1-20 of 2,232 results for subject:"Public sector"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.35 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.009 seconds
- Search query
- subject:"Public sector"
- We searched for
- subject_t:"Public sector" OR subject_t:"Public services" OR subject_ses:92681
Year
X
2010
Type
-
Early day motions (1)
+
Legislation (7)
+
Acts (2)
-
Public acts (2)
+
Bills (4)
+
Public bills (4)
+
Private members' bills (4)
-
Ballot bills (1)
-
Presentation bills (1)
-
Ten minute rule bills (2)
+
Delegated legislation (1)
-
Statutory instruments (1)
+
Members' contributions (1,922)
-
Business questions (6)
-
Maiden speeches (10)
-
Oral answers to questions (82)
-
Oral question time interventions (1)
+
Oral questions (94)
-
Prime Minister's questions (4)
-
Topical questions (11)
-
Proceeding contributions (1,745)
+
Parliamentary committees (18)
+
Committee proceedings (10)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HL) (5)
-
Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings (1)
-
Public Bill Committee proceedings (1)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (3)
-
Select Committee reports (3)
-
Select Committee reports (Government responses) (4)
-
Select Committee written evidence (1)
+
Parliamentary papers (50)
-
Command papers (5)
-
Consultation papers (2)
-
Deposited papers (27)
-
House of Commons papers (11)
-
House of Lords papers (2)
-
Impact assessments (3)
-
Unprinted command papers (1)
-
Unprinted papers (1)
-
White papers (3)
+
Parliamentary proceedings (56)
+
Debates (26)
-
Adjournment debates (2)
+
Committee proceedings (10)
-
Committee of the Whole House (HL) (5)
-
Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings (1)
-
Public Bill Committee proceedings (1)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (3)
-
Debates on select committee reports (1)
+
Legislative debates (14)
-
Debates on bills (12)
-
Debates on delegated legislation (2)
-
Questions for short debate (2)
+
Petitions and observations (2)
-
Observations on petitions (1)
-
Paper petitions (1)
+
Statements (27)
+
Oral statements (8)
-
Ministerial statements (8)
-
Written statements (19)
-
Urgent questions (1)
+
Parliamentary questions (294)
-
Business questions (6)
+
Oral questions (94)
-
Prime Minister's questions (4)
-
Topical questions (11)
-
Urgent questions (1)
-
Written questions (193)
+
Petitions and observations (2)
-
Observations on petitions (1)
-
Paper petitions (1)
+
Research briefings (5)
-
Commons Briefing papers (2)
+
Lords Library Briefings (2)
-
Lords Library Briefings - Bills (1)
-
Lords Library Briefings - Debates (1)
-
POSTbriefs (1)
House
Session
Month
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has made an assessment of the effects on (a) men and (b) women of his proposals to freeze pay in the public sector.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has made an assessment of the effects on (a) men and (b) women of his proposals to freeze pay in the public sector.
Asked by
Fiona Mactaggart
(Labour)
Answered by
Danny Alexander
(Liberal Democrat)
Answering body
Treasury
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
8 July 2010
For answer on
12 July 2010
Answered on
21 December 2010
The Emergency Budget announced a two year pay freeze from 2011-12 for public sector workforces, except for those earning £21,000 or less, who will receive an increase of at least £250 a year. This policy will help protect jobs and the quality of public services.The Government have assessed the impact of the pay freeze on men and women using Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) data.The precise impact on individuals earning £21,000 or less will be determined by the relevant employer. However, compared with the previous Government's policy of a 1% pay cap for 2011-12 and 2012-13, it is likely that the emergency Budget policy will represent less income for public sector workers earning over £21,000—but an increase in income for those earning £21,000 or less.It is estimated that 65% of those employed by the public sector are female. However, 78% of those employed in the public sector earning £21,000 or less are female and will therefore benefit from the Government's policy.In addition, the £3.3 billion in savings from public sector pay restraint will help protect public sector jobs. Given that 65% of public sector employees are female around two thirds of jobs protected will be those of women. Pay restraint will also protect the provision of public services that are used by both women and men.
