in the treasury absolutely no plans to reduce the budget deficit. they're penciled in the march budget, but absolutely no plans were put in place. i'm delighted we've been able to help her picture in this way and england and i tink suerfast is a key to the rural economy going forward. >> sammy wilson. ester speaker, first of all can i say that we understand the economic mess with the government has inherited and the problems that present. however, this is a huge gamble with people's jobswith economic growth and the public welfare. i suppose it all pays off. today is the chancellor, given the fact the capal expenditure is going to fall by 40% over the next four years in an already

fragile northern ireland economy, how does that sit with the congress on the last week will be protected and what assement has been made by the impact of the desire in which he and northern island of exactly how to rebound this northern ireland economy? >> well, let me say this. first of all, the current world environment would not set out plans to reduce the budget. we would've really been in the firing line. we've taken these decisions. second, capital spending, the second capital announced today are less than what is put in plan and the previous labor government because of the increase in the capital overlaid that i announced and that doesn't make them particularly easy. i have thought higher infrastructure investments. and if they are good projects in northern ireland, we can work with the administration on those, an area of devout

responsibility. finally i would say by runoff from the secretary of state, one of his absolute priorities of security northern ireland is getting the economy growing in the private sector recovery taking place in northern ireland. i'm sure we make it to arrange at some point later this year an opportunity to get together and represent in northern ireland, secretary of state, myself and discuss what is the best way forward, what can we do to help northern ireland see that private-sector job growth. >> thank you, mr. speaker. opening very much today's announcement, younger constituents particularly who live in an area where we have one of the highest levels of youth unemployment would be keen to know what specific measures there are two supports apprenticeships and chance to the future. >> i would say to my friend, we announced a record investment and apprenticeships and many tens of thousands -- many ns

of thousands of additional apprenticeship. and the difficult decisions which accounts for and the budget that shows we're investing in the skills that our economy needs for the future. >> the chancellor knows of the loss of 490,000 jobs in the public site dirt, not challenge the figures produced by waterhouse coopers to 500 coatingjobs lost in he private sector as a consequence. what has he made a number of jobs that will be lost in the construction site there, except in my honorable friend said from sheffield central in relation to cut enough funding of social housing. and with the accepted sluggishness of the recovery and economy, are we going to see significant ineasesin overall

unemployme in the economy and the next year? >> well, i'd say to the shuttle main who i knowits on the treasury, he knows that the budget deficit for struggling economic stability, he also knows that his party over a slightly longer period than we proposing. however, that would not reduce the scale in just the prolonged cuts. and structure deficit is a structured deficit, which doesn't return when the economy grows. it's the definition of a structural deficit. and what i would say is that we are investing in rope objects come in housing projects 150 new homes, 150,000 new homes. and he hasn't had time to study this document. the capital cuts sent out today are less than the capital cuts in the march budget of the

labour party. >> will my right honorable friend show the house that i might party opposite to abandon prudence after two years of ever meant him pursue the policies of economic restlessness, that she will continue to hold prudence close to your heart to ensure we have long-term stability and growth [shouting] >> i can assure my friend i'm planning a long-term relationship in prudence. >> can i have the chancellor, can you give us assurances that the green investment bank will be at dave and accessible for all regions including northern ireland on the relevant projects will not be disqualified by virtue of having a cross-border character, which would be entirely a perky at given our markets and environmental context? >> well, let me say this by the great investment tank. in a statement i made, i set

aside a billion pounds of direct government spending to the green investment bank. that means i would hope the minimum. i also want to dispose of certain government assets and put the money in the asset sales into the investment bank, but i wanted to provide a minimum billion pounds in case the asset sales took longer to realize that we hoped. i also want to live in private-sector investments for helping all passes as the united kingdom invest in green energy. i'm very happy to consider the case of cross-border projects because obviously the economy is of ireland and northern ireland are very close to these things and i will come back on that very specific one. >> cerny 10. >> we have inherited a social care funding system but it's just not that her purpose. that's tens of thousds of the most vulneble people. i very much welcome the extra 2 billion pounds of funding

