Live Treasury Questions House of Commons

order. Read the title of the Bill set down for consideration. The

Southgate Cemetery Hill, the Lords third reading. Tuesday the 23rd of

April. Tuesday the 23rd of April. Questions to the Chancellor of the

age to. -- of the exchequer. The Government is protecting the

core schools budget in real terms, 41 billion -- million pounds. And

also the funding lottery will be consulted. It has received over

25,000 responses. The Government is considering this carefully and will

publish a consultancy in the summer. For St Ives, it would mean an

increase of 0.04%. The majority of schools in my constituency are good

understanding, due to the dedication of the teaching staff and their

headteachers. Government funding for the school has not kept up with an

increase in costs, according to the library, increased 3.4% in 2017-18.

What message connected back to my schools who tell me that they cannot

maintain the standards and school funding ever does not keep up with

these increased costs -- Mark the Government does recognise that

schools like other organisations do face additional costs. Such as

salary increases. That is why the Department is in -- encouraging

schools to be more efficient. It is also worth pointing out that by

protecting the total schools budget in real terms, as pupil numbers

increase, so the amount of money in our schools. If the Government is

protecting the budget, why is the average cut in my constituency 8%,

rising in some of the village schools to 22%? The reality is as I

said, the total core schools budget is increasing. It can only increase

if we have a strong economy that can pay for it. It is also right that we

have a fairer funding formula to ensure that that money is

distributed fairly. Mr Speaker, the Government is taking action to give

the UK a world beating digital infrastructure that it needs.

Broadband across the country has been transformed by the Government

led ?1.7 billion superfast programme, extending coverage to 24

megabits per second to 95% of UK premises by the end of this year. In

autumn 2016, we committed over ?1 billion to support the market to

deliver fibre broadband networks to enable 5G mobile and to keep Britain

at the forefront of development. The new fibre roll-out is welcome. Can

the Chancellor assure me that we will make sure that it incentivised

ease the roll-out of more fibre in such a way that it means there is no

tax paid until the fibre is first used rather than when it is first

installed? The Government's clear intention is to incentivise

investment in fibre broadband networks. DC LG will publish a

consultation. It will set out in detail on how new fibre will be

designed -- defined. Why doesn't the Chancellor shake some of his

colleagues up and start investing in the digital infrastructure in the

north of England, Yorkshire in particular. When you look at the

other infrastructure like real ways, Quinn will be get electrification of

the great Northern Pennines railway? In the Autumn statement we announced

?23 billion of additional investment in key infrastructure, like research

and development, designed to increase the UK's productivity

problem. This investment has to be spread across the whole of the UK

economy to deliver improved productivity and economic growth

across the economy as a whole. The investment is going in. Capital

investment will be at a higher level in this Parliament as an

announcement of this decision than it was before the financial crisis.

Whilst the Government boasts about the speed of broadband and fibre

broadband across the United Kingdom, there are many parts in my

constituency we are sending mail by pigeon is quicker than by sending it

via the fibre network. What action does he intend to take to ensure

that rule areas where farmers and small businesses, and others who

rely on digital means of communication will have a greater

ability? I cannot speculate on how fast the pigeons are in the

honourable gentleman's constituency. I can tell him that as a matter of

right, all consumers have a right to 10 megabits broadband. 95% of

properties by the end of this year will have access to 24 megabits

broadband. The Government is investing more money in reaching the

last 5%, be hard to reach of which are often in the country areas. In

Scotland the original plan was for 95% coverage by the end of this

year. Additional funding for rural areas, Wi-Fi for buildings, and now

a target of 100% property coverage of superfast broadband by 2021.

Given this should be a common endeavour, Canet has the Chancellor

to welcome the steps in Scotland to deliver that performance so far and

the targets set? We have got a UK wide target. We welcome any actions

taken on top of that to achieve yet higher levels of broadband

penetration. This is a positive move for the economies of the nations and

regions. It is not simply the provision of the infrastructure, it

is also appealing for the Digital usage as well. Can I asked the

Chancellor to give a guaranteed to the House, when the UK Government

enters Brexit negotiations, there will be no return to the

super-expensive roaming the digital phone charges. For UK citizens

living in the EU and for EU citizens are working in the UK. I hear his

concern and I am absolutely sure that the vast majority of our

constituents would agree with his suggestion that we should seek to

maintain cost-effective access for UK phone users whenever they are

roaming within the EU. That will be an issue for this Parliament, after

Brexit, unless we choose with the UK -- with the exit negotiations to

reach an agreement with the European Union. The Government is protecting

the total core schools budget in real terms, is only possible through

careful management of the economy. School funding is at its highest

level ever, at almost ?41 billion. Spending will increase as pupil

numbers rise to ?42 billion. Also delivering our manifesto commitment

for feeder schools funding. It includes genderless transitional

protections for schools who will see the funding will the just. The

Government is considering replies and will respond in the summer. The

2015 Conservative manifesto promised that the amount of money following

your child into school will be protected. The National Audit Office

found that schools face a real terms cut by 8% per pupil, even before the

cuts and new national funding formula will come into 9000 schools

in England. Will the Government confirmed that the Tory manifesto

pledge on per-pupil funding is now in tatters? Not at all. We are

protecting the total schools budget in real terms. And implementing our

manifesto commitment to into just fairer funding. It is right that we

do so. Clearly not protecting the people per capita funding in York.