Subjects
Pay; Public sector
Date
21 December 2010
Reference
8103; 520 c1147-8W
House
House of Commons
Type
Select Committee reports; House of Commons papers;
Parliamentary committees
Committee
Public Administration Select Committee
Subjects
Accountability; Closures; Public sector; Non-departmental public bodies; Reviews; Reorganisation; Cabinet Office; National Policing Improvement Agency; Sport England; FDA; Youth Justice Board; Public and Commercial Services Union; Council of Civil Service Unions; Prospect; Centre for Policy Studies; Taxpayers' Alliance; Maude of Horsham, Lord; Institute for Government; Flinders, Matthew (Captain); Talbot, Colin
Commons Library location
CS 650
Date
20 December 2010
Reference
HC 537 2010-11
House
House of Commons
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Sassoon on 8 December (WA 67), what was the actual public sector net borrowing in May 2010 as a percentage of gross domestic product compared to the previous forecast for 2009–10.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Sassoon on 8 December (WA 67), what was the actual public sector net borrowing in May 2010 as a percentage of gross domestic product compared to the previous forecast for 2009–10.
Asked by
Lord Barnett
(Labour)
Answered by
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
20 December 2010
The Budget 2009 forecast for public sector net borrowing (PSNB) in 2009-10 was 12.4 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP). This was the last forecast for 2009-10 PSNB. Outturn for PSNB in 2009-10 was 11.1 per cent of GDP.
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector
Date
20 December 2010
Reference
5106; 723 c261WA
House
House of Lords
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his response, his Christmas wishes and indeed his Christmas card. Of course, for the Labour party this is always a time of giving. I have been looking through what he has been giving over the past few business questions—he digs deep into his...
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his response, his Christmas wishes and indeed his Christmas card. Of course, for the Labour party this is always a time of giving. I have been looking through what he has been giving over the past few business questions—he digs deep into his...
Member
Lord Young of Cookham
(Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Subjects
By-elections; Prisons; Public sector; Redundancy; Liberal Democrat; Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority; Oldham East and Saddleworth
Date
16 December 2010
Reference
520 c1047-50
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I thank the Leader of the House for his statement. Following the decision of the deputy Chief Whip this morning to break the convention that the party holding a seat moves the by-election writ in the case of seats declared void after an election, which is what happened in Winchester...
I thank the Leader of the House for his statement. Following the decision of the deputy Chief Whip this morning to break the convention that the party holding a seat moves the by-election writ in the case of seats declared void after an election, which is what happened in Winchester...
Member
Hilary Benn
(Labour)
Type
Business questions
Subjects
By-elections; Prisons; Public sector; Redundancy; Liberal Democrat; Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority; Oldham East and Saddleworth
Date
16 December 2010
Reference
520 c1047-50
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many jobs they forecast the private sector will create to compensate for the loss of jobs in the public sector due to Spending Review 2010.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many jobs they forecast the private sector will create to compensate for the loss of jobs in the public sector due to Spending Review 2010.
Asked by
Lord Taylor of Warwick
(Non-affiliated)
Answered by
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
13 December 2010
On 29 November 2010, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) released the official forecast for total employment and general government employment, updated for the spending review announcements.
As the OBR sets out in paragraph 3.98, page 62 of its November 2010 Economic and Fiscal Outlook (Cm 7979), it expects total employment to rise by 1.1 million over the next five years, from 29 million in 2010 to 30.1 million in 2015. General government employment is projected to fall by just over 400,000 between 2010-11 and 2015-16, more than offset by a rise in market sector employment of around 1.5 million.
In paragraph 3.99, page 62, the OBR presents evidence that this scale of private sector job creation over a period of fiscal consolidation is not unprecedented. The latest labour market statistics suggest that total employment increased by 1.3 million between 1992 and 1998, while general government employment contracted by around 0.5 million.
