Live Treasury Questions House of Commons

number of people from disadvantaged backgrounds. The proportion

financially has almost. 'S the wages of 18 to 21-year-olds fell in the

last parliament. Those under 25 are excluded from the national living

wage. Will the Chief Secretary to the Treasury Conder and what the

Cabinet Office minister said, that this is because those under 25

simply not productive enough? I thank him for that. I think he is

ignoring the fact the amazing record we have news unemployment. Since we

took office six years ago. Youth unemployment has fallen by 102,000

this year, and youth employment is actually up 94,000 of the year.

Close to the highest proportion on record. In terms of the national

living wage, while it doesn't apply to those under 25, I remind her that

the national minimum wage does apply to those under 25 and it is

increasing under this government. For younger workers, the priority is

to secure work and gain experience. Youth unemployment remains higher

than the employment rate for those aged under 25. Since 2010, nearly

500,000 children and young people are in fewer households where there

is worklessness. Will he confirm the government will continue to help

households into work and cut poverty? Indeed. I thank my

honourable friend for that question. We will continue taking action in

this space. Mr Speaker, the number of households where nobody had ever

worked actually doubled under Labour. Thanks trust, youth

employment is up 94,000 over the year. -- thanks to us. Would my

right honourable friend agree with me that the way to give a fairer

deal to young people is to make sure they are not saddled with the death

of reckless spending, and will he ensure me that he will do everything

he can to ensure this government balances the box? He is quite right.

-- balances the box. Will be repaying the debt that the last

Labour government left. What I can also says that household debt as a

proportion of income has fallen since Labour's financial crisis, and

we are in a much healthier condition in 2016 than we were in 2010. I

mustered much -- must advise that we are today visited by the Speaker of

the Parliament of Kosovo, visiting the UK in the year in which that

independent nation celebrates eight years of its independence. My

colleague and his team are warmly welcomed in the House. Mr Speaker, I

will with your permission answer this question with question number

ten. As a young MP I went there to help with the Morrissey building

programme in Kosovo, it's good to have the speaker of the parliament

here. -- the democracy building. We set out a plan to build a Northern

Powerhouse, so the whole is greater than the parts. Since then we have

committed millions in new transport investment, devolved to cities, it

in science and culture. Investments in the North are up over 100%. When

we started on this bold journey, it is only together that we will

transform this country. The severe flooding over Christmas caused huge

problems Mr Duley, which is a major player in the Northern Powerhouse.

-- huge problems for the city of Leeds. Will the Hill help to deliver

investment in infrastructure and help secure the economic prosperity

of the North? I want to congratulate him and other West Yorkshire MPs who

spoke up powerfully for the need in further investment in West Yorkshire

and in need of the city. We have provided that was around ?350

million extra into flood defence investment to protect the businesses

and the communities that he represents. Our neighbourhood

planning Bill ensures that we are going to have a national

infrastructure can listen on a statutory footing to look at the big

challenges we face, whether it is transport, broadband or indeed flood

defence. I thank my right honourable friend for his answer, and would ask

him what benefits there are four infrastructure funding for the

region outside of the large cities? This is an important issue. Of

course there has been a focus on economic development in recent years

in the big cities of the North, but it's the counties and county towns

in the North of England we now want to support. Of course in her area,

which represents so well, we have the new gross deal for the area. We

are looking to devolve more economic powers to counties so they too can

see the benefits of securing economic growth. My door is always

open to good, sensible proposals for investment in the counties of North

England. The Chancellor speaks about investment in transport and in flood

defences. Both of those are crucial in my city of Leeds. And yet, last

month the government cancelled the trolley bus scheme in Leeds, and in

2000 and 11 flood defences were cancelled in Leeds which contributed

to the flooding. -- in 2010. I'm surprised about the complacency of

my colleague, and would ask the government to properly invest in

flood defences in our city. I think the lady is being a little bit

churlish. We committed ?6 billion to investment in transport in

Yorkshire. But her constituency is in. On flood defences, she raised on

the floor of his House very specific schemes. I have funded those in the

budget. The future phases she talks about, as you well do not yet have

planning and a price tag attached to it. In principle, we are committed

to those as well. If she works of us, we will deliver these schemes

which were never delivered under a Labour government. The Chancellor

mentioned transport investment, yet his government has resided a

researcher racial weather is 24 times more transport -- presided

over a situation where there is. People in the north need our country

to remain at the heart of Europe, so that our cities will keep growing.