The seventh worst funded local authority currently with children

will experience 288 per pounds being cut off the funding. How is that

protecting the formula? I would expect how to share my view that it

is not right that we fund the schools on the basis of what has

happened historically. The bases should be that every pupil in

England should be assessed on the same basis. It cannot be right for

example that pupils in Hackney get 15% of more than pupils in Barnsley.

That does not seem to be fair and that is right on the Government

addresses at. The Government is supporting economic growth across

the entire country as a key part of productivity agenda by investing in

infrastructure and skills and by developing our industrial strategy.

In the Autumn statement I launched another powerhouse strategy. And set

out our Midlands engine strategy. Reasonably allocated another one

point billion pounds the local growth fund and an initial charge of

?185 million of local transport funding across the English regions.

Will my right honourable friend look at the potential to extend free

ports across the UK for free trade zones to create trade, create

manufacturing jobs and pushed regional growth, all key part of

local asperity. The Government will consider all

options which have the potential to support our ambition to see Britain

a great global trading nation. However, we will need to consider

carefully not only the advantages that free ports can deliver, but

also the costs and potential risks associated with them before making

any decisions. Thank you Mr Speaker. For towns and cities in our economy,

including in the north of England, to flourish, we needs banks and

building societies that support them. Will the Chancellor join

Mehmeti in saying that banks and building societies should keep their

branchs open in our local constituencies, including my own

constituency, where Leeds Building Society is closing a branch

following the closure of HSBC branch and Yorkshire in the last two years.

Of course, we want a viable branch banking network across the country.

We have to recognise that the nature of banking is changing. More and

more of us are using online, digital banking and that is bound to be

reflected in the configuration of the branch networks that the banks

operate. Mr Speaker, as the entrepreneurial

heart of England, Buckinghamshire provides an excellent bridge to the

East Midlands and beyond, will my right honourable friend look at how

investment in Buckinghamshire will stimulate growth throughout the

country outside London and the south-east. I am sure you will be

delighted that my honourable friend has lighted onned this key role for

Buckinghamshire as a bridge between the north, the south, the east, the

west and every other part of the country. I would be happy to receive

and I confidently predict that I will receive my honourable friend's

detailed submission on the case for greater information investment.

THE SPEAKER: Careful what you wish for Sir. Independent analysis says a

hard Tory Brexit could cost 80,000 jobs in ten years in Scotland and a

5% drop if GDP. Why has the UK Government failed to produce a

comprehensive impact assessment of a hard Tory Brexit or for some reason,

is now not the time? Mr Speaker, the Government is seeking, as was set

out clearly in the Article 50 notice letter to negotiate a deep and

special partnership with the European Union that will have at its

heart a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement, covering goods, services

and networks, allowing us to continue working very closely

together with the European Union after we leave that organisation.

And the Government does carry out detailed analysis to inform its

negotiating strategy but I'm sure the honourable gentleman would not

want me to reveal the outcome of that analysis, which would be of

great use to our negotiating partners (Inaudible) Mr Speaker, in

Corby there is a huge appetite for a new enterprise zone to further boost

jobs and growth. What consideration has my right honourable friend given

to introducing a new round of opportunities? Well, Mr Speaker, my

honourable friend raises an important point, and I will

undertake to look carefully at what he's suggested. There will no doubt

be an exercise taking place over the next few weeks in thinking about

what commitments we want to make for the future and I will take his

question today as a representation. Mr Speaker, an important driver of

economic growth within or outside the south-east is productivity,

despite the Chancellor's rosy picture, the FT's chief economist

says productivity is calamitous and has regionally widened. Who do we

believe, a respected economist or the Chancellor? Well, Mr Speaker, I

don't recognise the picture he paints of my position. I've stood at

this dispatch box on countless occasions and lamented the fact that

Britain has a poor productivity record, worse than Germany, worse

than the United States, worse than France, worse than Italy. But simply

lamenting that fact isn't enough. What we've got to do is put together

a plan for tackling it. It will be - well he says seven years, Mr

Speaker, the honourable gentleman from a sedentary position says seven

years, if he checks the records, he will discover that this is a problem

that's been going on for 40 years. It's a problem for 40 years. It

would be better if we tried to tackle this challenge in a spirit of

bipartisan recognition that there is a real problem here that we have to

tackle. We have to tackle it by investment in infrastructure, by

investment in skills and by actions to spread growth and prosperity

across the country. Yes, seven years. Mr Speaker, whilst welcoming

the ?6 billion investment for a new two-mile lower Thames crossing, how

does such an imbalanced infrastructure spending help to

close the economic gap of regions outside London and the south-east

and doesn't this simply re-affirm the Government's pathological

incapacity to see much beyond the M25 and of course, I'd be happy to

buy him a sat nav if he wanted to take the opportunity to use it?