Subjects
Job creation; Private sector; Public sector; Redundancy
Date
13 December 2010
Reference
4794; 723 c146-7WA
House
House of Lords
Deposited by
Department for Communities and Local Government
Type
Deposited papers
Author
Department for Communities and Local Government
Committed on
13 December 2010
Originated on
13 December 2010
Received on
13 December 2010
Legislation
Localism Bill 2010-12
Subjects
Accountability; Bureaucracy; Council tax; Finance; Expenditure; Local government; Powers; Public sector
Date
13 December 2010
Reference
DEP2010-2248
House
House of Commons
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in light of Spending Review 2010, what action they are taking to protect public sector jobs.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in light of Spending Review 2010, what action they are taking to protect public sector jobs.
Asked by
Lord Taylor of Warwick
(Non-affiliated)
Answered by
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
13 December 2010
The United Kingdom faces the largest peacetime deficit in our history. The public sector pay bill accounts for around half of departmental resource spending, so deficit reduction will inevitably impact on the public sector workforce. However, not tackling the deficit would be the worst thing for jobs in the medium term, across the public and private sector.
The Government will support employers to do everything they can to mitigate the impact of public sector job losses; by protecting jobs through pay and pensions reform; by ensuring that staff in different public sector workforces and each region will have visibility of suitable vacancies; by encouraging local employers to explore voluntary deals with staff on pay restraint or reduced hours in order to save jobs; and by actively monitoring potential workforce reductions, enabling decisions to be taken in time to mitigate localised impacts.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), in its Economic and Fiscal Outlook of 29 November, estimated a reduction in general government headcount of around 160,000 less than expected in the June Budget forecast. The bulk of this revision reflects the Government's reforms to welfare and savings made on debt interest. The full set of forecasts can be found on the OBR website: http://budgetresponsibility.independent.gov.uk/d/econ_fiscal_outlook_291110.pdf
Subjects
Employment; Public sector; Redundancy
Date
13 December 2010
Reference
4694; 723 c146WA
House
House of Lords
The Government announced at the spending review their plans to take forward recommendations made by the Independent Public Service Pension Commission in its interim report. These plans included a commitment to undertake a review of the discount rate used to set contributions in the unfunded public service pension schemes. Today...
The Government announced at the spending review their plans to take forward recommendations made by the Independent Public Service Pension Commission in its interim report. These plans included a commitment to undertake a review of the discount rate used to set contributions in the unfunded public service pension schemes. Today...
Member
Danny Alexander
(Liberal Democrat)
Department
Treasury
Type
Written statements
Subjects
Contributions; Discounts; Workplace pensions; Public sector; Public consultation; Independent Public Service Pensions Commission
Date
9 December 2010
Reference
520 c30WS
House
House of Commons
My right honourable friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Danny Alexander) has today issued the following Written Ministerial Statement. The Government announced at the spending review their plans to take forward recommendations made by the Independent Public Service Pension Commission in its interim report. These plans included a commitment...
My right honourable friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Danny Alexander) has today issued the following Written Ministerial Statement. The Government announced at the spending review their plans to take forward recommendations made by the Independent Public Service Pension Commission in its interim report. These plans included a commitment...
Member
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Department
Treasury
Type
Written statements
Subjects
Contributions; Discounts; Workplace pensions; Public sector; Public consultation; Independent Public Service Pensions Commission
Date
9 December 2010
Reference
723 c52WS
House
House of Lords
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Southend West of 24 November 2010, Official Report, column 254, on consultancy, what safeguards are in place to avoid any conflict of interest arising in the award of contracts; and if he will...
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Southend West of 24 November 2010, Official Report, column 254, on consultancy, what safeguards are in place to avoid any conflict of interest arising in the award of contracts; and if he will...