It's quite right that we invest in major transport infrastructure in

our capital cities, which we have done with Crossrail. That is not to

the exclusion of investment elsewhere in our country. In her

part of the north-west, there has been a massive investment in the

electrification of the railways. Under a Labour government only ten

miles of the entire railways of the country were electrified. We have

high-speed two, which will help with train journeys to Merseyside and

Manchester. And now the new Merseyside mea agreed, we can go on

putting more money into the infrastructure of Merseyside to

support the private businesses to grow and grow jobs in the private

sector. This week is Homburg BusinessWeek. Despite the

forthcoming opening of the road into the docks, business leaders still

tell me they feel somewhat disconnected from the Northern

Powerhouse project. Could the Chancellor out line what future

schemes may benefit them? My honourable friend championed that

road when he first came into Parliament. PCs now the practical

benefits with that work now almost complete. -- he sees. All of which

are examples of how well delivering for his part of the country. I'm as

passionate as he is making sure East Yorkshire and Hull is connected into

the Northern Powerhouse. We have made it clear to all cities in the

north that whole should be included in that and the surrounding area. In

the budget we support the city of culture near where he represents.

Recent figures showed a 9.6% crop in the value of new construction

projects starts recorded in the so-called Northern Powerhouse in the

end of 2015. Interestingly, despite the Chancellor's trick on

investment, much of the public capital invested thus far has

actually been delivered by the EU. Would he agree that Brexit will not

affect greater magister's vision and access to funding? As you well know,

I certainly think that Britain is stronger in the European Union and

that helps the Northern Powerhouse. Investment projects in the north of

England are up over 100% in the last two years. That is actually in

striking contrast to some other, to give you a sense of scale,

investment projects in London are up 7% in the last two years. In the

northern Powerhouse, up 127%. We are balancing the economic geography of

this country. It shall welcome the fact that the North of England now

has the highest employment rate in the country's history, and we have

seen the fastest falls of unemployment in the country. With

permission, I would like to answer this with question nine. We have the

highest employment rate on record, the lowest claimant count since

1974. That's millions more opportunities for a fellow citizens,

and we must not now put at risk the security that's being brought by our

long-term economic plan. Up to April and June 2015, employment increased

by 20 4000. The figures are three times higher than this for EU

nationals. With respect to the national wage, what anticipation is

therefore the job growth in the UK? -- increased by 20 4000. Nine in

every ten people in a job in the UK are UK nationals. As the Chancellor

has said, Britain deserves a pay rise, the national living wage

delivers it. I'm sure the minister and the whole house will welcome the

latest unemployment figures in my constituency. Standing at any 361,

or less than 1%. What more can be done to ensure this trend continues?

-- at only 361. Airing in mind the over 50s, and the 18 to 24-year-old

bracket. I'm sure the keenness to ensure no one is left behind. We've

made it more cost-effective for employers to hire young people and

apprentices. And also helping older job-seekers find employment through

pilot schemes. This morning, the head warned that a Brexit vote means

jobs would be lost. What is the estimate of the number of jobs that

would be at risk if we left? But when the immediate economic shock

our prediction is that 500,000 jobs would be lost, the increase in

unemployment, partly from the initial impact on foreign direct

investment and the effect continues thereafter. Of course it isn't just

a touchy but any non-European company having its European

headquarters in the UK, the UK is much the most attractive location

for them, they would be in great difficulty if we were to leave the

European Union. Has the department made an assessment of what that

particular group of employer is contributing and should contribute

in the future, which would be addressed we left? We have modelled

the effect on foreign direct investment and you don't have to

believe that current people in the UK would leave, all you have to

believe the notice will have a detrimental impact to the UK is what

happens to investment in the future, there are many reasons to invest in

Britain but we know that 72% of firms that invest in the UK say that

our membership of the EU is a key factor. Alongside genocide and four,

we had all these threats to jobs if we leave the EU, Kennington Road

will be done if we got to stay in and continue to have unlimited

immigration from 27 countries, what will be done to protect my

constituents, who have seen their wages flat line because of this

unlimited immigration? Well of course we have already taken steps

to ensure people cannot just come here and claim benefits from day

one, with the renegotiation of the Prime Minister secured, we address

the in work benefits system, and are watching touching that the effect of

immigration would be as great as is sometimes opposed, particularly when

you look at the other models of agreement with you, a number of

which include free movement. Just the Minister agree that about to

leave the European Union on June 23 could have a negative effect on

employment trends, particularly in Northern Ireland which has 50,000

jobs related to exports in the U and for the Chancellor, in my

constituency, the effect on that. I know my right honourable friend was

in County Down yesterday, and of course Northern Ireland is in a

sensitive position because of having the land border with the Republic

and therefore with the European Union, the new European Union, that

we would be in, I agree with her that employment in Northern Ireland,

more people in work than ever before, they need to protect that.