Well, Mr Speaker, I'm not going to take any lectures from the

honourable gentleman on regional awareness. But he maybe should speak

to the Mayor of London who has a view on infrastructure investment

and what should drive it. This Government is very clear that we

need to spread infrastructure investment around the country in a

way that will tackle the productivity challenge and one of

the ways we will tackle that is by harvesting the benefits of our city

regions in the West Midlands, in the northern powerhouse and elsewhere in

this country, which evidence Kroos the -- evidence across the developed

world can be major drivers of productivity improvement. That's

what we've got to focus on. Mr Speaker, as the honourable gentleman

may be aware the Ministry of Justice ran a consultation recently on this

issue and received 853 responses in total. The Government response to

the consultation was published on 17th March and is ongov.uk. The

Government has set out the changes in that response. The majority of

responses was against proposals. Access to justice should not depend

on being rich. Unfortunately, this Government does not agree. It's

intent on lessening access to justice bay greatly increasing court

fees. The increase in probate fees is another stealth tax which will

affect almost half the estates in England and Wales. It's an attempt

to hide the massive cut in inheritance tax for its rich

friends. Will this dying cut and run Government abandon its tax on access

to justice? Well, Mr Speaker, we certainly don't recognise the

characterisation of this proposed fee structure. This is about

sustaining the justice stuckure. In fact more than half the estates in

England and Wales will pay no probate fees at all. Number six Mr

Speaker. I can reassure the honourable gentleman that the

Treasury and the department for exiting the European Union are

working closely on this issue. As we exit the EU we will look to

negotiate the best deal possible so we can continue working together to

maintain justice and security both in the UK and across Europe. Mr

Speaker, the Panama papers showed thousands of UK based banks,

accountants, lawyers and other intermediaries had helped set up

shady and opaque corporate structures to handle illicit cash

flows after registering in overseas territories. Almost a year on from

the anticorruption summit will the minister submit to a public register

of beneficial ownership for Crown dependencies and overseas

territories? We don't have that ability. But I can say in March

2017, last month, we published the draft money laundering regulations

and announced plans for a new watchdog ensure supervisors and law

enforcement work together more effectively. Since to 10, law

enforcement have seized 1. 4 billion in illegal funds.

Whilst the EU is to blame for many, many things, it is not to blame for

money laundering. In fact, any solution that looks to the EU to

solve money laundering is missing the point that it is an

international problem. So will the minister confirm that he will be

engaging internationally and not through the parochial lens of the

European Union? We are, of course, Mr Speaker, a founding member of the

financial action taskforce which sets international standards for

anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing and

after exiting the EU the EU will - the UK will continue to lead around

the world. Number seven, Mr Speaker. We'll see

how lucky, Mr Speaker. With your permission, I'd like to answer this

question together with question eight. The Government has undertaken

a significant amount of work to assess the economic and fiscal

impacts of levering the EU and continues to carry out that work.

This is part of a continuing programme of analytical work

covering a range of possible exit scenarios, including sectoral

analysis. We are seeking the best possible deal for the United

Kingdom, recognising there say range -- there is a range of possible

outcomes to the negotiations and the work being done reflects this. The

Government is committed to keep Parliament informed but it would not

be appropriate to publish analysis that would risk undermining our

negotiating position. Mr Speaker, throughout the last seven years, the

needs of the British people have had to play second fiddle to the needs

of the Conservative Party. As a result of that, the Chancellor has

been forced to disown the commitment of the manifesto commitment to

balance the budget within this Parliament. Isn't the truth that

today's announcement about a general election is another example of this

Government putting the party's interest ahead of the country's

interest at a time when there is a desperate need for stability in this

country? In terms of the effect on the public finances Mr Speaker, the

decision that the Prime Minister has made today is a decision made very

much in the national interest to strengthen her hand as she goes into

the negotiation with the European Union, to provide a clear mandate

for the type of exit that she has set out in the letter she wrote to

President Tusk two-and-a-half weeks ago and tone sure that the UK -- to

ensure that the UK can negotiate its exit from the European Union,

execute that exit and then transition to the new arrangements

with a clear run before the next general election.

After that party political broadcast on behalf of the Conservative Party,

could I ask the Chancellor a very serious question. Many billions of

pounds of EU structural funds are invested annually in the UK,

particularly in our deprived areas and regions. Wales and Merthyr

Tydfil have benefitted from this funding. What steps will he be

taking to replace this essential investment when we leave the

European Union? Mr Speak, as we've said on many previous occasions from

the dispatch box, we recognise that there will have to be alternative

arrangements put in place. We will no longer be making large

subscriptions, payments into the European Union. But on the other

side of the equation, some of the funding which we have been receiving

for many years, including the structural funds, we will no longer

be receiving. That places the opportunity back in the hand of this

House, this Parliament to decide how we should use our taxpayers funding

to achieve the objectives of the UK Government and to achieve economic

development in a way most appropriate for the UK. Thank you Mr

Speaker. Does my right honourable friend look forward to getting net

?10 billion a year into the scecker and does -- exchequer and does he

note that the claims for tens of billions of euros in Brussels merely

illustrates the financial incontinence on the continent. Mr

Speaker, any Chancellor would always welcome any net tens of billions or

any net billions from pretty much any source whatsoever. In terms of

the numbers bandied around in Brussels, relating to the so-called

exit charge, we should recognise these numbers for what they are - an

opening Gambit in what will be a long and complicated negotiation,

nothing more, nothing less. Does the Chancellor agree that whether inside

or outside the European Union, the best way of delivering strong public

finances is a strong economy supported by low tax and low

regulation. Is that the future we can look forward to? The only way of

delivering strong public finances is through a strong economy, with

sensible and balanced regulation. We have a very large financial services

sector in this country, very important contributor to our fiscal

balances. Its success depends on us getting that regulatory equation

exactly right. Too much regulation and we would drive away industry

from London. Too little regulation and we may lose our reputation as a

safe and secure place to do business. We have to get it right.

The Chancellor recently said that Brussels had set out a very

aggressive starting line on the UK's bill to quit the EU. Is the

assessment he has made of the worst case scenario, reported to be in the

region of 60 billion euros, and what impact will that have on public

finances? I am not sure what the worst-case

scenario she is talking about relates to. We have helped various

figures bandied about in Brussels in terms of an exit charge. The work

that the Government has been doing which I was asked about earlier, it

relates to the economic and fiscal impact of different possible exit

scenarios. The numbers bandied about in Brussels are a simple question of

the potential demand. Which would be raised in the negotiating process.

There simply that, a negotiating strategy. I agree with the

Chancellor that one of the biggest contributors to the public finances

is the tax revenue from the financial services sector. We have

had the triggering of Article 50 and the white paper. Is he confident

that this will not see a significant reduction in the loss of jobs or the

loss of any major areas of financial activity? The negotiating strategy

that we have set out and the objectives we have set out in the

Article 50 letter would create an environment in which the financial

services industry in the UK would be able, by and large, to be able to

continue with the levels of commercial activity that currently

takes place with the European Union 27. That depends on negotiating the

right arrangements with the EU and it is essential we go into these

discussions in a constructive manner, recognising there are issues

on both sides and that the UK's financial services industry is an

SF, not only of the UK but the entire continent. -- is an asset.