while we establish a new and reformed sstem. when will details of the extra funds be made available? >> well, there're details in t book we publish today and will send out more details in the coming days. of course, we're waiting for the report from andrew dillman and social care. we're trying to address your is the problem you're aware of our own constituencies, which is sometimes the wall between the health services and local authority. i was conscious, given a challenging supplement that social care type effect is. that's why found the additional 2 billion pounds of social care. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the chancellor would like, can you say what this means for the express program, considering to just go had would create jobs in my constituency anthousands mo in the northeast of england when he requires in the last

election? >> i'm very aware of that project. it will bear with me, secretary of state will make an announcement shortly about that. >> stephen williams. >> thanks, mr. speaker. the chancellor said travis was an objective of this statement, soy grew up in poverty on free school meals when i was in school. one of my ideological objectives and potics is to deliver social mobility. >> the chancellor preferred that the seven and a half billion pounds with the next investment by the bigger part of this year and will help potential and some of the poorest countries on trenfamilies in the country. [shouting] >> my old friend obviously thinks a life to bear and the two biggest settlements are to the healt and for education. and in education, we have particular prioritized underprivileged children on free meals. at the heart of this coalition agreement, with the commitment

to two and a half billion pound premium. we foundhat on top of the flat cash settlement per pupil, evil and people numbers are rising the street real increasing resource in schools on for years been the labour party was suffering general election. also are offering for the very first time 15 hours of free education at all disadvantage 3-year-olds will include those of course on pre-school meals. and that is a real chance to make sure that other people on free school meals have the kind of successful career that he has had. >> jane durkham. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the chancellor says he will replace the announcements with more support. can you tell me and the thousands of families and louche and arabiaffect whatould be more targeted than 30 pounds into the pockets of a family that is. the extra burdens of eeping a teenager in school? >> wl, but i take to be on the

pro-lady, we looked very closely at this program and he is a very high degree. were also received the participation age to 18, of course they ame to replacement age in the original policy of this day on the 16 were present compulsory age and sunday nights. we are going to do a more targeted and that will help you but i have to say, we conducted a public consultation over the summer. but 100,000 responses. we have a lot of responses from parents in receipt of the allowances. it was on the most prominent issues raised and the overwhelming view of the responses was that it was not a well targeted support and certainly that has been my experience and some of the schools i visited. are looking for more targeted payment that actually helps those for whom this fnancial

incentive would really encourage them to stay in education. >> can i welcome the chancellor's commitment to protecting science and also his comments on the forefront review but does he agree with my view of the chancellor that a problem with the graduate tactics the money goes straight to his department had not to the university. >> my friend has experience in this are we honestly considered to an enormous amount of work which send looking at the feasibility and indeed done by the previous deficit because the higher education minister will not be a graduate tax. and the involvement under the less government about why woodward correct we looked very through generally through which there were many, many different advantages. at one of the disadvantages

would be a massive decentralization to the system with visited the treasury controllg to the last pound almost what different universities forgetting. they will start completely against them. >> stewart bell. >> referring to the statement made by the prime inister, ich the chancellor confirmed, we welcome that the science budget is safeguarded. also this will be advanced. and also, we welcomethe 500 million pounds in the macho image to sally network. the thing on the questions of my norable friend and my honorable friend paul leicester west, since the chancellor places so much emphasis on fairness, how can it be fair to make 400,000 unemployed in the public sector and 500,000 in the air? how can that be a sensible quality for growth?

