they plan to raise £49 billion through tax measures but the institute for fiscal studies says that theyless. more like £40 billion. but what about the conservatives. they plan to continue with austerity. the institute for fiscal studies says there is a risk if they implement cuts there could be serious damage to the public services. labour will bring in more money but the risk is they will not bring in the risk is they will not bring in the revenue. under the conservatives, the risk is that the squeeze to public services will not prove deliverable. the parties say that they wish to be fairer but the institute for fiscal studies are saying that they are not honest about that. conservatives wish to means test winter fuel payments or tackling the tripping lock. but the measures will not raise much money. £1 billion. nothing from that in the next five yea rs. nothing from that in the next five years. what about the labour's plans? they are saying that they are for the many as they are scrapping tuition fees but the institute for fiscal studies says it is the wealthier segment of the populat

they plan to raise £49 billion through tax measures but the institute for fiscal studies says that theye a lot less, more like £40 billion. but what about the conservatives? they plan to continue with austerity. the institute for fiscal studies says there is a risk if they implement cuts there could be serious damage to the public services. labour will bring in more money but the risk is they will not bring in the revenue. under the conservatives, the risk is that the squeeze to public services will not prove deliverable. the parties say that they wish to be fairer but the institute for fiscal studies are saying that they are not honest about that. conservatives wish to means test winter fuel payments or tackling the tripping lock. but the measures will not raise much money. £1 billion. nothing from that in the next five years. what about the labour's plans? they are saying that they are for the many as they are scrapping tuition fees but the institute for fiscal studies says it is the wealthier segment of the population that goes to university and they are going ahead with cuts for som

they plan to raise £49 billion through tax measures but the institute for fiscal studies says that theyscal studies says there is a risk if they implement cuts there could be serious damage to the public services. labour will bring in more money, but the risk is they will not bring in the revenue. under the conservatives, the risk is that the squeeze to public services will not prove deliverable. booth parties say that they want more fairness, but the institute for fiscal studies are saying that they are not honest about that. conservatives wish to means test winter fuel payments and scrap the triple lock. but the measures will not raise much money. nothing from that in the next five years. they are saying that they are for the many, not the few, as they are scrapping tuition fees, but the institute for fiscal studies says it is the wealthier segment of the population that goes to university and they are going ahead with cuts for some of the poorest families out there. and there are questions that neither party is answering, in labour's case, the tax burden is going to be at its highest

the institute for fiscal studies has criticised both parties‘ policy proposals, saying they fail to addressut the conservatives? they have planned to continue with austerity, and the institute for fiscal studies have said it is going to bea fiscal studies have said it is going to be a big risk that you could get serious damage to public services. under labour, the tax reasons would get money but the danger is that they would not get the money that they are planning to spend. the squeeze they are planning to spend. the squeeze on public services may not be deliverable. both parties have said they want more fearless, but the ifs have said they are not being honest about that. the conservative plans to be fair across generations. they want to scrap the trouble of meaning state pensions go up by 2.5% each year. the ifs has said those will not raise much money. just one billion and that is not going to reason much over the next five yea rs. reason much over the next five years. what about labour? they said they are about the many, not the few. scrapping tuition fees. but the ifs said that benefi

the institute for fiscal studies has been publishing its assessment of the party pledges.r nor the conservatives set out an honest set of choices, why do they say that? what do they mean by it? what they are saying is from their reading of the manifest as they are not convinced that the conservatives can deliver the cards that they are talking about in public spending and maintaining public services, and with labour figure not maintaining public services, and with labourfigure not convinced that a labour government would be able to raise the amount of money that labour says in its manifesto it can get from increasing taxes on companies and the very wealthy. the intervention of the institute for fiscal studies is a significant moment because this think tank which is being seen as being neutral is like a referee between political parties when it comes to spending plans and it is often quoted by the political parties against their opponents. fair assessment as always very significant. 0n opponents. fair assessment as always very significant. on this occasion, they are saying

the institute for fiscal studies says tory plans would most likely mean more austerity.ing. new regulations on pay day loans come into force today. 0nline lenders will have to advertise on at least one price comparison website. this comes after an investigation by regulators who want borrowers to know about other options for borrowing. the industry has already complained about being over regulated. more in a moment. the price of crude has fallen by about 5%. that's despite oil producing countries agreeing to extend their cut in production until march next year. investors had been hoping they'd extend the cut even further. let's go back to that story about payday lenders and new regulations coming into effect today. as we mentioned, these companies, which offer high interest short—term loans, are going to have to make sure that they are advertised on price comparison websites. the sector is huge and of course, controversial. critics say it promotes irresponsible borrowing others though say it can really help people out of a short term jam. hannah maundrell is the editor o

earlier my colleaguejane hill spoke to pauljohnson, the director of the institute for fiscal studies here is a very big difference between the two main party, the labour party have say it not only they would be happy to borrow to invest but they are looking to invest but they are looking to invest in an awful lot more than is currently being spent on capital and infrastructure projects, so that looks to us like they would be willing to borrow 70 billion or more, more than the conservative party would be willing to borrow, if they are willing to borrow that much, then the degree of tax rises they are likely to need in addition maybe more limited, though they have clearly said that capital gains tax and corporation tax would rise under them relative to the conservatives. a the top level there is is a big choice here. yes, so it is so for a voter it is about do you feel co mforta ble, voter it is about do you feel comfortable, do you want tax rises to fund public service or whatever that tax money is going to be spend on. that is the key debate. i suppose we look at the core rate of inco

there is some support for that run the institute for fiscal studies who say that theoretically at leastt with the risk that corporation tax increases release in lower corporation tax receipts in the long run. because companies find other ways of doing things. because actually we have record corporation tax income last year despite corporation tax having gone down. if you ask for public opinion, surveys, things like we nationalising the railways, although it is quite a left—wing thing to do, it tends to get very high approval ratings in public approval ratings. if we look at the daily telegraph, same story but the difference lance. corbyn ‘s ma nifesto but the difference lance. corbyn ‘s manifesto will take britain back to the 1970s, amongst other things they have highlighted, trade unions to be welcomed into the number ten fold. they are also highlighting a pay cap, which they say would also bring us cap, which they say would also bring us back to the 19705. very interestingly, there is detail on what will be a row in labour about defence and it looks like it is the kind of outcome very

the institute for fiscal studies have given a quick verdict on the labour ma nifesto quick verdict onest state intervention in the economy outside of a crisis since the 1970s. so whatever you think, as you said, one thing voters he has is a choice between labour and the conservatives. how is this working because we have been talking about this all day, it's been the main story in the uk, but presumably it will be revealed all over again next week? it will, and from what we understand, the leak we have all seen understand, the leak we have all seen will be quite similar to what is actually agreed. we don't think there will be many differences. this was not the plan for labour. what happened was newspapers and then the bbc got hold of it last night. it was leaked out, embarrassing for jeremy corbyn said he didn't turn up toa jeremy corbyn said he didn't turn up to a poster launch this morning, and one of the questions was why was it leaked? one of the questions was why was it leaked ? it one of the questions was why was it leaked? it undermines the discipline within the party and sugges

not my words, that is the damning verdict of the institute for fiscal studies.to glasgow and hear more from our reporter. if we can hear him over the cheers. what hasjeremy can hear him over the cheers. what has jeremy corbyn can hear him over the cheers. what hasjeremy corbyn also been seeing tonight? he hasjust finished speaking and he gave a pretty rousing speech here at the old foot market in central glasgow but he began ina market in central glasgow but he began in a more sombre mood and started by paying tribute to the victims of the terrorist attack in manchester on monday evening. he said the like that should bring us together. he also said the emergency services were excellent and he paid tribute to the ambulance, nurses and doctors who work tirelessly to help the victims of that attack. after that he moved on to the politics and said there are only two parties that can win this election, labour, which he called the party of social equality, or the tory party, which she accused of putting —— cutting support to all public services. he said the tories wer

they are the independent institute for fiscal studies.d and they think having worked it all out, it'll be about 41 billion so there is a big shortfall there. when you promise people billions and tens of billions for the nhs and social care, actually you will be able to raise that money. what we have said to ifs is that they are being very pessimistic about this and actually we think our measures will work and we are quite happy to talk to them about it. there is within our manifesto room for us having underestimated the amount that we might raising taxation so we are quite happy to engage with them, quite happy to talk and we would also like to have the office for budget responsibility, a government body, and we said that about our previous manifesto as well as this one, there will always be fights about this so the obe are should look at our manifesto... he ifs have done that but you don't like what they have said to you dismiss it. but the office of a budget responsibility has this as theirjob. we are happy to engage with either of them

i am joint by someone from the institute for fiscal studies. the business of tax and where people might stop paying it. it sounds a lot money for a lot of people. for a couple living particularly in london it would not be that much, would it? you are right. £80,000 a yearfor an individual is in the top 5% of income tax payers with your better off than 95% of the population. if you are in the family, you are earning 80000 and your spouse might not be earning, you have children and a mortgage and so on, you might not feel so fantastically well. what to make of it went politicians say people over £35,000 would pay more tax? we get arbitrary lines and limits, don't we? how do they come up limits, don't we? how do they come up with them. it is all about reassuring those people they will not be paying tax. it is part of this rather, i think, not be paying tax. it is part of this rather, ithink, not not be paying tax. it is part of this rather, i think, not entirely honest conversation that politicians wa nt to honest conversation that politicians want

with me is george stoye, senior research economist from the institute for fiscal studies. roposal from the liberal democrats. what in financial terms does that mean? it is £6 billion rise for health and social care, orat billion rise for health and social care, or at least £2 million promised specifically for social care. £4 billion for health would be about 3%, so that is a generous increase compared to recent increases we have seen, but against the historical long—term average it is quite small. in terms of increasing the health service side of it first, does this compensate for the money in real terms that the health service has lost in luke recent years? there was some extra money coming in any way which would have just about meant that spending per head would have been approximately flat over last ten yea rs approximately flat over last ten years and this would increase it a bit more. it is a modest increase on what the existing spending plans are. in terms of the breakdown between the different parts of the uk, we should be cleared the lib dems are talking about ring

let‘s get the thoughts from the institute for fiscal studies.. what is your view? yes, this is clearly a very big document. the labour party suggests an extra £50 billion a year of day—to—day spending, another 25 billion a year on investment spending, and quite a lot of other things besides, including the additional nationalisations. that is without some of the things you might expect, so there is not reversal of the social security cuts coming down the social security cuts coming down the road. actually rather a small amount of money for the national health service. what they have got is very large amounts of money on infrastructure spending, getting rid of student tuition fees, which essentially would benefit high earning graduates. a lot of money on childcare, and a whole siri is of other interventions. —— a whole series. we were talking with norman smith about the cost of the plan, for example, to take water companies in england into public ownership. thames water alone cost something like 10 billion. these are staggering sums that would be

that‘s according to the institute for fiscal studies.ment. the biggest airline in the middle east — emirates — has reported its first fall in annual profits for five years. and it‘s quite a fall — 82%. it says concerns over terror attacks, changes to us immigration laws and the brexit vote have all hit demand. let‘s have a quick look at trade on the markets. mostly the markets. m ostly rea d , the markets. mostly read, as you can see, but that even flat trade. markets have been digesting the news that the bank of england expect inflation to grow more quickly than expected as well as forecasting that interest rates might eventually be going up more quickly than previously thought. we‘ll is also affecting trading. opec has sharply raised its forecast for supply from nonmember countries, which could have an impact on prices. that is it from me. back to you. thank you very much indeed. see you later on. leaders of the eight nations with territory in the arctic are meeting in alaska amid confusion about the us government‘s policy on climate c