Europe depends on those financial services. Can I thank the Chancellor

for that and so and I share his assessment that there is a mutually

beneficial deal with us and the EU, if the Government is able to deliver

it. Can I ask to state unequivocally that as a result of a deal that the

Government will seek to negotiate, they will be no significant loss of

jobs from any financial institution, mole removal of citywide functions

such as cleaning, and now the locations of any regulatory agency

such as the European banking authority. The location of European

Union agencies is a matter for the EU. We could not leave the EU and

dictate whether it should locate its agencies in the future. The initial

items on his list, it will be the objective of the UK Government going

into the negotiations, to protect our financial services sector. Since

the referendum, the Sterling depreciation has seen expos increase

and the balance of trade bridges down to 5 billion in quarter four of

last year. The Chancellor is -- has said he is not concerned with the

exchange rate. Is he wrong? I have never said I am not concerned with

the exchange rate. I said that the Government does not take a view what

the appropriate exchange rate is, that is a matter for the markets to

determine. I am sure he'll be delighted to note the Prime Minister

in her statement this morning has sent Sterling up in the markets,

demonstrating the confidence that the markets have in the future for

this country under a Tory Government with a new mandate. As the

honourable lady would expect given the emphasis that we have put in

this Parliament, since 2010, and tackling avoidance and evasion. With

regards to Treasury ministers discussions with European

counterparts, I can confirm this is something we discuss on a regular

basis. The Chancellor spoke at an informal meeting in Malta as part of

his ongoing dialogue with EU colleagues. Everybody seems to have

a nice time having conversations. As my opponent discovered when he came

from Chelsea to soak my constituency. People in my part of

the world work hard and pay taxes. Can the Minister try again and to

give a proper answer to give an indication of what is happening up

on an international level? The question is about what meetings have

taken place and I plead guilty to answering as I was asked. If she

wants details she can look at the many measures that are being put

through since 2010 and in this Parliament already. If she wants to

stick around for the Finance Bill second reading she will hear about

more things that the Government has planned on cracking down on evasion

and avoidance. Has the tax gap continued on the trajectory left by

the last Labour Government, it would be ?47 billion and the public purse

would be living billion pounds per over, as a result of the policies of

this Government it is at its lowest level ever of 6 billion. Under some

parties, talk is the best they can have on tax evasion and avoidance

and it takes a Conservative Government to get something done

about it? That is exactly right, Mr Speaker. This is something we have

taken extremely seriously, the tax gap is one of the lowest in the

world in the UK. It is transparent and well documented. HMRC has

secured ?140 billion in additional tax revenue by tackling avoidance,

evasion and noncompliance. The Government is keen to do more. Would

you mind if I started by sending out my congratulations to Brighton

Hove Albion on the promotion to the Premier league, an important part of

the South East's economy. We allocated ?351 million to the

south-east for the local growth fund and the south-east will benefit of

over ?21 million from the coastal communities fund. I thank the

Minister for his response and I congratulate Brighton Hove Albion.

We have got under six miles of motorway in East Sussex and the

Brighton Hove Albion Stadium is on one of the junctions. We need to

make the south coast more economically viable and would you

join with me in meetings Sussex MPs to discuss how to take this forward?

I am fully aware of the problems on the A28 and A259 in my constituency.

We recognise the importance of infrastructure provision in all

regions of the United Kingdom. That is why the Autumn statement 2016, we

had high-value economic infrastructure from the National

productivity fund. We are committed to putting local and regional needs

at the heart of this fund. We are spending ?1.1 million on local

projects to improve existing transport networks which will

deliver improvements to hundreds of roads. -- one 1p. But father helped

in my right honourable friend give to infrastructure project in

Southend West, including the A127 corridor improvement works. He is a

tireless advocate for the case for Southend. We met in November to

discuss these issues. The Government has important -- supported

improvements to the A127 with over ?30 million of local growth funding.

Local authorities will have the opportunity to bid into the local

transport pot as part of the national productivity investment

fund. I welcome the investment in the electrification of the real line

between Manchester and Preston. What more can the Chancellor do to ensure

we have the vital road links, such as the Wes Horton bypass? The

Government is investing over ?30 billion on transport projects in the

north and supporting local schemes such as the Manchester Airport

relief road and the Heysham M6 Link road. The Government is looking at

the highways England north-west quadrant that should ease congestion

in places like Wes Horton. This Government cannot pretend that they

are interested in infrastructure outside of London and the

south-east. We only need to look at transport spending to prove this. In

London, transport spending is ?1000 per head, in the North East it is

not even ?300. This shows the record and the priorities of the

Government. As I said, we are investing over ?13 billion on

transport projects in the North. HS two will benefit the north of

England. And we make no apologies for wanting to ensure that we invest

in Crossrail to deliver for London and the entire United Kingdom

accordingly. Ahead of the last general election, the Conservative

ministers were committed to elect location of the Leeds and York line.

Will they do any better after this election and will we see the

electrification of this line? Because we are investing in

infrastructure, we already has significant plans on infrastructure.

Before the Autumn statement which involved further investment, that

does give us scope to improve transport infrastructure. Aggregate

investment and infrastructure will rise by almost 16% between 2016-17

and 2021. As a Huddersfield Town fan can I congratulate Brighton Hove

Albion, once we triumph at Wembley in the play-off final, we look

forward to meeting you in the premiership next season. As the new

trains to replace have came forward, HS3 is developed, can we make sure

that connectivity between northern towns is developed? Not just the

great cities of the North. My honourable friend makes a really

important pound -- important point. It is worth pointing out that we're

putting local and regional needs at the heart of financial productivity

and the investment fund. That is why we are spending ?1.1 billion on

local projects to improve transport networks. I congratulate his local

team on his success and I hope he will congratulate the congratulating

liberating SC who have also gained promotion. There is no doubt an

engineering feat, it cost more than one third of Scotland's national

budget, when we'll be seeing more devilish destruction funding? --

infrastructure funding. It is the case that Scotland benefits from the

Barnett Formula consequential is such as HS2. HS2 does provide a

change in conductivity across the East Coast corridor. It will bring

significant benefits to the UK economy. We can only afford to spend

money on infrastructure if we have got a stable and strong economy to

deliver it. The Government has carefully considered the evidence

for applying 5% reduced rate of VAT on visitor attractions. This is

something that is came up a number of times in this House. We do

believe that on balance the cost to do so will outweigh the benefits.