>> well, this is quite frankly a deliberate misrepresentation of this number, which was produced independently. the number is the reduction in the public sector headcount is the four years that the redundancies are they said will also be postego unfilled. the plan settled y the labour party involves also hundreds of thousands of reductions, the leader of the opposition admitted on a number of casions for the general election country and his party contest we've all cut to face up to this challenge. but the same organization that produces the number of the responsibility also put past the falling unemployment through 22040. >> and her percy. >> i welcome the commitment of which also goes a long two weeks after the involvement. i also welcome the commitment to watcher wind energy. just last week in north we can share, negative counselors voted

through an offshore wind development in the gteway, which has potential to bring 5000 jobs to the reason. they're requesting it to be an inquiry. the risk of these will now go to mainland europe. not the offshore wind will have a quiet word with the secretary of state so encourages them to reject applications for public inquiry. >> well, i think i've been kidding myself a lot of legal homework. if i could make a couple of observations. first of all, all involved in the generalization and plan to decisions for their local area or indeed nationally need to take account that enomic investment they need over the coming years. second, we have found additional money for offshore wind technology investments, including manufacturing of sites which was one of the issues of the trade unions raised for me

as a particular priority. and finally, both my honorable friend and our honorable friend amanda properly have been very persistent inaction for a treasure review and there'll be a treasure that review of the humber should be due to inadequate to prejudge the outcome. >> mr. speaker, international development and many people were welcome the government government commitment spend needlepoint 7% gdp. can a chance to telme how that budget will be e same two was previously delivered and paid for by our government departments agencies and non-department bodies? >> well, first of all, i would say this. there's a substantial increase in the departments budget. i think around 40% -- 37% by increasing the budget.

but it's a very substantial increase. there ofourse are partial international development which the front office doesn't fall in terms of conflict stabilization and the like in the course that is perfectly within the rules set on the u.n. commitments. which are internationally policed, so we can't fudge then. it's reasonable to count that expenditure towards that target, but the very large bulk of this will be delivered to the government which has a substantial increase. i suggest it that these parties fully make sure that th relevant ages now well spent on the poorest people and avoiding conflict prevention. >> train route poetry. >> to resend the lasgovernment failed to hold the spending review is because they follow their responsibilities then. they're still running to buy from them out in the cuts were seen are no more than the butchers bill for 13 years of

legacy in ways. [shouting] >> well, i completely agree with my honorable old friend. and it is striking that in all the responses, everything we've heard from today from the front legislative party in the back bench, not a single proposal but how to reduce the eficit details have been allowed to grow. >> what will they take to get them onto the train? >> well, what would i would say to the honorable member is again we've got to take a really big decision of investment in our railways. we are going to invest 14 billion pounds in our railways. we also went to invest in new roing stock that i was asked a question by the membernow that that irequired required a tough decision on the rail fact areas. i think passengers will at least

i hope understand if you want investment in rail stop, we have to be a will to afford that. and the people who use the rail stock should me a contribution to that. >> -- in particular efforts to protect most probable. we agree with me the biggest restore economy was actually to attend nothing at all as advocated by most members opposite in the action is taken today would do the most to restore economic confidence to our economy? here, here. >> papers male friend. whoever reform the government was going to havto come to the house of comments for reducing his budget deficits in our peacetime history, considerably higher by the ay and against the imf. we have set others are puzzles to believe they will deliver certainty and stability going forward. the market interest rate of british businesses and families are already though are as result of the decisions we taken come

into office. in terms of decisions we finance, i notice on the labour party has asked me about the increase in th tax credit, which will help 4 million families. >> thank you him and mr. speaker. i'm not sure how the government claims to be the greenest other than they had spending reductions combined and 40% in real terms over the next 40 years. i question is, should the chancellor to more than jut fill the huge gap between the 1,000,000,050 set aside in is announcement for the green investment bank and the 6 billion is the minimum required. the gentleman said he would find a bit more. how much of that willie from the file? >> what i would say to the honorable lady is this, first of all of course there is even in these difficult times a commitment to a carbon capture and storage demonstration to develop watcher wind technology and manufacturing foresight to

