what position generally did you and her majesties treasury take? k i majesties treasury take? i don't think i ever _ majesties treasury take? i don't think i ever refer _ majesties treasury take? i don't think i ever refer to _ majesties treasury take? i don't think i ever refer to it _ majesties treasury take? i don't think i ever refer to it as - majesties treasury take? i don't think i ever refer to it as a - majesties treasury take? i don't| think i ever refer to it as a clash, i saw my role as chancellor of the exchequer asked making sure that the prime minister had the best possible advice, information, analysis relating to the economic impact and consequences of some of the decisions he was having to make. obviously the chancellor of the exchequer has to be responsible for the economic and fiscal policy in the economic and fiscal policy in the financial services sector in the country so that was my primary responsibility and role and as a pretend pandemic, myjobs were not just to design and implement economic interventions like furlough or su

but that advice was given to you by the chancellor and her majesty's treasury in a way that wasn't openlydvice you are being given to the public, there was no regular production of material or any kind of published economic analysis provided to you. do you think, in hindsight, that that was an error? t hindsight, that that was an error? i think that there was certainly transparent economic analysis of the cost of some of the measures that we were obliged to enact. and the fall in gdp, the cost of cjrs and other schemes was plain to see. that was all public. what was not public and is not traditionally public as ministerial conversations and discussion between ministers. again, the perspective that i was being offered by the treasury was a very useful one, just as a perspective of the department of health was a very useful one. the material, that's _ health was a very useful one. the material, that's to _ health was a very useful one. tt9 material, that's to say diary entries and readouts from minutes and so on, show that the chancellor of the exchequer would, in this difficult context of

but we do know i there has been no advice from her majesty treasury warning of the economic costs oft of covid on _ to give an example? more generally the impact of covid on the _ to give an example? more generally the impact of covid on the labour i the impact of covid on the labour market— the impact of covid on the labour market was— the impact of covid on the labour market was mis—estimated by most people _ market was mis—estimated by most people because a predominant fear was significant and employment which thankfully— was significant and employment which thankfully didn't manifest itself in the end _ thankfully didn't manifest itself in the end but the predominant labour market— the end but the predominant labour market fear from all economists was about— market fear from all economists was about the _ market fear from all economists was about the rising unemployment as the furlough _ about the rising unemployment as the furlough scheme is wound down. what was underappreciated was the rise in economic— was underappreciated was the rise in economic inactivity. there are a numbe

but that advice was given to you by the chancellor and her majesty's treasury in a way that wasn't openlye sage advice was provided to you. there were no minutes disclosed of the advice that you were being given to the public. there was no regular production of material or any kind of published, transparent economic analysis provided to you. do you think in hindsight that that was an error? >> i think that there was certainly transparent economic analysis of the cost of some of the measures that we were obuged the measures that we were obliged to enact and . the fall obliged to enact and. the fall in gdp , the cost of the cures in gdp, the cost of the cures and the other schemes was was plain for to all see. that was all that was all public. of course , what was not public and course, what was not public and is not traditionally public is thatis is not traditionally public is that is ministerial conversations and discussion between ministers. but again , i between ministers. but again, i think the perspective that i was being offered by the treasury was a very useful one, just as a perspe

what position generally did you and her majesty's treasury take?nk i ever refer to it as a clash. >> i think i saw my role as chancellor of the exchequer as as making sure that the prime minister had the best possible advice, information and analysis relating to the economic impact or consequences of some of the decisions that he was having to make . obviously, the chancellor make. obviously, the chancellor of the exchequer's role is to be responsible for the country's economic and fiscal policy and the financial services sector. so that was my primary responsibility in the role . and responsibility in the role. and then as it pertained to the pandemic , my jobs were not just pandemic, my jobs were not just to design and implement economic interventions , options like the interventions, options like the furlough scheme or support for pubuc furlough scheme or support for public services and businesses. but also, as i said , to provide but also, as i said, to provide analysis and advice to the prime minister as he made his decisions and more broadly