Number five. This government is backing small and large businesses

as part of our long-term economic plan. A corporation tax rates are

the lowest in the G20 and will fall to 17%. In the budgets, we insured

600,000 businesses permanently pay no rates at all. This is a

conservative government that supports businesses and jobs they

create. In towns like Newark where 11,000 new jobs are being created

under this government, the task ahead is not just to attract any

businesses but those which ensure people are not just in work but I

will pay. With that in mind, will they agree with me and the knowledge

that not only are knowledge of dozen new businesses have been created

since 2010 but one in four working people in this country are now in

high skilled, well-paid jobs? I think my honourable friend is right

to point out all the good things that are happening in Newark and of

course across the East Midlands more we see 53,000 new small and

medium-sized witnesses since we came into Downing Street. A remarkable

achievement. We have the continued to move people up the job scale,

make sure their wages continue to grow as they are at the moment and

the good news is that of the jobs being created, 80% or so are

full-time and the majority are in skilled occupations. With the

benefits of innovation to business and the economy, why does the

Chancellor think his decision to change innovation support from

grants to loans is anything other than a bad idea, which will increase

cost and risk the company is seeking to innovate? I think you would

accept as I would, that the UK has had a challenge with turning good

inventions in the laboratory into good inventions in the workplace

that sell around the world. So our innovation support has needed to be

modernised and the idea of loans were something borrowed from a

French initiative which has worked well in that economy, in terms of

turning scientific invention into good product in the marketplace. It

is not simply on innovation, that is a rather unconvincing answer, it's

also foreign exports. We understand the benefits of exporting more, so

why does the Chancellor again think it's a remotely good idea to take

the decision to cut the UK TI budget by 42 million over the next four

years, making it more difficult to export and more difficult for him to

meet his own target of doubling exports by the end of the decade?

Over the last five or six years we have greatly increased the UK TI

budget but like every UK Government, it's paid for by the taxpayers, we

need to make sure they get value for money and the new head is ensuring

the money is go to the front line of supporting medium-sized and small

Scottish exporters and others about selling around the world. He should

welcome the enormous success many Scottish businesses have, from W to

agriculture, to manufacturing in Scotland, in exporting around the

world with the support of the UK TI. The clue is in the first two

letters. The Chancellor has introduced a subsidy for tax relief

on items, a high-risk, high return market, most people support the

intention which is to increase competition in the lending market,

but many are becoming concerned that some of these loans are being

marketed to those who can't reasonably understand the risks stop

what is the Treasury doing to ensure that the taxpayer does not end up

encouraging the marketing of such schemes to people who can least

afford to lose the money? At their own request, the lending industry is

now originated by the Financial Conduct Authority, which is alert to

the risks my right honourable friend identifies. In the financial crash,

we saw the limitation of the UK credit system, where many companies

were reliant on bank finance. But we have tried to do in the last few

years is broaden the range of financing options for small and

medium-sized businesses, not just in terms of capital markets but

innovative new products like peer-to-peer lending, and using

things like I sat rappers, is a good thing for our economy. To could he

look at abolishing the seven course rather than just halving them? We

have taken a significant step to helping Welsh businesses and

businesses on the other side of the border by holding the tolls, while

ensuring we have the resources to maintain the bridge and we don't

have too true on the same taxpayers through their tax bill. At an event

in my constituency we have invited a number of providers including fibre,

satellite providers and point-to-point wireless, which is

the best solution in our experience for those in the hardest to reach

areas. With the Chancellor look at extending the excellent voucher

scheme for satellite for point-to-point wireless will allow

communities to pool vouchers to fund these schemes? I am very happy to

have a closer look at the proposal my honourable friend makes, I know

what a rural constituency he represents and we have pirated

support in North Yorkshire for raw businesses and their broadband

links. In the Queens speech, in the provisions of the Digital economy,

we are looking at making it universal service obligation between

no it can have action is formative effect on the rural economy. The

Chancellor talks about supporting business and like labour, I'm sure

he will want to see long-term sustainable business growth in

Britain. After his six years at the helm, what is the forecast for

business investment growth this year? Business growth is positive

this year, and in the years ahead, according to the OBR forecast and it

was negative and I became the Chancellor, so things are improving.

Mr Speaker, the OBR has revised down business investment growth by a huge

4.9% since November. Even taking into account the fiscal measures he

has introduced. And we know this could go further down, if we leave

the European Union. The acting head of the British chamber of Commerce

recently highlighted frustration from businesses around

infrastructure projects, the huge skills gap, child care, housing and

uncertainty around the apprenticeship levy, it almost

sounds like gruel today without the jam tomorrow. Does the Chancellor

agree with him? Where was the apprenticeship levy before they

complained about what we were doing? If the Labour Party wants to

contribute to this important debate about how we make our economy more

productive, I think we are going to need a better contribution. Her PPS

has been in an e-mail exchange with the member for Bishop Auckland

weathermen but the Bishop Auckland complained about these questions at

Treasury questions, saying that the brief she has just been sent is a

disgrace and it demonstrates that the Labour Treasury team... Order,

order. The Chancellor should remain seated. If that is the sum total of

what he has to contribute on his feet in response to that question,

frankly, it wasn't worth the breath. Utterly feeble and competition in

the improper. And it, it's very simple. Number six. With your

permission, question of 12. The predicted rise in unemployment of

500,000 includes 24,000 people in Wales, 34,000 people in the West

Midlands. In the long-term the central estimate is that GDP would

be lower by around ?4300 per household by 2030 is an otherwise.

The head of the World Trade Organisation said yesterday that the

process of negotiating deals outside of Europe would take decades. Isn't

that one of the reasons why confidence would be hit, currency

would fall, jobs would be lost including 24,000 in Wales, and

companies such as Hitachi have mentioned today they would pull out

of the United Kingdom. I think we do agree, Mr Speaker, on the turmoil

that uncertainty can bring. And the uncertainty of that future trade

deals he raises is part of that. There is much more uncertainty as

well about businesses who currently trade with other European countries,

about people who are employed, thinking about going to those

countries. All of these things generates uncertainty, which creates

economic turmoil in the short run. There is the real danger of missing

out on a large number of third-party traders in the long-term, if or when

all the current trade deals currently under negotiation are

finished. That would cut for some 80% of outrage. Can the Chancellor

state what the economic benefits are as a result of us leaving the

European Union in places like the west midlands, and more importantly

the impact on manufacturing. In the judgment's constrict GNC, the

automotive sector -- in the gentleman's constituency. It is

unsurprising that among those speaking out in favour of Remain

include the chief executives of Rolls-Royce and red Land Rover.

Considering the UK has been a member of the EU for over 40 years, and we

still don't even have a trade deal with the United States of America,

the largest economy in the world. Does my honourable friend not agree

that our economy would benefit from the United kingdom being able to

negotiate our own free trade deals? Mr Speaker, the businesses that I

speak to overwhelmingly say that they feel they would get a better

deal with the increased economic clout, five times economic weight

that comes with being a member of the EU as opposed to being Britain

on its own. All these deals to take a long time, but when all the

current EU negotiations are completed, the EU will have more

trade deals with the rest of the world, and therefore we would then

the United States and Canada combine. The living wage is a very

attractive economic policy, especially in Eastern Europe. Given

the extensive financial modelling my honourable friend has conducted, can

he tell the house what his official estimate is of the number of

unskilled migrants coming into this country from Eastern Europe in the

first five years after a vote to remain? Of course the national

living wage makes sure that British workers who are low paid cannot be

undercut by people coming from other countries, it would be a great

benefit to our economy. It's also the case that as our legal minimum

pay increases, we will still be with in the middle wage internationally.

Yesterday the Chancellor told the people of Northern Ireland that

housed prices would fall by 18% if we voted to leave the EU, even

though the day before he said that housing costs would go up by 9%. He

told us 14,000 jobs would be lost in export industries, even though the

exchange rate which, which would help export, would plunder it. He

made an uncanny prediction about income in 14 years' time. -- would

plummet. Does he agree that he is expending his own credibility by the

panic which is now set in trying to sell the economic, threadbare case

for staying in the EU? Saying that house prices would come down but

housing costs would go up, that's not inconsistent at all. As the cost

of borrowing would go up. In many parts of the country, Northern

Ireland is a special case, would be a good thing for house prices to

come down, but not as a result of crashing the economy and making it

more difficult for people to borrow. In terms of the long-term forecast,

it is difficult to forecast 15 here's hence. What the analysis

seeks to do, saying all things that being equal, whether you are in or

out of the European Union. The result is clear that in the central

case of the central scenario, the GDP is hit. Doesn't the Minister

agree with me that how the fact that so many international firms have

made it very clear that by being in the European Union and being in the

single market, this is a good country to invest? So the obvious

thing to do is remain in the European Union, a union for

investment and the jobs. I do agree that. The United Kingdom has the

third highest stock of foreign direct investment in the entire

world, behind only the United States and China. We are the biggest

recipient of foreign direct investment in the EU, and from the

EU. The express of accession countries shows that that move into

the European Union agreed us make a difference. It's just about tariffs,

it's also about being in the customs union, which some, most of the

models don't involve. Important for the cross-border supply chains that

the gentleman was talking about earlier. Only two countries, the

Germany and the Netherlands run a surplus with the UK, and the rest

run a deficit. Does he agree that the others would vote for tariffs,

and so would Germany to stop Japanese car imports. Has he

modelled the impact of those tariffs on employment levels and on inward

in the best mint? Disastrous, I suggest. It is the case that

different countries will have different interests. No doubt they

would come to the surface, and it needs a very large majority of other

countries voting to agree a deal. Fundamentally, I don't think it is

about the deficit that one country has with the EU or vice versa. It's

about the relative size of the export market to that country. For

us, 44% of our exports go to be, for the EE is 8% the other way. In any

negotiation, that means that the other side has the better hand. --

for the EU. Can the Minister tell us why we pay over ?10 billion net this

year for a ?68 billion trade deficit with a declining part of the world's

economy, when anyone with even an ounce of common sense knows that we

could have a ?68 billion trade deficit with a declining part of

Royal's economy from nothing? I think I did say. -- part of the

world's economy. The fact is that for every pound that those in tax to

this country to the European Union, it's not a tribute cost and don't

belittle it. -- trivial cost. What comes of that is the enhancement to

the economy and protection of jobs and investment that we want to see.