They keep all of these things under review but there are no plans for

reductions in the rate of VAT for tourism activity. It was a

disappointing answer. The campaign for VAT into tourism estimates that

a 5% rate would produce a higher tax income and create 121,000 jobs

across the country. It would be of benefit to many coastal and island

communities which are economically fragile. Will the Minister meet the

campaign to discuss this in detail? I am familiar with the figures he

gave to the House. Treasury officials have met some of those

campaigning over the number of years to look at these figures. We will

always look at evidence. We disagree with the campaign's economic

assessment. Such a cut would cost around ?10 billion per year,

approximately 7 billion for restaurants and bars and 3 billion

for leisure and accommodation. What further steps are being taken to

support the tourist industry, especially in places like Congo with

it is important to our local economy? -- Cornwall. There are

various ways we would support the sector. The sector is doing very

well. We are seeing increases in the number of tourists. I know he is an

advocate for his region. It is one of the highest performing sectors in

the accordingly. The UK has happened -- as one of the highest VAT

registration officials in the EU. It provides goods and services to

tourists who do not charge VAT. In particular reference to that, does

the Minister recognise the additional disadvantage that the

tourism industry in Northern Ireland faces, particularly in border

constituencies like my own, given that the rate of VAT on tourism in

the Republic of Ireland sets at 9% and ours is 20%? We explored those

issues where they gave evidence to the Northern Ireland Select

Committee. I know what she is alluding to. To give one example,

the decision to focus on investment and infrastructure in the Autumn

statement will see an increase of ?250 million to the Northern

Ireland's executive capital budget which will give them the means to

produce -- promote regional growth in Northern Ireland.

In England and Wales the Government is investigating almost 1. 3 billion

in City Deals for Glasgow, Aberdeen, Inverness, Cardiff and swansies. It

is discussing further deals. -- Swansea. On that specific point, Mr

Speaker, will the minister guarantee that the City Deals, specifically

for Edinburgh and my own constituency in East Lothian will

neither be aborted nor substantially delayed by the calling of the

general election? What I can guarantee is that it's about time

the SNP start delivering for the people of Scotland. The level of

growth in Scotland is one quarter of that in the UK. Mr Speaker, the

minister will be aware of the difference that we made by the new

hi-tech centre in digital at South Devon college, which has been

supported by the third round of growth funding. Would he agree that

this facility makes the college an ideal place to be one of the first

to offer the new T level. Yes, I do absolutely agrow that it would be an

ideal place for the first stream. Thank you Mr Speaker. In terms of

Ayrshire growth, when is the UK Government going to consider that

seriously. In terms of delivery, it's the UK Government's holding

that back. This Government is focussed on

delivering the existing deal. If they want to do something in

addition then it is within their power to do so.

Question 16. The UK has spearheaded improvements

in the transparency of beneficial ownership information. HQ Iraq is

building a register of trust with tax consequences. It will improve

transparency and assist law enforcement agencies. Thank you Mr

Speaker. We are now a year on from the anticorruption summit. Will the

UK now ensure that the overseas territories and Crown dependencies

also have public registers of beneficial ownership? What I can say

is that we will carefully consider the commission's proposals for a

broader register. If they go forward, the Government will consult

on what this should look like after the negotiations have concluded.

Thank you Mr Speaker. Number 17. The Government recognises the challenge

that Britain's productivity performance represents. It is

resolved to tackle this issue. Last year, at the Autumn Statement we

launched the national productivity reality fund to provide ?23 billion

worth after digsal spending focussed on areas key to boosting

productivity at the budget we went further investing an additional ?500

million in technical education. With the average worker spending 23%

of their day on e-mail, what assessment has the Government made

of increasing reliance on e-mail store and productivity. I think what

I would say to my honourable friend is particularly in the context of

the public sector, we have an ongoing efficiency review. Where we

can find areas to improve efficiency and ensure that everyone becomes

more productive we will look to take those offers.

THE SPEAKER: If the honourable member wishes to come in on question

17, he's welcome so to do. Thank you Mr Speaker. What assessment has the

minister made of current employment in Northampton? Well, what I can say

is that at 84. 4% the employment rate in Northampton south is the

17th highest out of all 632 constituencies across the United

Kingdom. There are 3,000 more people who work in Northampton south over

the past year alone and 4,000 more than in 2010. Small businesses -

THE SPEAKER: Well done, man. Well, Mr Speaker, the Government, as the

Chancellor mentioned, have undertaken a significant amount of

work to assess the economic impacts of leaving the EU. It's part of our

continuing programme of rigorous and extensive analytical work covering a

range of scenarios as the honourable member would expect sector by

sector. Small businesses, manufacturing car

ponents in my constituency are hugely concerned that if post Brexit

this country has to revert to the World Trade Organisation agreement,

which would mean increased car Tiff cost and further regulation. It

could impact on the viability of the booming motor industry. What

assessment has the Chancellor made of this impact? Mr Speaker, you

know, Treasury ministers and ministers right across Government

are speaking to businesses, individual businesses and sectors

all the time to understand their concerns about these sorts of

issues. We're seeking the best possible deal for the UK and all the

work being done reflects this, including understanding how we can

respond to those concerned to get a great deal. My priority is to ensure

that the economy remains stable and resilient as we conduct our

negotiations with the European Union. That means building upon this

Government's achievements in reducing the deficit by two thirds

and getting unemployment down to the lowest rate since the 1970s, while

at same time, tackling the long-term challenges of productivity

enhancement and making steady progress towards our goal of a

balanced budget. I'm pleased to be able to tell the House in the last

few minutes, the IMF has upgraded its UK growth forecast for 2017 by

0. 5% to 2%. Farms and other agricultural businesses are often

deterred from making investments in new buildings and infrastructure

because of a very complex system capital allowances. Will my right

honourable friend look at this issue, particularly in respect of

giving the sector a boost in the wake of Brexit? Mr Speaker,

alcultural land hand buildings are exempt from business rates. I know

my honourable friend was speaking about the capital allowances. We are

committed to a capital gains tax system that supports growth across

the economy. At the budget we reduced the CGT rates to 20% and

from 18% to 10% for gains on most assets. Owners of agricultural

businesses benefit from the same rates as other business owners. Mr

Speaker, as you know this morning the Prime Minister's called the

general election. She's breaking her commitment to not hold an early

election, made only weeks ago. She's blamed Brexit, our European

neighbours, she's blamed the parties on these benches, but the real truth

is that after seven wasted years of failure under the Tories, they've

failed to close the deficit, they've add 700 billion to the national

debt, pay is falling behind prices, four million children are growing up

in poverty, our schools are in crisis, more people than ever on NHS

waiting lists, more families homeless, more elderly people not

getting the care they need. Will the Chancellor use this last opportunity

before the election to apologise to the British people for the utter

failure of this Government's economic policies and for the pain

he's inflicted on this country? Well, Mr Speaker, the honourable

gentleman's got some brass neck to stand there and accuse us of having

failed to eliminate the deficit, when his policy is to add another

?500 billion to it overnight. The British people understand very well

what is going on here. A Conservative Government, which is

maintaining growth, which has got unemployment down, record levels of

employment and a steadily closing deficit and a Labour Party which

remains as fiscally incontinent as ever. If given a chance would wreck

this economy once again. Here we have it Mr Speaker, not one word of

apology. No contrition whatsoever from a Chancellor who's broken his

promises to the British people and still failing to deliver on a

manifesto elected only 23 months ago. They're entering this election

having scheduled ?70 billion worth of tax giveaways for whom? For the

super rich and for the corporations of the next five years. They're

entering an election with a 2 billion unfunded black hole in the

budget. The Chancellor delivered only a few weeks ago. Will the

Chancellor now use this opportunity before the general election to put

on record his party will rule out raising VAT, rule out raising income

tax and will he commit unequivocally to support education to protect the

triple lock. If the Tories can't be straight with the British people,

Labour will be. The truth is promises made from that

side of the House are not worth the paper they're written on and the

voters of this country, the pensioners of this country, the

workers of this country understand that very well and they'll give

their verdict on Labour's promises on June 8th.

Can the Chancellor confirmed assuming the House votes for an

election that he will seek to trunkiate the finance bill, remove

the controversial measures in it and allowing everybody to focus on the

economic issue which matters most to the next country over the next few

months, which is which party can best be trusted to run the economy?

Mr Speaker, I certainly agree with my right honourable friend on that

last point. On the matter of process, assuming that the House

votes in favour of my right honourable friend the Prime

Minister's motion tomorrow, there will then be the usual end of

Parliament process of negotiation with the official Opposition around

measures that are currently before the House with a view to passing

them in whatever form is appropriate. Given we are

congratulating football teams I'm sure the House will want to join me

and congratulate Hibernian football club. Mr Speaker, the Chancellor of

the Exchequer has a brass neck when he talks about stable and resilient

economy. When we look at the figures for money supply, the growth in

money supply, trending around 6% is mainly due to an increase in

personal borrowing and credit card debt. When are we going to have the

fiscal measures to stimulate the economy rather than relying on this

boom and bust that we're seeing again? Well, Mr Speaker, I can

confidently predict to the honourable gentleman that after the

general election on June 8, there will be a Budget in order to give

him the answer that's he's seeking. You may be aware that Plymouth

argyle was promoted yesterday as well. As my right honourable friend

may be aware, I am the chairman of the all-party group for south-west

rail. Last November the taskforce launched a report into the future of

rail in the south-west with one key recommendation, that is for a

resilient railway line through dualish. Will my right honourable

friend confirm there is enough money in the kitty to deliver that and to

make sure... Improved rail resilience in the south-west is a

priority which is why we committed ?5 million in Budget ?2016 and #10e

million -- ?10 million in Autumn 2016 to support this work. The

Government will continue to work with Network Rail to develop options

for future investment in the south-west in Network Rail's control

period six. Mr Speaker, cooperatives and worker

owned businesses tend to be more resilient and are more productive.

Does the Chancellor agree that regulation in law should not

disadvantage their development? Will the Chancellor consider redirecting

tax incentives away from company executives and towards employees

looking to buy their own work place? We're keen on employees having an

opportunity to take a stake in the businesses that they work for. We

will look carefully at any proposals which would tend to enhance

productivity through incentivising and encouraging employees. Given the

very large increase proposed for probate fees and given that deceased

people have their bank accounts frozen, will the Chancellor look at

allowing these fees to be paid after the estate has been wound up? Well,

Mr Speaker, in most cases the Ministry of Justice expect that

banks will release enough cash from the estate to pay the probate fee.

The average estate is 25% cash. The Ministry of Justice is working with

the British Bankers' Association and others to put such arrangements in

place. Today we've heard a lot about stronger economy and the need to

improve productivity, account Chancellor tell me what discussions

he's had with Cabinet colleagues regarding skills and education

funding? It leaves some concern when children in Blackburn are about to

lose ?284 per head on what you call a fairer funding formula. The

honourable lady will know my right honourable friend the Education

Secretary is considering responses to the consultation on schools

funding formula. At the Budget we announced a substantial increase in

funding for technical education, 16 to 19, which will make an important

contribution to improving the UK's productivity. Whilst the south-east

is the financial powerhouse of the UK, there are nonetheless less

prosperous areas like the Isle of Wight, what steps is my right

honourable friend taking to ensure that the benefits of economic growth

reach all corners and islands in the United Kingdom?

I know my honourable friend regards the islands as important and I

concur with him. The Government supports continued economic growth

across the south-east, including more regions and Islands. They sold

enterprise partnership is receiving over ?180 million from the local

growth fund, investment for skills, business start-ups, with the Isle of

Wight receiving about ?15 million of investment in infrastructure and

skills. Will he give us assurance he will not submit to the outrageous

demands from Donald Tusk, that Britain must pay ?60 billion before

leaving the EU? There should be seen for what it is, an opening gambit in

a long and complicated process. Coastal communities have enormous

potential for sustainable economic growth in tourism and fishing

sectors. Much work is being done but could he give an assurance that no

stone will be left unturned to ensure the regions realise their

full potential? I represent coastal areas and they will benefit from ?40

million of investment from the local communities fund. We will make sure

they get the best possible deal. Candide they charge that tell us

what will be the first in the Tory manifesto, the Pledge on

international aid spending, the triple lock, or the promise not to

raise any new taxes? The honourable gentleman will have to contain

himself and ready his money and he can buy a copy in due course. The

taxpayer has benefited from the return to private ownership of

Lloyds TSB... Can he provide an update on the sale of The Royal Bank

of Scotland? We're making progress in realising our holdings in the

banking sector. They continue the sale of shareholding in Lloyds which

is down from 43% to less than 2%. Last month we sold ?12 billion of

Bradford and Bingley mortgages in a highly competitive process. The

Government is not at present actively marketing its stake -- its

stake in RBS. We plan to return to private hens as sure as we can get

fair value. -- private hands. To be below what the baby 's Government

paid for them. We live in the real world and will have to make a

decision in the best interest of taxpayers. In the real world, seven

years ago, a Tory Chancellor stood out that the dispatch box and said

we have to cut the money that every single local authority in Britain,

by up to about 14%. The result is it was all because of getting rid of a

deficit. Now, seven years later, that deficit is still more than ?60

billion. Will he apologise to the people in Britain for that lousy

mistake? It is still ?60 billion but it was ?200 billion when we

started... Following the theme of the afternoon on football, I am sure

everybody would wish to know that Cleethorpes town have finished as

champions of the Northern counties East league. Even more people will

want to travel to Cleethorpes. The infrastructure development we spoke

about, can he give an assurance that all roads will lead to Cleethorpes?

I will take that as representation for all those many fans wanting to

get to Cleethorpes football ground. Can the Chancellor can that HMRC

take eight months to fill a vacancy with the national minimum wage

compliance unit and what will we due to resource list segment so workers

can get a decent day's pay for a decent day's work? I will look into

the specific issue. I wanted to be clear that HMRC investigates every

report of violations of national minimum wage. We take it seriously

and it is enforced. In my constituency, the public

consultation on an enterprise zone or a business park, the Labour

County Council have blocked it considerably. With the chance like

to come to my constituency and listen to the constituents and what

they are saying about having an enterprise zone? As it happens, I

was planning my domestic travel arrangements for the next five weeks

and I will take the request in mind when I do that. The law president of

the Council and the Leader of the House will -- House of Commons. With

permission I would like to make a short statement about the business

for tomorrow. On Wednesday the 19th of April, the House will be asked to

approve a motion that allows the Prime Minister to seek an early

Parliamentary general election under the fixed term Parliaments act 2011.

This will be followed by consideration of the