let's talk to pauljohnson, joining us from the institute for fiscal studies, we've been talking aboutine figures that we discussed earlier, but what's your reaction to the £394 billion of borrowing that only goes down to 100 billion by 20 4—25, and the contraction of the economy by 11.3%? these are the contraction of the economy by 11.396? these are all, as we expected, completely staggering numbers. i think it is worth saying that quite a lot of other stuff hidden within this, the chancellor sounded very generous in what he was saying, and in terms of the huge amounts he is putting towards the covid related needs this year and next, he is being very generous, more than 50 billion next year, as well. but not so generous if you look at everything else, the office for budget responsibility have broken down these numbers according to covid spending and non—covid spending and we actually see quite big cuts in public spending over the next few years, relative to what was being planned back in march, so even the borrowing numbers you'vejust quoted assume we will be spending less in three or

that was pauljohnson, from the institute for fiscal studies. of their physical difference, that's according to the charity changing faces. now scientists at the university of bristol are launching the first research project of its kind, to find a way for people to heal without leaving a scar. 0ur reporterjohn maguire has been to meet delilah, who was severely burnt as a baby. when delilah was just 17 months old, she suffered extensive and severe burns in an accident. she spent two months in intensive care and has had numerous operations ever since. my scars, they don't grow with me, so if my didn't have skin grafts then they would just be really tight and extremely painful. the biggest concern is how her injuries and scar tissue restrict her physical activities. i can't play with my friends the way that i would want to, and i can't alwaysjoin in in stuff, and after a while it does really hurt. and there are emotional consequences, although her positivity is extraordinary. when i was younger i used to be seen differently, because when i was youn

paul johnson from the institute for fiscal studies.talking about today. there's also the health issues and we have the latest data we can go through. with me now is our health correspondent anna collinson. talk us through what it all means. first of all we have the latest weekly surveillance report from public health england which covers up public health england which covers up to the ist of november. this shows covid hospital and critical ca re shows covid hospital and critical care admissions have continued to increase, though influenza rates remain low which shows even though hospitals are experiencing pressure the flu season has not yet properly started so that is a significant thing to consider. we have some slides from public health england. the first one shows looking at nhs regions the highest covid admission rates were in the north—west. we have been hearing this week across the bbc that some hospitals in that area are struggling to cope, having to cancel nonemergency surgery, but there is hope if you look at places like liver

carl emmerson is deputy director of the institute for fiscal studies. hejoins me now. i spending review normally sense out plans for three yea rs, normally sense out plans for three years, possibly more, we are getting a one—year plan because of the level of uncertainty, so how difficult you think it is for the chancellor to plan, given the pandemic, given that we don't know whether or not there will be a deal for the end we don't know whether or not there will be a dealfor the end of we don't know whether or not there will be a deal for the end of the brexit transition period? there is certainly huge amounts of uncertainty, and even in normal times our forecasts are wrong, undoubtedly they will be more wrong than usual this time, so the chancellor is right not to try and set further spending plans for three yea rs — set further spending plans for three years — just setting them for next years — just setting them for next year will be hard enough, he doesn't know what path the virus will take over coming months, whether lockdown will be needed, whether he might have to

the director of the institute for fiscal studies, pauljohnson, says the government will probably have to tax rises. it's important to say that for next year, the government's spending plans were cut. really quite substantially, actually, other than the amount they are allocating to deal with covid. and that means the numbers they got penciled in after next year involve cuts of more than £10 billion, relative to the plans set out in march. because there is no additional spending for covid after next year. so the government is basically saying, compared with what we thought was needed back in march, we actually think we need to spend quite a lot less going forward than we thought. i'm not at all sure that is remotely plausible, the idea that we will need no more money in the nhs after next year than we thought at the beginning of this year, the idea that we will need no money to deal with covid, the idea that we will want to spend less on public services, and social care and education and so on. i'm not sure that stacks up. the government is also saying that it is going to get rid of th

deal with the current crisis. 0n the andrew marr show this morning, the director of the institute for fiscal studies that the level of borrowing this year was, as a fraction of national income, the highest ever outside of the two world wars. have a huge reduction in economic output, the biggest recorded in history, it bounced back in the middle of the year. but it is at least 10% smaller, the economy, then a year ago. and we have borrowed an eye watering amount of money to deal with a pandemic as well, haven't we? at least 350 billion this year, a fraction of national income. so we thought what we saw back in the financial crisis was huge but this is bigger. does that mean we have got to stop borrowing? we have to reduce borrowing at some point. at the moment government is right, we need to support the economy, particularly while we have locked down, and that may well be more worrying this year. far more borrowing the next three or four yea rs borrowing the next three or four years then we were expecting a year ago, but if we continue with the levels of spending and tax at the moment, then not only

deal with the current crisis. 0n the andrew marr show this morning, the director of the institute for fiscal studiese level of borrowing this year was, as a fraction of national income, the highest ever outside of the two world wars. we have probably the biggest output in recorded history, it bounced back in the summer but it is now, the economy, 10% smaller than it was a year ago. we have borrowed an eye watering amount of money to do with the pandemic, have it we? at least £350 million this year, depending on the governance do next over the next few months, that would make it the most we have ever borrowed outside of the second and first world was. we saw the financial crisis but this is much bigger. does that mean we must stop borrowing? we clearly have to reduce borrowing at some point, at the moment, i think the government is right that we need to support the economy, particularly whilst we are in lockdown and that may well mean more worrying this year. it will be more worrying over the next three or four years, far more worrying than we were expecting a year ago. but if we continue with spendi

deal with the current crisis. 0n the andrew marr show this morning, the director of the institute for fiscal studiesid that the level of borrowing this year was, as a fraction of national income, the highest ever outside of the two world wars. we have a huge reduction in economic output in the first this year, that will have gone down now. the economy is at least smaller now than it was a year ago, so is at least smaller now than it was a year ago, so one of the biggest recessions in history. we have borrowed an eye watering amount of money to deal with the pandemic, haven't we? ali to 350 billion this year, probably, depending on what the government does over the next few months. that would make a fraction of the national income, the most we have ever borrowed outside of the first and second world wars. this is much bigger than the financial crisis. does that mean we have to stop borrowing and we cannot borrow any further? quickly have to reduce borrowing at some point, but at the moment, i think the government is right, we need to support the economy, particularly whilst we have locked down, and t

the institute for fiscal studies says the impact of the public sector pay freeze, and council tax risesomics editor faisal islam is here. what faisal islam is here. have we learned? on the part public what have we learned? on the partial public sector pay freeze, the iss point out when you take inflation into account, that the £250 rise focused on the lower paid in fact, those earning above £18,000 will have an effective real terms pay cut -- ifs. have an effective real terms pay cut —— ifs. there is also an effect on the pay rise for teachers, as well, they had been promised a different starting salary in 2022 but that will be delayed by a year, and on the council tax, councils have been allowed to raise council tax by 5% but the ifs assume because of social ca re costs but the ifs assume because of social care costs that will mostly be taken up care costs that will mostly be taken up and be an effective £70 rise in council tax in the spring on average for households. on the issue of brexit, the prime minister promised evenif brexit, the prime minister promised even if we left the eu w

pauljohnson of the institute for fiscal studies, who is usually invited on, isn't he, to mark the government'sas saying effectively they are extending a scheme that was dreamt up on the hoof back in march, which is extraordinarily generous to some people, as he put it, but leaves other people getting next to nothing or nothing at all. i suppose, though, adam, what rishi sunak's doing is casting the sort of blanket of help pretty broad in the hope that he doesn't face every single week lots of people all over the uk, dependant on their circumstances, saying, "well, what about me?" he's kind of extending that crutch, isn't he, all the way through to march, potentially? ed, you used to work in the treasury for a long, long time. do you think the people in the treasury are happy to just be shovelling all this huge amount of money out the door? i think they are going to be very concerned by the cost and the fiscal implications, but that's something to be dealt with later. this is a once or twice in a century event, and it's going to be very expensive and governments around the world are going to pa

this is the head of the institute for fiscal studies speaking on the bbc earlier. own these numbers according to covid spending and non—covid spending, and we actually see quite big cuts in public spending over the next few years relative to what was being planned back in march. and so even the borrowing numbers you just quoted assume that we'll be spending less in three or four years' time than was planned back in march, that we spend nothing after next year on anything related to covid and that overall the pressures on public spending have been reduced by what we're seeing this year. i think that's unlikely, to put it mildly. so i think there are some questions here about how well this set of numbers will work through in the medium run given what we know about the pressures on public spending. vicky pryce is a formerjoint head economist for the uk government. these are huge numbers. what do you make of these figures? do you think they are advisable?” don't think the government has any choice but to borrow as much as it possibly can and is much as the markets would

to bring the public finances back under control, that's according to analysis from the institute for fiscal studiesifs director pauljohnson says rishi sunak may end up borrowing much more than than what he set out in yesterday's spending review, as he has not allocated money for covid—related costs after next year. a former porter at great ormond street hospital has been charged with dozens of child sex offences. paul farrell is believed to have worked at the specialist children's hospital from the mid—1980s until his arrest in january. in a statement the hospital said they are orking with the police and that safeguarding children is fundamental to the care they provide. president trump has pardoned his former national security adviser michael flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to the fbi. general flynn resigned three months into the trump administration, after being investigated over russian interference in the 2016 us presidential election. mr trump said the act of clemency was his "great honour". senior democrats have accused the president of an abuse of power. germany is to extend the closure o

for the self-employed. millions are affected by this. bad enough to make this mistake in march but we 7 months, the institute of fiscal studies says the scheme remains their words targeted for the self-employed. the institute of directors, many self-employed continue to be left out in the cold after six and months. why the chancellor or prime minister still failing at self-employed? >> unquestionably this pandemic has been hard on the people of this country and unquestionably people have suffered throughout the pandemic whose livelihood suffer but we have done everything we possibly can to help them. 2.6 million of them received support across 13 billion pounds. we also operate universal credit, that will continue until next year and he champions universal credit and calls for it to operate steadily. >> the prime minister doesn't get it. it has been extended. the prime minister must know that doesn't apply to millions, for 7 months and there's a human cost. chris said to me our interest is devastated. it has fallen through the cracks. our businesses are falling and crashing each day. what will the prime minister say to chris and millions lik

but seven months on, the institute for fiscal studies says the scheme remains, their words, "wastefulionably, this pandemic has been hard on the people of this country and unquestionably, there are people who have suffered throughout the pandemic. and people whose livelihoods have suffered. but we have done everything that we possibly can to help. as for the self—employed, mr speaker, 2.6 million of them have received support at a cost of £13 billion. quite right, mr speaker. we have also, as he knows, operated universal credit and that will continue until next year. —— up rated. he championed universal credit now and calls for it to be extended. he stood on a manifesto to abolish universal credit! mr speaker, the prime leicesterjust doesn't get it. i know very well that the self—employment income support scheme has been extended —— the prime ministerjust. but the prime minister must know that that the scheme simply doesn't apply to millions of self—employed people. they've been left out for seven months. there is a real human cost to this. this week on lbc, spoke to a self—employed p

sector pay is higher than private sector pay is higher than private sector pay, whereas the institute for fiscal studiesrity that public sector workers will have a greaterjob security than someone in the private sector, and we all know unemployment has hit across so many sectors during this pandemic, and there is at least a degree of job security that a lot of people, as we have witnessed, just don‘t have in the private sector, or in the gig economy? that is a levelling down argument and it is one of the reasons why we have been calling on the government to get to grips with insecure contracts, protectjobs, and create new good ones. we would like to see real ambition from the government for an industrial strategy that delivers decent work for people in communities up and down britain. i am sorry we have to live there because i know you have to be elsewhere. thank you very much for now, frances 0‘grady from the tuc. as promised, let‘s go through all the numbers with economics correspondent andy verity. just explain for anyone who didn‘t see it the announcements, the key points the announcements, the key

the institute for fiscal studies says that the new money actually amounts to £7 billion.elded? we were... that‘s a good question. we never checked. clearly, whatever the policies were in place didn‘t work, you know. operationally... either mistakes were made or things didn't happen in the right way and, as a consequence. . . you know the consequence. the duke of cambridge has tentatively welcomed a new investigation into how the bbc secured an interview with his mother princess diana in 1995. in a statement released last night he said, "the independent investigation is a step in the right direction. it should help establish the truth behind the actions that led to the panorama interview and subsequent decisions taken by those in the bbc at the time." the bbc has promised to "get to the truth" about the events surrounding the panorama interview. lord dyson, one of the country‘s most senior retired judges has been appointed to lead the inquiry. our royal correspondent jonny dymond explained how unusual the statement is. it‘s very unusual. i can‘t think of another time that

ben zaranko is a research economist at the institute for fiscal studies. thank you forjoining us.k to see if this is confirmed. if it has as it has been outlined in the press today, 3.7 million workers in the public sector will have their pay is frozen next year. that is equivalent to a bill cut if prices rise. it could save £3.5 billion which is not a small sum of money but it is a drop in the ocean compared to the borrowing. white maxi you are saying it would not make a massive dent and it would affect individuals very hard? it would affect those public sector workers in the sense they would not get the public or pay rise they were expecting and some think they deserve. it is a fairly major saving to the treasury, it is just that the borrowings are so exceptionally large that this really is just going to have to be part of an overall package. one thing to say, which hinted at in your intro, as this will not be felt equally across different parts of the population. about two thirds of the public sector workforce are women. in some parts of the work it is much higher than that. 85