Mr Speaker, over the last six years, UK Trade Investment has more than

doubled the number of businesses it helps, and is now aiming to help

another 100,000 fans to expect by 2020. -- to export. It doesn't

really say what's happening to exports. The Chancellor promised his

strategy would double by the end of the decade. Today, the figures for

exporter going the wrong way. What is the government going to do to

actually turn around that dire performance? My right honourable

friend mentioned earlier the important work that UKTI is doing,

not only in terms of promoting the exporting is great brand around the

world, but now also working across the whole of government to involve

all of our embassies around the world in focusing those resources on

increasing the potential opportunities for our world-class

exporters. Is the Minister aware that over 25% of small businesses in

France and Germany export? Where is the figure in the UK is around 20%.

Does he agree with me, it's not just UK TI's all, there is also a role

for Chambers of trade and business federations to encourage more small

firms in particular to export? My honourable friend is aptly right,

there is an important role to be played, not only by our NBC network

but also by our Chambers of commerce, our Federation of Small

Businesses -- our embassy network. Some of our larger banks have also

set themselves targets in terms of additional customers who can export

the next two years. Is the Minister aware that Huddersfield and

Yorkshire still, the northern powerhouse already in terms of many

factoring and the quality of partnership with universities. Issue

where that my universities in Yorkshire and the many factoring

sector, are terrified that we will leave the European Union, it will

bankrupt the universities, it will bankrupt manufacturing set to. I'm

sure -- assure the honourable Antman meant to mention it to. He's right

to highlight that the UK's universities are unanimous in

expressing the value if they put on not only are higher education, but

also the potential for those educated in those universities to

export in due course. And that he is absolutely right to highlight the

fact that all other trade deals would be worse than the current zero

tariff trade deal that we have being a memorably EU stop yellow -- a

member of the EU. Changes to capital gains tax will give incentives for

companies. Individuals expected to pay a lower tax. Further cuts to the

corporation tax rate announced the budget of 17% will benefit over 1

million companies, large and small. This supports UK companies to

invest, grow, and create jobs. Treasury figures show that just

200,000 individuals will benefit from capital gains tax, a giveaway

of ?600 million. Meanwhile, on corporation tax, we have the lowest

in the G-7, lower even than Saudi Arabia, Russia and China. At the

same time, the resolution foundation shows that the poorest 20% of

families in this country will lose 506 to ?5 over the course of this

government because of their policies. -- ?565. Where is the

social justice in that? What I would say is that his honourable friend

earlier asked the question about encouraging business investment. We

want to encourage business investment, because it's through

being an environment where businesses invest that we see

improved productivity, the conditions for growth, and we see

people benefiting with higher wages. What I would say to the honourable

member and the House as a whole, is that pursuing policies that favour

business investment, but encourage businesses to invest, such as

cutting corporation tax, are important for all of our

constituents. In 2010, the Chancellor told this house that

raising capital gains tax was necessary to come and I quote,

create a fairer, tax system. Given that the Chancellor is now cutting

capital gains tax overwhelmingly to the benefit of the richest 0.3% of

people, what does the Chancellor think has changed? The purpose of

the tax measures as I outlined a moment or so ago, are to encourage

people to invest in businesses. This is specifically targeted at

companies, the cut in CGT doesn't apply to residential property. It is

putting in place an environment where businesses can grow and

prosper. That is absolutely the right approach that we should follow

colour and -- follow, and I would remind him that other countries have

followed approaches of which he has been full of praise and it's not

quite working adding them as well, is it? Question about 11. The

government has protected disability benefits, protecting them from the

freeze. Disability spending will be hiring every 22020, relative bows to

2010 and two today -- every year to 2020. The Ayr local authorities are

required that record 58% of local authorities have cut their funding

by 15% or more. What will ministers do to reverse that trend and make

sure that there is funding for local authority is to fund is those

important short breaks with white we have provided funding for respite

breaks. She's right to highlight this very important thing in this

carers week. 200,000 more people receiving carers allowance in this

country. The act extends right to assessments. The government is

launching a new strategy in recognition of how important role

this is a millions of people throughout the country.

Can I welcome the commitment in the budget to prevent homelessness, but

does the minister recognise the risks of a cap on supported housing?

I in turn acknowledge welcome to the additional money to tackling

homelessness that was in the budget and indeed previously, on the local

housing allowance cap, there is no disjoint evidence review conducted

by DC LG and the Department for Work and Pensions, to make sure we get

this right, so we can have a long-term, sustainable funding

solution for this sector. Number 19. The government seeks parliamentary

authority for its spending plans through supply procedure.

Occasionally expenditure on some services is so urgent that it cannot

await normal procedure. Treasury officials assess cases on the basis

of criteria set out in Treasury guidance. Extra support being

consulted on for contaminated blood victims is coming from the

Department of Health budget where there is simply not enough magic yet

previously central contingency funds have been used for national scandals

such as Equitable Life. Before the spending review, 18 MPs from six

parties wrote to the Chancellor asking that the ?230 million to

Treasury was getting from the sale of the blood products company could

fund a fair sentiment for contaminated blood victims. We have

had no reply. Will the Minister look at this again? I will ensure she

gets her the reply she deserves, because this is a deeply distressing

issue. The government takes it very seriously indeed. I don't believe it

is appropriate to use the contingencies fund in this

particular case but what I can tell, and she will know the consultation

on the reform of financial support to those affected are closed on the

15th of April and we will reply in due course. The Department of Health

has identified additional money from its budget for these purposes. Which

is in addition to the 22.5 million they spend on this annually as well

as the further 25 million and announced in March 2015. Although

more than double the support. The government has paid a leading role

in driving forward international action on tax transparency, the

introduction of country by country reporting that increased the

transparency between multinationals and tax authorities and we're

pushing the make this public, led the way throughout the developing to

the common reporting standard which will see more than 100 countries

exchange information on financial accounts add on a similar initiative

for the, we have consistently advocated for public registers of an

official ownership going live this month. The planned closure of 137 H

MRC offices has clearly been very effecting for the employees,

communities, can I ask what steps he has taken two interviews in

moratorium on these closures of officers to support the wider work

of improving tax transparency? I commend his ingenious ability to

raise this particular issue, what I would say is it is important that H

MRC's funds are spent in an efficient manner to ensure it is

spent on delivering the tax being collected that we want rather than

spending it on buildings. The savings from buildings are being

spent on collecting more tax. He must've the different approaches

that the French and UK seem to have taken towards cases like Google.

What more can the Minister to to make sure the public and everyone is

getting a good deal. Will he give some assurance that a good deal is

achieved? We've already heard from the member for Newark. I remember

very well his question and I rather hope he does. It is one per session.

He can try again at topical but not in substantive is. What I would say

to my honourable friend is that HMRC brought in an assurance receded to

ensure that all set settlements are properly scrutinised, HMRC are

confident they have reached a fair and proper settlement with Google,

and it is worth pointing out that in recent years, we've seen increases

in revenue collected by HMRC, increases in yield from their

compliance activities including from large businesses. If we are to

tackle tax evasion and avoidance effectively to remain within the EU.

Will the Chancellor and blistered join with me in calling on all MEPs

to support the new anti-tax avoidance directive being voted on

tomorrow in the European Parliament? Conservative MEPs abstained at the

committee stage and there are worrying noises that they may

abstain what again. Can the Minister make it clear now that Conservative

MEPs will be voting the directive? In terms of the anti-tax avoidance

directive, that was discussed at the cuff in meeting a couple of disco, I

can do that and the UK was making the case for us taking strong action

and working through an anti-violence tax directive. -- anti-avoidance.

That will also be addressed in the meeting next week, the UK is pushing

for progress and working cooperatively with other member

states to ensure we make progress on this. I am mystified whether

Conservative MEPs will be voting for it tomorrow or not, I just live in

hope that they will. But the European directive did show the

value of European Union Corporation, as part of that cooperation

following the raids on Google's Paris offices, can the chance to

learn from the house would arrangement are in place with the

French authorities for sharing information from the raids, and if

new evidence comes to light, for the Chancellor stand ready to reopen his

deal with Google? -- will the Chancellor stand ready? The first

point I have to remind the Shadow Chancellor of is all settlements are

reached by HMRC, operational matters are rightly for HMRC and not

Treasury ministers. But of course HMRC, if there is new evidence, will

take that into account. But the position is that HMRC have made it

very clear that under the law that existed between 2005 and 2015, they

believe they have reached a settlement that ensures that the

right amount of tax has been collected, that is what their job

is. Our job is to ensure they have the tools and rules and that is what

we are delivering. Number one. The core purpose of the Treasury is to

ensure these debility and prosperity of the economy. We are great for the

Treasury was able to have funding for local infrastructure projects

which clinicians the success of the policies being pursued by the

government. However they have been no major investments in rail

infrastructure in Hampshire and is holding back our productivity. Will

he meet with me, local councils and enterprise partnership to sort out

this issue as a matter of urgency as we have committed to 102,000 new

homes by 2030 and our roads are already full? Thirsting I would say

she's absolutely right to raise the issue of investment and

infrastructure in Hampshire -- the first thing I would say. Of course

there was money going into the road infrastructure like the 27 and some

investment in rail infrastructure like Southampton Central Station but

there is room to do more, as someone who has some experience of the rail

services from Portsmouth, I know they're not as good as they could

be, so I'm happy to meet her and her colleagues and local businesses to

see what we can do. In Scotland we have introduced the anti-avoidance

rules on avoidance taxes, the SNP have called on the Chancellor

repeatedly to embody compliance by guaranteeing that the beneficial

ownership of companies and trusts is made public. Has he taken steps to

ensure the people of the UK that this progressive step will happen?

The UK is bringing in a register open official ownership for

companies and in terms of trusts, where there are tax consequences,

that also will be included. So yes, the UK's leading on that and we are

pretty well the first country to do so. I have been conducted by a

number of constituents who are having difficulty with this year's

online HMRC self-assessment system, in particular the level of customer

service they are getting from the help desk. Will he look into this

issue as a matter of urgency so we can get a speedy resolution to the

problems and ensure my constituents are not penalised? Can I thank my

honourable friend for her question. In terms of the specific points, I

would be happy to meet with her, to discuss this. I would also say to

her that the customer performance of eight see last year and clearly not

at an acceptable level, for the run-up to the self-assessment

deadline at the end of January, a decent of calls were getting through

first time, the average waiting time was less than five minutes. That can

be improved upon but it is a much higher performance than has been

achieved in HMRC's previous history. I noticed the Minister has yet to

properly respond to the Shadow Chancellor's question about the new

anti-tax avoidance directive in the European Parliament, being voted on

tomorrow. In light of Conservative MEPs's abstention at committee

stage, will someone confirm whether they will be supporting it tomorrow?

The text of -- the text has not been finalised. It was the skirt at the

Council of ministers meeting a couple of weeks ago. -- it was

discussed. It will be discussed again on the 17th of June. It is not

been finalised. The position of the UK Government is clear. We want

something that is strong and effective and that is the case we

have been advocating in the Council of ministers. The evolution of

business rates allowing local areas to shape their own future will be a

real benefit to my constituency of Kingston, making it one of the

highest council taxes in the country and receive one of the lowest

government grant in return. Could he confirm when the first devolution

deals will be rolled out? My honourable friend and local council

have been at the forefront of calling for this major reform of

local government finance, which is now being undertaken across the

whole country, but I can confirm that London would be moving ahead of

many other areas and will start the retention of business rates and

local areas from April 2017. The public finance will be at risk and

will push up energy bills to businesses and consumers. For the

Chancellor redirect the investment to clean, safer and cheaper energy

sources such as carbon capture? The first thing I would say is they were

remarkable figures recently that showed that 25% of UK ex-fatigue

generation is now from renewable energy, second only to Germany. It

is a translation of our energy supply under this Conservative

leadership. We need to renew the next generation starting with

Hinkley point, but the deal we have signed to make sure that taxpayers

are not exposed to the construction risk. I note the government is going

to publish a report on the progress of payments to Equitable Life

policyholders who are victims of the great scam and I congratulate the

government on the progress made to compensate those individuals. Will

my right honourable friend undertake to review the amount of money paid

to those victims of the scam so they can make good on the debt of honour?

What I can announce is that while the Equitable Life payment scheme is

now closed to new claims, that payments that are being made under

the scheme are not only tax free but will continue for the life of the

element. Relevant and unity. It has concluded that GDP growth was

also 40 possible bundle the Chancellor listen to the experts and

offer investment instead of idyllically driven austerity? Both

the downward predictions are specifically for this year and in

both cases, both organisations attribute that to the referendum on

our membership of the EU and potential exit from the EU but if

the country votes to remain, they expect activity to bounce back and

they haven't revised down growth for next year. Just the Minister share

my concern about the activities of and villains chasing law firms who

encourage fraudulent whiplash claims of which I have had personal

experience, and can the Minister update the house on the government

was macro plans to clamp down on this outrageous practice? I hope

that my honourable friend has only experienced the ambulance chasers

and not the whiplash stop he is right to holler the cost was put on

motorists. We estimate it is about ?90 a year, which is why we have

taken steps to reform this area and lastly in the Autumn Statement we

announced further reforms which will remove the right to cash

compensation for minor whiplash injuries while ensuring genuine

claimants are rehabilitation. Genuine tax avoidance must be

tackled, but HMRC pursuing people who invested legally in scheme is

not to avoid tax now being hit with accelerated payments is an front --

affront. Will the Chancellor meet with me and a group of affected

people who are Dutch mentally affected by this issue? I completely

disagree with the honourable member. He is opposing a measure we

introduced that says to people who are in dispute with HMRC about the

money they pay because of their potential use of tax evasion or

avoidance seat dreams, that they should win upfront and if they win

their case they should will get their money. We have raised hundreds

of millions of pounds for public services, one some key court

judgments and I find it remarkable for a Liberal Democrat to be siding

with those who want to try and debate their taxes. Will the

Chancellor agree with me that we need to work with our businesses to

tackle our productivity, especially ensuring that we have a skilled

workforce in engineering and design and technology to boast our economy

further? I completely agree with our honourable friend and I know how

much she champions skills in her constituency, in Wiltshire. Of

course the apprentice levy, which is coming in soon, now legislated for,

will ensure we are able to increase the amount of apprentices in this

country towards a 3 million that we committed to in the manifesto. More

money will go into skilled apprenticeships in fields like

design and engineering that she wants to see more of. So do I. Many

constituents of mine, including those working, are telling me that

their employers are attacking their terms and conditions because of the

National living wage. Does he believe that this abuse should not

go on, because it's giving constituents overall a minor pay

cut? We certainly expect businesses to pay the national living wage, and

to honour not just the letter of the law, and we have increased

enforcement of the living wage through HMRC, but also the spirit of

it, which is that people should pay that wage and not find ways to cut

other allowances to make good on paper.

gender pay gap figures. What steps is he'll she taking to reduce the

gender pay gap in the financial services sector? I rework on this

question, because our financial services sector is not only our

highest-paid sector, but it's also the one with the widest gender pay

gap. That is why we have launched the women in finance Charter, and

asking all financial services firms to implement the recommendations,

the Indy Chief Executive's excellent review into the and representative

of senior women in financial services. The government has made

significant public spending cuts affecting disabled people, including

nearly ?30 million in cuts. Given that disabled people are twice as

likely to be living in poverty than the general population, how many

more disabled people will be living in poverty by 2020? Mr Speaker,

spending on disabilities bending is going up, not down. There are many

people getting the highest rate than there were in DLA, there are 200,000

people more getting carers's allowance, more people getting helps

remote ability. We are working on the employment disability gap, which

is so important. It has remained stubbornly wide, but the most recent

report did show a decrease. 10% of our GDP comes in through each

import, that link road will still seeing the opening. Part of economic

plan is to show that this area of Lancashire is going to be

regenerated, would my honourable friend my diary permitting, like to

open the road? I remember visiting the road with my right honourable

friend the primer Minister, just days before the general election. --

the Prime Minister. His constituents said, let's have him back in

Parliament championing more investment in Lancashire. Diary

permitting, I would be delighted to open the link road. When I was in

Northern Ireland yesterday, I met the company that trades between

he/she Warrenpoint, and they are investing in more jobs there. Wales

will be left with a vastly inferior fiscal settlement to both Scotland

and Northern Ireland. Why can't Wales have corporation tax powers

like Northern Ireland, and devolution like both countries? I

totally agree with him that we need to get on with income tax

devolution. I will be having further meetings with the worst government

to make sure that we do that. At the same time, we will need to look at

questions like the block grant. -- with the Welsh government. We have

said of course the funding floor at 115% for the duration of the

parliament. The economy in the West Midlands has been one of the

fastest-growing subregions in the UK over the last few years, with new

jobs and investment. With the Chancellor agree with me that we

need to continue to focus on investment and growth in the Black

Country, and avoid the economic risk that would come from as leaving the

European Union? I agree with my friend on both counts. First of all,

I think there's an enormous amount of exciting news in the Black

Country, and businesses there are growing and creating jobs and there

is more investment coming into that part of the country that he

represents so well. I think that that economic growth is at risk if

we read through European Union. We had today warnings from the chairman

of the Federal reserve, the head of Hitachi and the World Trade

Organisation all telling us that there is a real economic risk for

the UK if we vote to leave. What assessment has the Chancellor made

of the impact on the British economy of overcrowding in London and South

East airports, and how much will further delay cost us? It absolutely

clear that we need additional runway capacity in the south-east of

England. That's what the Davis report suggested. Of course the

government now needs to come forward with a conclusion to the report, but

we did want to address the issue of air quality when we raise that

issue, people said was necessary to look into it this remark when you

look at the last few months, when you look at the debate in the mail

context, you can see that our quality is an important issue to get

right. Where close to finishing that, and will report back on the

commission and future airport capacity. Just before I call on the

honourable gentleman, I should explain that on account of the

subsequent business, its importance and the likely levels of

subscription to it, it will run for a maximum of half an