the institute for fiscal studies has criticised both parties‘ policy proposals, saying they fail to addresss editor kamal ahmed is here. why are they being so critical? think there are two big reason, firstly, do the numbers add up? and secondly, have they been honest about the big challenges, for example, the rising cost of social care? 0n example, the rising cost of social care? on both, the ifs is not convinced. let us think about the conservatives first. can they really drive through those spending cuts they say they still want do? the cuts in work benefit, the ifs says their proposal on the nhs budget aren champion, can it be delivered. delivered. for labour the issue is that big idea, the tax rises it wa nts to that big idea, the tax rises it wants to drive through. £49 billion of tax rises, the ifs suggests they will only get 40 billion. a 9 billion shortfall and the impact won't just be billion shortfall and the impact won'tjust be on the rich, but it will be on lots more people than labour suggest. now, manifestos will be on lots more people than laboursuggest. now, manifestos are

the independent think tank, the institute for fiscal studies, says labour's draft manifesto would significantlyize of the state. one proposal is a commitment to renationalise britain's train network. at the moment, train services in different parts of the country are operated by different companies. our transport correspondent richard westcott has been looking at what labour's plans would do for the railways. britain's railways are bitty and complex. most of the track, signals and stations are run by network rail. it's effectively a nationalised company, spending public money. the trains are in private hands. so what exactly is labour proposing? at the moment, different companies can bid to run different rail services for a limited number of years. it's called a franchise. what labour seems to be suggesting is that as each of those franchises runs out, rather than having a new bidding process, the government will take over those services instead. there are 18 franchises in total. the first one, south west trains, comes up for renewal in august but another ten, including famous names like great

the institute for fiscal studies says the tory pledge to slash immigration would cost billions, and there'se richest 5%. here's our economics editor, kamal ahmed. 0ne says they will have a fairer economy with strict control on spending, the other spending on public services. today, a damning conclusion, neither is being straight. the tories were the first in the dock. they would continue cutting day—to—day spending by the state. they have a settlement for the nhs which is not that generous. they would be taking a risk with public services. would they allow public services. would they allow public services. would they allow public services to deteriorate, or would they top their spending plans 7 would they top their spending plans he would they top their spending plans up? the ifs analysis says the tories plan another tour parliament of austerity with cuts in welfare spending, funding period so challenging for the in england is a question about whether it's deliverable, and cuts to per—pupil funding in schools also in england. the ifs also says the target of lower levels of immigration could

you say 95% of the country won't pay extra income tax, but the institute for fiscal studies, which isator of these things at elections, says there is no way that tens of billions of pounds of tax rises would affect only a small group at the very top. no way. they say your plans "would not work". no, they haven't said they will not work. they did. they have looked at our programme. they have been through the funding of it, and i'm pleased they have. they've done the same with the conservatives. what they're saying is that you would have to collect your new taxes as well as the increase in corporation tax, obviously. you would have to be assiduous in chasing down tax evasion, obviously. they've also said that our investment would bring about a better society and a more harmonious society. they said that you're going for the highest ever peacetime level of taxation, the highest ever. well, they're not correct on that, actually, because the level of corporation tax we're proposing to go to would be 26%, which is actually less than it was in 2010. but they're talking about the overall leve

hang on, we mention the ifs, that is the independent institute for fiscal studies, they have suggested like £49 billion in taxes, you have miscalculated and if you think having worked it all out, it will be something like £41 billion, that is a big shortfall. when you promise people buildings and tens of billions for the nhs and social care, you will not be able to raise it. we have said that they are being very pessimistic about this but we think that our measures will work and we're happy to talk to the nhs about it. within our manifesto there was room as having underestimated the amount we have raised in taxes. we are happy to talk to them and with our manifesto we would also like the others for budget responsibility, a government body and we said this about our previous ma nifesto and we said this about our previous manifesto and this one, they will a lwa ys manifesto and this one, they will always be fights about this, let the obr always be fights about this, let the 0br look at our manifesto. —— 0ffice for budget responsibility. it is given this as its job and we have said we are