Asked by
Tom Brake
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Lord Maude of Horsham
(Conservative)
Answering body
Cabinet Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
30 November 2010
For answer on
2 December 2010
Answered on
9 December 2010
The Government have in place robust procedures for the avoidance of any conflict of interest, including through the requirements of the Ministerial Code. These cover Ministers and their immediate family members.With regard to the specific contract between the Cabinet Office and DLA Piper, the legal firm which employs the Deputy Prime Minister's wife, Miriam González Durántez, the Deputy Prime Minister had no involvement in the award of this contract in 2008 under the last Government. The Deputy Prime Minister is a Minister in the Cabinet Office not the Minister for the Cabinet Office and he has had no involvement in the award or management of Cabinet Office contracts.Furthermore, the Deputy Prime Minister and Miriam González Durántez have been assiduous at all times in ensuring there is no conflict of interest between the Deputy Prime Minister's official responsibilities and their private interests. In accordance with the Ministerial Code, the Deputy Prime Minister, on appointment to office, provided the Cabinet Secretary with a list of his interests. At the same time, Miriam González Durántez had separate discussions with the Cabinet Secretary and the Cabinet Office Director of Propriety and Ethics to ensure there was no conflict between her work and the Deputy Prime Minister's official responsibilities. Procedures have been put in place to ensure any contract between DLA Piper and the Government is insulated from Miriam González Durántez's role in DLA Piper so no conflict will arise.
Subjects
Public sector; Procurement
Date
9 December 2010
Reference
28644; 520 c411W
House
House of Commons
Deposited by
Treasury
Type
Consultation papers;
Deposited papers
Author
Treasury
Committed on
9 December 2010
Received on
9 December 2010
Subjects
Contributions; Discounts; Workplace pensions; Public sector; Independent Public Service Pensions Commission
Date
9 December 2010
Reference
DEP2010-2239
House
House of Lords; House of Commons
My Lords, I should declare a professional interest; perhaps I should also declare that I have had free tuition in economics from my noble friend Professor Lord Peston.
Despite the Minister’s Answer, does he not agree that on any definition this country never has been, and is not, anywhere near bankrupt? The plain fact is—and the ONS confirms this—that the net asset position of this country at the end of last year, just before the noble Lord took office, was £6.7 trillion. On top of that, there is no problem in paying debts, because the average length of debt repayment is 14.2 years. We recently lost the services of a distinguished noble Lord in this House. I would not like to see another one go so soon from the Prime Minister’s services. Will the Minister withdraw the word ““bankrupt”” and apologise to the House for using it?
My Lords, I should declare a professional interest; perhaps I should also declare that I have had free tuition in economics from my noble friend Professor Lord Peston.
Despite the Minister’s Answer, does he not agree that on any definition this country never has been, and is not, anywhere near bankrupt? The plain fact is—and the ONS confirms this—that the net asset position of this country at the end of last year, just before the noble Lord took office, was £6.7 trillion. On top of that, there is no problem in paying debts, because the average length of debt repayment is 14.2 years. We recently lost the services of a distinguished noble Lord in this House. I would not like to see another one go so soon from the Prime Minister’s services. Will the Minister withdraw the word ““bankrupt”” and apologise to the House for using it?
Asked by
Lord Barnett
(Labour)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
7 December 2010
My Lords, I know that the noble Lord, Lord Barnett, is a man who likes precision, so I thought that I would do a little research and see how he has used the term ““bankrupt”” in this and another place. The first time that the noble Lord used that word in another place was very interesting. It was on 8 April 1965 in the Budget debate. The then Member for Heywood and Royton was defending the then Labour Government’s cuts to our Armed Forces east of Suez. He asked: "““Have we discussed this with our Commonwealth friends in the area and told them … that … it would not help them or us if we bankrupted ourselves by having a force in the area of a size which we could not afford?””.—[Official Report, Commons 8/4/1965; col. 737.]"
That was in 1965 when public sector net borrowing was 1.6 per cent of GDP. On that basis, does the noble Lord think that I was a little moderate in my language when I talked about the brink of bankruptcy?
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c115
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, when the Government came into office, we had been put on negative credit watch by one of the main rating agencies, unprecedented for the UK, and were paying interest of £120 million a day. The first or second largest holder of bonds in the world had talked of the UK as a ““must to avoid”” and described the UK’s gilts as, "““resting on a bed of nitroglycerine””."