renewable heat incentive. and on the green investment bank, it would have been easy to say, in my possession, let's wait and see if we can get government asset sales and do some private sector money to create the body and hope it gets the funding. i want to provide a backstop that i've provided that blion pounds of the general government expenditures, but i also went to see substantial govrnment asset tells going to the green investment bank. i also want to leave some private sector money so there is a multibillion pound reinvestment in our country. >> dr. coffey. >> actually, delivering investment in the 21st century infrastructure will be welcomed by the coastal as well as expanding to protect the post office network and most of all for me, which you agree with me this side of the house, the coalition is make in the difficult decisions, politically

courageous decisions much reflected also today in the european paliament voted to reduce the budgets unlike labour and et who didn't take that opportunity and instead visit -- [shouting] >> well, my honorable lady tells me something i did not today, which is behavior of mps is completely inconsistent with the message from that party that they are serious about trying to duce britain's budget deficit. i should say that the money we found for flood and coastal defenses is around 2 billion pounds. it will help 145,000 households. conversely the secretary of state for make announcement about different tranches which will now go ahead. i wish the coast every success. >> mr. speaker, although to the question by my honorable friend from bus may go, i'm referring

to the chancellor's use of the word conflict resolution for ich rather strangely with the terminology also used several times by the prime minister yesterday in the context of the street fund expenditure. recalling the episode of the pair go down, could we give an absolute assurance by the chancellor that finance funding from overseas aid won't find its way into the defense commitments will be used used for the purposes of number one and developed on gold? >> me say to the honorable gentleman, first of all, it is internationally monitored and obviously having said were going to hit it, i do want to find international body saint deweese

dodged the resources and the overseas aid in the wrong way. can i just say this to the number, with increased international id budget by almost 4 billion pounds. and quite frankly, i understand why lots of members opposite want to ask questions about specific difficult questions. but to quibble about the massive 37-cent increase in the national developed touch it i think is a little unfair. we have made a decision that the house of commons and all parties are committed to this as a general election, we've made a decision we have to understand as consequences elsewhere and other government budget. but we made a decision to hit the 7% and it involves a very, very substantial increase in the international development budget. they're very specific projects and the internal health and mike were funding. i think is a country we should be proud and tell the world about our commitment, rather

than suggest the rules are going to be internationally believed. >> my right honorable friend take this opportunity to nail once and for all the life perpetuated by many members opposite of the international banking is in some way completely responsible for the budgeteficits, where reality figures show that just 40 billion of the total 6 billion spent by government last year went? >> well, what i'd say to my humble friend is this, i suggested he's not had the opportunity yet, that he looks at 1.1 and the budget vote produced by the treasury, which shows that actually a structural deficit waemerging f the last decade, but this made britain particularly ill-prepared for what happened in our banks. and of course, the full regulation of our banking system meant we were effect is publicly

more than any country like iceland and ireland. we were protected by not every other country. we're trying to sort that out in the public finances of the regulation of the banks. and as i say, if we fixed the roof in the sun was shining, we would've been in better condition to do with the sources. >> jeremy corbin, are you aware that housing is the biggest and most serious problem facing people in my constituency, overcrowding social housing? and is proposals in july, the cab that fits endering risk the lives of many eople and its accommodation with the rent is paid for by having benefits in his proposals now to have two tiers of council tenure do not fit very well when you have one tenant living in a secure accommodation on a fixed rental around 100 pounds a week. a next-door neighbor because of an accident will be paying twice

that at least in rent and have no security. how does that say with the notion that were all in it together? >> well, i'll say this to the honorable gentleman. first of all, there's a problem social housing. but frankly, the house to do nothing to address it and we try to reform social hsing provisions with action more homes to build and there is more available in the socially rented properties unlike before we seen recently. he talks about his constituents. he has to ask himself this. was it fair to ask the people of his constituency to fund housing benefit bills to 50, 60, 70,000 pounds a year, totally unaffordable to the woking people. and we have introduced what i think is a perfectly reasonable rule, that the average family not get more benefits than the average family and work. i find it difficult to see how people could object to that.

>> thank you, mr. speaker. is my right honorable friend agreed that in this countrthe key to economic recovery will be a development in new at 78 able to deploy in this country than in any other site there and does he also agreed that it will be in order to get sme money so they have better funding and what we must do is root barriers to entry for your providers to get funding to get sme is? >> well, what i think the honorable friend as i did mention the seats where funding enterprise guarantees and smaller businesses can access to credit. of course in the budget, i also stop the increase in small companies tax rate, which was going to take a set of the previous government. and what we want to do with the course helped the these small businesses and medium-size enterprises which are the absolute engine of our private sector economy and hopefully some of the =tranfour infrastructure which is something businesses often brief

but thus is the infrastructure set up today will help. >> the statement can run for me a few more minutes as though some people will be disappointed good but i do reiterate the repeal for sure questions. help yourself and help others in the process. the tosha angola. >> thank you, mr. speaker. whichever way he slighted it -- slice of that, itstill means even after four years, even if it's not a wasted, there's a 490,000 jobs in the public set or that are left the economy. now also, you wanted to move people off benefit and into her to save on the welfare budget. hodid he make this? where the jobs coming from by the people who were on welfare now? >> were grateful. chancellor. >> first of all, i say that 200,000 jobs were created in this economy, but second, the labour party's plan i think

involved several hundred -- over 400,000 job headcount reduction. this was accepted by labour politicians during elction that there be redundancies. this is what happens when a country loses control of the public. if we been met or vanished in recent years, people doing the job before me have actually managed to avoid this record budget deficit, the largest in the g20 and after all, they keep saying the international situation. they have been explained to me one with the most effective and that international situation. it will help the private sector he helped create jobs. the number she keeps using as a number from an independent oddie, which i presume she recurs credible, but they also say forecast falling unemployment of the period. you can't lose when forecast or not the other.

>> very macleod. >> did they agree with his approach of reform they are missing gropius presented to date, order they suggest something else the competition are suggesting? >> well, they said very clearly in the settlement of the british economy that the measures we've taken were essential to fiscal sustainability. they don't always say that kind of thing about economies because foster the actual criticize the previous government economic plans. to be absolutely honest with my honorable friend, i didn't share all my detailed budget plan for the imf. i thought was for the house attendance. >> in your statement to the post today, is on of the nominees i understand was before your statement was made with people in 45,000-pound income will be penalized in the tax benefit. an 80,000 pounds, that money

isn't cupcake money and education for their children. as for the mortgage. what sells select take through it has clearly been a difficult decision to remove child benefit from ira taxree. it raises to a billion pounds. interesting to know, although it was the first issue raised by the leader of the opposition of the prime minister's questions last week heard not a single labour mp has mentioned it because i think that's why we are beginning to realize that this been a priority is probably a mistake. of course it is a difficult situation, but i have to try and make this better than the taxpayers represent the top 20% of earners in the decisions i've taken have tried to make this fair across the income distribution. >> thank you, mr. speaker.

it's often said while talk is cheap, the consequence of the factions are very, very expensive. with a chance or not agree with me that the chance of the spending review is not about cuts, but about responsibility and financial responsibility we've increased our children and grandchildren? [shouting] >> i think my old friend makes a very good point, which as we've talked a lot about fairness and fairness across income distribution. there is also fairness between distributions. if we do not have a credible planned, it will be our children and grandchildren were famished with the debt we are prepared to pay and i think that is very unfair. >> the david lammy. >> the chancellor -- can he also clarified the cost adjustment into specific ground means the local authorities could be up to 35%. both of thoseare based on deprivation. how does he reconcile that with

this obligation to child poverty? >> well, the honorable gentleman and i can't hold it against this also is centralized or in the localizer. he would like these decisions to be taken by people doing my job and directed to elect your counsels. we are sweeping away a lot of these grounds. i have to say, however, and the falling short be a bit of interest to the people in his constituency who know something of the nature of it at the incrse in tax credit will help that we've also -- and this was an insistence of the communities in government but a great deal of resources into the supporting people program, which i think is particully important in areas like this. >> mr. david brett lee. >> what he agreed that go along way to help underpin growth and private sector jobs in the northwest who we both represent?

>> well, my honorable friend is my mp and i better agree with it. [laughter] i would say this, his predecessor, will be passionate about supporting manufacturing. i'm glad that this torch has been passed for a new generation macclesfield because my honorable friend is right. we need to see private sector recovery. it's the growth and investment in the northwest of england. we want to get away from this economy, which we saw over the last 10 years, world growth is focused in one sctor of the economy and where i think from memory, for every 10 jobs created in the southeast of england by the private sector, what job was created in the north. that is not a sustainable model for an economy. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i was gratful to hear the party support. however, we must have funny to make sure we can go ahead. so therefore, could test out today was funny misallocated for the gateway project?

>> well, i don't actually have the exact abrupt hand, but i will give it to my honorable frnd of the honorable gentleman who sat stunned in the project a suicide note. i know the chief executive of his local council was our council used be the chief executive our local council. i discussed at them and hope to have further discussions to make sure the bridges built. the private investment that is linked to the ridge comes in on the exact number. >> i think the chancellor for taking the decision to give more than three times the amount of equitable life for commended. could you describe to the house into my constituents with settlements he thinks the policy may drop at the opposition party was in the government? >> well, we know the answer to that has he gave absolutely

nothing. they then set up in john chadwick's reports, although i thank them for the report, don't agree with the conclusions. i strongly suspect or wonder when the election would agree with his conclusions. i would've been just a third of the money that i set out today for policyholders. as i say, were helping policyholders across the peace in our particular priority been attracted to a fully ompensate. >> lillian greenwood. >> the chancellor is concert almost half a million public sector jobs will go under and they will estimate the more the half a million in the air. so can the chancellor explained to me how having a million people to the toe and pay no taxes will bring down the deficit in half her economy to grow? [shouting] >> well, let me expand to the honorable lady. this country's largest budget

deficit in the g20. if we don't address that, though the economic ruin the country. the reduction of the public sector headcount will take the four years. this economy creates 2000 jobs in the last three months. positive reduction of total turnover and last time i checked the labour party was acting so committed to eliminating the structural deficit. they would've taken longer an for the job losses in a deep headcount reduction would've been prolonged. and i don't think that's the right and for this count. >> mr. speaker, the fellow nation cnservative as my right honorable friend agree with me that today's announcement has not been driven by some ideological crusade is suggested by a genuine desire to spend more government revenue on public services and my phone service and weber dat? >> my honorable friend is absolutely right. and of course we've made choices today. we have made choices to seek to reduce that interest by going

further in te party would've done and ithink it's best to spend the money here rather than give it to our foreign creditors. second, we've made the choice to put particular emphasis on trying to reduce welfare bills that enabled us to increase investment in the nhs and schools and the provision which we were discussing earlier. it is also true to the values of this coalition. >> i welcome the chancellor's decision to honor the previous governments commitment on the set and consent of international development. what i ask of them is absolute transparency. how much money that was previously allocated in the defense budget and in the foreign office budget is now going to be covered by this budget? >> well, let me say two things to the honorable gentleman. first there's an increase in 4 billion pounds in the international development

buet. but also, a departmental fund within the nat will hope conflict and support post-conflict stabilization that will growth 229,000,329,000,000 in 2014 short of 100 million pounds. i think that will help as they say a word as to having come to emergency situations. but if horses produce small, given the scale of the increase had just announced in the budget. >> i'm sorry to disappoint politics. i'm grateful to the chancellor and colleagues for their cooperati >> today on "washington journal" -- the chairman of the american conservative union, discusses what conservatives are looking for from those running for office and en couple bents. mary kay henry, president of the service employees international union, talks about the union's money role in the ele