not my words — that's a damning verdict of the institute for fiscal studies.cal studies has said your tax plans will not raise as much money as you thinkthey might. if that was the case, would you choose to raise taxes or cut public spending? what they have said is there is a gap between what we have said we would raise and what they believe could be raised from existing taxes. what they have not taken into consideration is the effectiveness of transaction taxes, which we want to bring in, and offshore property taxes that we want to bring in. we believe they will raise money necessary. the city of glasgow always used to be known as an absolutely rock—solid labour heartland. what's happened to the party here is a good illustration of what has happened across scotland. until recently, every glasgow mp was labour. in the 2015 election they lost every seat in the city to the snp. now, not even their most optimistic campaigners believe they are likely to win any of them back in this election. labour are fighting to keep the single mp they have in scotland, and mayb

focussing on the economy and we'll be putting your questions live to pauljohnson from the institute for fiscal studiesyou can email us as well at askthis@bbc.co.uk. a father has died after falling while walking with his daughter on a mountain in wales. rescue workers say the man, who's believed to be from the south of england, slipped on tryfan in snowdonia. he was airlifted to hospital where he was pronounced dead. president trump has been urged to hand over any recordings of conversations between him and sacked fbi director james comey to the authorities. senior opposition politicians continue to pressure the president over allegations russia meddled in last year's election. they warn destroying any tapes — if they exist — would be against the law. the new french president, emmanuel macron, is expected to name his prime minister today — on his first full day in office. mr macron, who was inaugurated as the country's youngest president yesterday, will also travel to germany today for talks with chancellor angela merkel. a 101—year—old war veteran has become the oldest person to complete a skydive. ve

so the well—regarded and independent institute for fiscal studies has published a realty check today,erything about it, and what it is that the last two parliaments have done, or not done to it. it covers the deficit, on taxes and spending. so what's the story? chris cook has been delving inside the ifs report. 0ne topic was central to the last two general elections. we will half the deficit over the next four yea rs. as we reduce the deficit. our country is facing the largest budget deficit in modern history. and you can expect it to recur in this one. we need a credible plan for dealing with the deficit. despite a rather different contexts. we will clear the deficit as soon as possible. the financial crisis and recession increase the deficit to the highest level since the second world war back in 2009—10. it has generally fallen since and is back to level before the crisis, a bit above the average but not high by historical standards, so there is a case for more deficit reduction, not least because we have racked up debt over the years but not a deficit so large it is extraordinary

the institute for fiscal studies says the party's plans would result in a 3% cut to school budgets inpending slightly, and the liberal democrats would maintain the status quo. in response, the conservatives said at least their proposals were properly costed. the parents of a seriously ill nine—month—old boy, who doctors say should be allowed to die, say they intend to take their case to the supreme court. the court of appeal ruled against chris gard and connie yates, who had wanted to take their son charlie for treatment in the united states. judges upheld an earlier ruling which accepted the therapy was experimental, and wouldn't help. scientists say new observations of the planetjupiter have taken their breath away. they have been studying detailed photographs sent back to earth by nasa's spacecraft juno. researchers say they have been amazed by the storms at the gas giant's poles. dozens of hurricanes, each the size of earth, can be seen clustered together. and those are the main stories this morning. you were going to say something? i was just morning. you were going to say someth

for british people. you're planning to spend according to the institute of fiscal studies upwards of £75 billion. r final manifesto, so studies, not that i am aware, have seen ourfinal manifesto, so i studies, not that i am aware, have seen our final manifesto, so i won't comment on what they have seen or what they have assessed, but i'm sure they will provide a full reassessment after the manifesto has been published. it will go up, it will be above £75 billion. explain why it's a good thing to spend upwards of that? well, i won't comment on specific figures as i've said. they will be referred in our ma nifesto said. they will be referred in our manifesto when it is launched at 11am. the government has a duty to ensure that businesses have the tools that they need to thrive and prosper, infrastructure, skills, research and development, we need to set—up our economy for the future and to do that we have to invest. 0k. have you added up all your spending? we have. we've got a fully costed manifesto. at 11am, there will abtotal figures costed manifesto. at 11am, there will abtotalfigures for costed

the economy — and we'll be putting your questions live to pauljohnson, director of the institute for fiscal studiesg the hashtag bbc ask this, or text your questions to 61124 — and you can email us as well at askthis@bbc.co.uk. police in essex say they are searching a garage for the murder of teenager 15 years ago. the body of danieljohnson was never found. teenager 15 years ago. the body of danieljohnson was neverfound. her uncle was found guilty of the murder in 2002, but never tell police what happened. president trump has been urged to hand over any recordings of conversations between him and sacked fbi directorjames comey to the authorities. senior opposition politicians continue to pressure the president over allegations russia meddled in last year's election. they warn destroying any tapes — if they exist — would be against the law. dozens of nhs hospitals are still affected by the global cyber attack with routine operations and tests cancelled. the conservatives are promising to expand workers' rights, including unpaid leave to care for relatives if the party keeps power. labour says it wil

the director of the institute for fiscal studies, pauljohnson joins me from the bbc newsroom. k it, i suppose it is about people like you, pauljohnson, working out simply whether the maths add up, whether one party is promising to raise enough revenue it can spend that money in another area. well, we will wait and see to see what is in the ma nifestos. wait and see to see what is in the manifestos. it is clear already though, there is a very big difference between the two main party, the labour party have said not only they would be happy to borrow to invest, but also they would be, they are looking to invest an awful lot more than is currently being spent on capital and infrastructure projects so, so that looks to us they would be willing to borrow 7 o 0 billion or more, more than the conservative party. if they are will willing to borrow that much and the degree of tax rises they are likely to need maybe more limited, thousand they have 0ussama assaidi capital gains tax would rise under them. at the top level there is is a big choice here. yes, so for a voter it is about do y

the first thing i would say is that the institute for fiscal studies did say this when we introducedctually we did. i think also it's interesting what the ifs is saying today seeming to be different to what the rowntree foundation says. what i would like to do and what labour would like to do is what we wa nted labour would like to do is what we wanted to do at the last election because there will be always this argy—bargy when manifestos come out and what we wanted to do was to get the office for budget responsibility who are independent, paid for by government, they'd only to attract anyfundraising, government, they'd only to attract any fundraising, they don't need to get their spokespeople on television, they are simply independent. get them to look at our ma nifesto, independent. get them to look at our manifesto, the tory manifesto, cost them and see if the sums make sense. we asked them at the last general election to do that and they said no, and guess what, this time they are saying no. they will not debate us, they keep slinging mud around and they won't let the office for

that‘s according to the institute for fiscal studies.s and the brexit vote have all hit demand. flat trade around most of europe. here in london it‘s all about economics. markets have been digesting the news that the bank of england expects inflation to grow more quickly than expected. the forecast that interest rates might eventually be going up more quickly than previously thought. in the us we‘re expecting shares in the company behind snapchat to come under pressure again after news of the big loss it suffered in the first quarter. rebecca. see later. lets see what the weather is doing for the next two or three days over the weekend. it's it‘s looking pretty good across the northern half of the country this afternoon but further south, we have got increasing cloud, showers breaking out. low—pressure is destabilising the atmosphere and sending some humid air to us from the near continent. we‘ve had clouds developing over the last few hours. you can see the sunshine developing with showers and thunderstorms. similarto with showers and t

the institute for fiscal studies think the tax increase in corporation tax that you are talking aboute of the biggest tax increase in the last 30 years or so and that that could discourage investment from businesses and risk in the end, actually reducing the amount raised by the treasury. you have to find the money from somewhere and therefore what we have decided to do, protecting, by the way, small businesses is to ask those who pay corporation tax to pay more. it will rise progressively from 19 to 26%. but that would still leave us at the lowest rate in the g-7 leave us at the lowest rate in the g—7 countries. so what we have done and quite rightly so is to say to the children and parents of this country, we are on your site, we are going to ensure that you get the best possible start in life and that the way we are keen to fund it is to ask those who can afford to pay to pay a bit more. we are obviously in uncertain times economically going ahead into brexit. under the conservatives, the corporation tax rate would fall to 70% in 2020. under labour's lands that it would be 24%. --

it is worth stressing the institute for fiscal studies very highly regarded fiscal watchdog that theyas suggested none of the political parties are putting in nearly enough given the pressures on the nhs. they calculate that because we are an ageing population we need about a four percent increase in funding every year. the tories are proposing about 1%, the lib dems a bit more than that and labourjust over 2%, not meeting what they say is necessary to cater for the pressures facing the health service. also interesting as well on immigration, and issued theresa may is wanting to focus more on, again no real clear answers from the parties this morning, theresa may arejeremy corbyn not parties this morning, theresa may are jeremy corbyn not setting parties this morning, theresa may arejeremy corbyn not setting out in any detail what we will do once we leave the eu and freedom of movement comes to an end. thank you norman. and you can see the debate live at 730 pm on and bbc news channel. police investigating last week's manchester terror attack in which 22 people died now believe the su

we mentioned the ifs, the independent institute for fiscal studies. all out, they think it will be 41 billion. so there was a big shortfall there. so when you promise people tens of billions for the nhs and social care, you will not be able to raise that money. we have said to the ifs that they are being pessimistic about this. we think our measures will work and we are happy to talk to them about it. within our ma nifesto, to talk to them about it. within our manifesto, there is room for us having underestimated the amount that we might raise in taxation. we are happy to engage with them. and we would like the office for budget responsibility, a government body, and we said this about our previous ma nifesto and we said this about our previous manifesto as well. there will always be fights about this. let the 0br look at our manifesto. they have what you don't like what they came up what you don't like what they came up with, so you dismiss it. , well, the office of budget responsibility is given this as its job and we are happy to engage with them,

thank you very much, director of the institute for fiscal studies, pauljohnson.e case that this is the manifesto that is pitched to the concerns of ordinary working families. it is a brave document. it stresses that we need to tackle some long—term challenges and in so doing theresa may has made some courageous and principled decisions. she has said that we can no longer afford to have universal provision of winterfuel no longer afford to have universal provision of winter fuel payments for pensioners and those wealthy pensioners who are benefiting from that benefit will have to lose some of it in order to ensure that people who are the poorer end of the spectrum can have the social care paid for. i think that approach, one nation approach is in the best traditions of the conservative party. so when theresa may says there were trade—offs to be made, what, as you see it, are the key trade—offs in this manifesto? what, as you see it, are the key trade-offs in this manifesto? one of them is the way in which the first time the whole question of social ca re time the

institute of fiscal studies to the academics, it shows it is the fairest way. how is it proportionate if everyone pays 1p extra ? it proportionate if everyone pays 1p extra? 1p in the pound, so forunder your plans in order to fund care? when we we re plans in order to fund care? when we were in government and we had agree this with the conservatives, although they renege on it, is that you would pay some and then after that i think, it was about £70,000, i would have to check the figures, after that you get free care. so, people make a contribution but nowhere near the contributions that they are making at the moment, which force people to sell their homes and get them into the crisis dolores is in. talking about brexit as well. you have made it clear that you differfrom you have made it clear that you differ from the other parties. at this point you are offering another vote, another referendum. has the vote, another referendum. has the vote not already... you accept the vote ? vote not already... you accept the vote? this is the first vote on the brexit deal. when we have the referendum last year, no one could tell you what it meant. it interestingly means we don‘t know what i