The Government have restored confidence in our public finances by setting out a clear plan to restore the budget to balance and that is what enables us to borrow what we need to borrow on the international markets on reasonable terms.
My Lords, when the Government came into office, we had been put on negative credit watch by one of the main rating agencies, unprecedented for the UK, and were paying interest of £120 million a day. The first or second largest holder of bonds in the world had talked of the UK as a ““must to avoid”” and described the UK’s gilts as, "““resting on a bed of nitroglycerine””."
The Government have restored confidence in our public finances by setting out a clear plan to restore the budget to balance and that is what enables us to borrow what we need to borrow on the international markets on reasonable terms.
Answered by
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Asked by
Lord Peston
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, as the Minister does not, under any circumstances, believe in answering questions put to him, can I ask him whether he has looked at the latest report of the Office for Budget Responsibility, whose forecasts for the next five years—which is how long this Government are insisting that they are going to stay—state that the balance of payments will be in deficit for every one of those five years? That means that our net assets will decline overseas by the amount we have to borrow to finance that deficit. What a nerve the Minister has to talk about bankruptcy in connection with the previous Government, when the balance of payments forecasts show that if anyone is making us head for bankruptcy—although I do not actually believe that we are—it is the present Government?
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c116
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
I completely agree with my noble friend. That is indeed it. I was looking at the Oxford English Dictionary this morning and I saw that one definition of ““bankrupt”” is, "““one who has brought himself into debt by reckless expenditure or riotous living””."
I would not presume to accuse the previous Government of riotous living.
I completely agree with my noble friend. That is indeed it. I was looking at the Oxford English Dictionary this morning and I saw that one definition of ““bankrupt”” is, "““one who has brought himself into debt by reckless expenditure or riotous living””."
I would not presume to accuse the previous Government of riotous living.
Answered by
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Asked by
Lord Naseby
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Has my noble friend had a chance to read the statement from the shadow Chancellor in which he said that the problem for the Labour Party was that it had built up a reputation for 13 years of overspending and debt? Is that not near-bankruptcy?
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c116
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I know that the noble Lord, Lord Barnett, is a man who likes precision, so I thought that I would do a little research and see how he has used the term ““bankrupt”” in this and another place. The first time that the noble Lord used that word in another place was very interesting. It was on 8 April 1965 in the Budget debate. The then Member for Heywood and Royton was defending the then Labour Government’s cuts to our Armed Forces east of Suez. He asked: "““Have we discussed this with our Commonwealth friends in the area and told them … that … it would not help them or us if we bankrupted ourselves by having a force in the area of a size which we could not afford?””.—[Official Report, Commons 8/4/1965; col. 737.]"
That was in 1965 when public sector net borrowing was 1.6 per cent of GDP. On that basis, does the noble Lord think that I was a little moderate in my language when I talked about the brink of bankruptcy?
My Lords, I know that the noble Lord, Lord Barnett, is a man who likes precision, so I thought that I would do a little research and see how he has used the term ““bankrupt”” in this and another place. The first time that the noble Lord used that word in another place was very interesting. It was on 8 April 1965 in the Budget debate. The then Member for Heywood and Royton was defending the then Labour Government’s cuts to our Armed Forces east of Suez. He asked: "““Have we discussed this with our Commonwealth friends in the area and told them … that … it would not help them or us if we bankrupted ourselves by having a force in the area of a size which we could not afford?””.—[Official Report, Commons 8/4/1965; col. 737.]"
That was in 1965 when public sector net borrowing was 1.6 per cent of GDP. On that basis, does the noble Lord think that I was a little moderate in my language when I talked about the brink of bankruptcy?
Answered by
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Asked by
Lord Barnett
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I should declare a professional interest; perhaps I should also declare that I have had free tuition in economics from my noble friend Professor Lord Peston.
Despite the Minister’s Answer, does he not agree that on any definition this country never has been, and is not, anywhere near bankrupt? The plain fact is—and the ONS confirms this—that the net asset position of this country at the end of last year, just before the noble Lord took office, was £6.7 trillion. On top of that, there is no problem in paying debts, because the average length of debt repayment is 14.2 years. We recently lost the services of a distinguished noble Lord in this House. I would not like to see another one go so soon from the Prime Minister’s services. Will the Minister withdraw the word ““bankrupt”” and apologise to the House for using it?
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c115
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, leaving aside the fact that the mortgage payers of this country would be somewhat upset to be thought of as having brought it upon themselves by reckless expenditure, the point is, as the IMF succinctly put it in its report of 27 September 2010: "““The consolidation plan and implementation of early measures to tackle the deficit—one of the highest in the world in 2010—greatly reduces the risk of a costly loss of confidence in fiscal sustainability and will help rebalance the economy””."
That was what the IMF had to say.
My Lords, leaving aside the fact that the mortgage payers of this country would be somewhat upset to be thought of as having brought it upon themselves by reckless expenditure, the point is, as the IMF succinctly put it in its report of 27 September 2010: "““The consolidation plan and implementation of early measures to tackle the deficit—one of the highest in the world in 2010—greatly reduces the risk of a costly loss of confidence in fiscal sustainability and will help rebalance the economy””."
That was what the IMF had to say.
Answered by
Lord Sassoon
(Conservative)
Asked by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, the successive attempts by the noble Lord to define bankruptcy have looked quite pathetic...
Well, his latest definition would indicate that every mortgage holder in Britain was bankrupt because they have substantial debts. The issue is whether these debts can be managed. He must draw a distinction between the situation of Ireland at the present time, or of Greece in recent times, and that of the United Kingdom, where, as has been indicated, our debt repayment is over a 14-year period.
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c116-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Has my noble friend had a chance to read the statement from the shadow Chancellor in which he said that the problem for the Labour Party was that it had built up a reputation for 13 years of overspending and debt? Is that not near-bankruptcy?
Has my noble friend had a chance to read the statement from the shadow Chancellor in which he said that the problem for the Labour Party was that it had built up a reputation for 13 years of overspending and debt? Is that not near-bankruptcy?
Asked by
Lord Naseby
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
7 December 2010
I completely agree with my noble friend. That is indeed it. I was looking at the Oxford English Dictionary this morning and I saw that one definition of ““bankrupt”” is, "““one who has brought himself into debt by reckless expenditure or riotous living””."
I would not presume to accuse the previous Government of riotous living.
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c116
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that, if we had not taken action so quickly, we would have been a further £100 billion in debt by 2015?
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that, if we had not taken action so quickly, we would have been a further £100 billion in debt by 2015?
Asked by
Baroness Seccombe
(Conservative)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
7 December 2010
Indeed. I am grateful to my noble friend and I think that points out how close to bankruptcy we were.
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c117
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, the successive attempts by the noble Lord to define bankruptcy have looked quite pathetic...
Well, his latest definition would indicate that every mortgage holder in Britain was bankrupt because they have substantial debts. The issue is whether these debts can be managed. He must draw a distinction between the situation of Ireland at the present time, or of Greece in recent times, and that of the United Kingdom, where, as has been indicated, our debt repayment is over a 14-year period.
My Lords, the successive attempts by the noble Lord to define bankruptcy have looked quite pathetic...
Well, his latest definition would indicate that every mortgage holder in Britain was bankrupt because they have substantial debts. The issue is whether these debts can be managed. He must draw a distinction between the situation of Ireland at the present time, or of Greece in recent times, and that of the United Kingdom, where, as has been indicated, our debt repayment is over a 14-year period.
Asked by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
7 December 2010
My Lords, leaving aside the fact that the mortgage payers of this country would be somewhat upset to be thought of as having brought it upon themselves by reckless expenditure, the point is, as the IMF succinctly put it in its report of 27 September 2010: "““The consolidation plan and implementation of early measures to tackle the deficit—one of the highest in the world in 2010—greatly reduces the risk of a costly loss of confidence in fiscal sustainability and will help rebalance the economy””."
That was what the IMF had to say.
Subjects
Borrowing; Public sector; Public finance
Date
7 December 2010
Reference
723 c116-7
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords