aun a un aid warehouse in explosion at a un aid warehouse in rafah in gaza. this comes as a new land route is being used to deliver food to the north of gaza. the first aid to arrive there in three weeks. also on the programme this hour... a £10 million donation to the conservative party made by a businessman now accused of racism. will rishi sunak return it? after nato expands president putin issued a fresh warning to the west, he will send troops to the border of finland. lithuania blames russia for attacking a close aide to late opposition leader alexei navalny. the us sends marines into haiti as it tries to help the transition of power in a country wracked by violence.

you are live with bbc news. i am anna foster in bethlehem. some breaking news this hour. five people have been killed in an explosion at a warehouse run by the united nations relief agency in rafah. it appears to have happened on the eastern side of the building. these are the latest pictures just in. we can see blood from the attack and aid the boxes that are damaged. ambulances are there. as yet there is no statement or response from israel or the israel defence forces but we will bring that to you if it comes. breaking news to begin this hour, five people have been killed in an explosion at a un aid warehouse in rafah in the southern gaza strip. for the first time in this conflict a new road route has been taken to actually deliver much—needed food aid to northern gaza at the opposite end of the

strip. this is something that has been particularly difficult to do, to actually get aid to the 300,000 people in the north of gaza who desperately need it. the un has said it's the first time they have managed to do that in three weeks. global pressure is increasing on israel to allow more access to the palestinian territory, where famine is looming. on tuesday, the eu's foreign policy chief said starvation was being used as an arm of war in gaza. aship is a ship is en route from cyprus, inaugurating that new maritime aid corridor between cyprus and gaza, carrying 200 tonnes of food, which in itself is only a very small amount when you look at the need for food and aid in gaza but that is expected to arrive potentially in the next 2a hours but will face challenges in unloading and distributing the aid. there are still tensions here in the occupied

west bank and in eastjerusalem overnight where overnight five palestinians were reported overnight apparently by israel defence forces. one of them was a 13—year—old boy who was holding a firework he was going to fire at israeli police. ourjerusalem correspondent yolande knell has more shaky video shows a palestinian boy with a lit firework. he was fatally shot. gunfire. rami hamdan al—halhouli was just 12. with tensions running high for ramadan in eastjerusalem, he was killed by an israeli border policeman. and today a far right minister praised his action, saying it was a disgrace that israeli police were investigating the officer. translation: a combatant comes and does exactly - what we expect from him. it's simply the biggest scandal that they invite him here for questioning.

overnight, there were other palestinians killed. two here, one aged just 16, in a village nearjerusalem. then this morning there was a stabbing at this israeli military checkpoint. israeli police said they shot and killed the attacker, a 15—year—old palestinian boy. ramadan is always a sensitive time in the israel — palestinian conflict. but this year, with no truce agreed in gaza, there is a particular worry that trouble could spread. a lot depends now on what happens on the ground. in the shadow of famine, the un says israel's military opened a new route to allow this aid convoy to reach northern gaza. there have also been new airlifts to try to alleviate the deep humanitarian crisis. meanwhile a charity ship carrying 200 tonnes of food is making its way across the mediterranean from cyprus. a newjetty is being set up so that aid can start to come in by sea. but the un says lorries

are the fastest way to get aid to those who need it. israel is continuing to strike in gaza. after more than five months, the war rages on with devastating effects. yolande knell, bbc news, jerusalem. there have been intensive efforts brokered by qatar and egypt to try and at least bring into play some humanitarian ceasefire for a period of time. they were looking at the muslim holy month of ramadan which we have just entered, muslim holy month of ramadan which we havejust entered, they muslim holy month of ramadan which we have just entered, they are looking at that as a possible date by which to get that mechanism under way to see a pause in the fighting in gaza, which would see the release of israeli hostages are still being held there, and equally the release of some palestinian prisoners held in israeli jails. despite those various intensive efforts backed by the international community, even now there still seems to be a degree

of distance between the sides when it comes to the specifics, the wording, israeland hamas it comes to the specifics, the wording, israel and hamas have both made it clear what they want in the deal in order to agree with it and put it into place, but as things stand at the moment, despite the fact channels of communication are still open and still working on it, at the moment it doesn't appear as if any breakthrough is imminent. studio: anna foster, thank you. here in the uk, the prime minister has told the commons that alleged comments made by conservative party donor frank hester were wrong and racist. mr hester is reported to have said the mp diane abbott made him want to hate all black women, and should be shot. at prime minister's questions, the labour leader sir keir starmer asked rishi sunak if he was proud to be bankrolled by a someone using racist and mysoginist language. here's our political correspondent damian grammaticus. will you give the money back, prime minister? £10 million, it's a huge amount of money and a political problem for rishi sunak.

he has now criticised remarks said to be made by the donor frank hester as racist. sir keir starmer seized on that. is the prime minister proud to be bankrolled by someone using racist and misogynist language when he says the member for hackney north and stoke newington "makes you want to hate all black women"? mr speaker, the alleged comments were wrong, they were racist and he has now... as i said, the comments were wrong and they were racist and he has rightly apologised for them and that remorse should be accepted, mr speaker. there is no place for racism in britain and the government that i lead is living proof of that. in november the prime minister accepted a non—cash donation . to the tune of £15,000 from frank hester for. the use of his helicopter. so will he reimburse him? yes or no? _ no, mrspeaker. and i am pleased that the gentleman

is supporting a party that represents one of the most diverse governments in this country's history, led by this country's first british asian prime minister. the jeopardy for rishi sunak here is twofold. first, on the money, having said the comments from mr hester were racist, can he reallyjustify holding onto the money? and then his leadership. his critics say he is buffeted by events, weak and inconsistent. after the guardian reported frank hester�*s alleged comments, he said he accepted he was rude about diane abbott in a private meeting several years ago, but his criticism had nothing to do with her gender nor colour of skin. so, another question... if mr hester said today i would like to give you another £10 million, would you take it? on the basis we don't think mr hester is racist, yes. i the donations were, mr hester has said, because he liked rishi sunak and his leadership, but others in the party don't want the money. i would think about the company

i kept and i would give that money back. i have to give you my view rather than what the party should do. ms abbott is not currently sitting as a labour mp because of comments she made saying irish, jewish and traveller people were not subject to racism all their lives. she has apologised and the comments are being investigated. she was not given the opportunity to ask rishi sunak a question herself and has reported mr hester�*s alleged comments to the police unit responsible for mps' safety. damian grammaticas, bbc news, westminster. a bit of breaking news to bring you from the uk government, an announcement on humanitarian aid into gaza. a couple of key developments they are highlighting here, they say 150 tonnes of uk aid will enter gaza today, including tents and hygiene supplies from the uk. secondly, a uk field hospital will arrive this week to provide life—saving medical care. the foreign secretary also announced a

further £10 million in aid funding. that brings the uk support to more than £100 million this financial year. that's coming from the uk governmentjust in the last few minutes. president putin says russia will deploy troops to finland's border. it follows the accession of both finland and sweden to nato, since russia's invasion of ukraine. speaking today, vladimir putin said he thinks finland joined the alliance to be members of a "western club". translation: why they needed this, i i frankly don't understand. this is an absolutely meaningless step from the point of view of ensuring their own national interests. but nevertheless, it's up to them to decide. that's what they decided. we didn't have troops there. now they will be there. there were no systems of destruction there. now they will appear. so why? lithuania has blamed russia for attacking a close aide to the late russian opposition figure alexei navalny.

the country's president called it a pre—planned assault. this is leonid volkov, a long time ally of navalny. he was assaulted while in his car in the lithuanian capital vilnius on tuesday night. he was left with a broken arm and covered in blood. navalny�*s team social media post saying this. a short time ago, mr volkov released a video message and urged russians to continue their struggle against president putin. translation: thank you very i much for your words of support. it's a bit tough but never mind, we'll get over it. i was pleased to read what you had written to me. even more so because while i was reading, i knew i was still alive.

they wanted to make me into a schnitzel with a meat hammer right outside my house, in the yard. the attacker hit me 15 times in my leg. surprisingly, the leg is still in one piece. it is difficult to walk but apparently the leg is not broken. my arm has been broken instead. oh, well, i'll live. the most important thing is, we will continue working and we will not surrender. i am not ready to make any comments except for this. it was another obvious, typical, classic gangster hello from putin, from the gangster petersburg. vladimir vladimirovich, hello to you, too. what else can i say? continue working against putin. that's what needs to be done. let's go on. the bbc hasn't independently verified the account. sarah rainsford is our eastern europe correspondent. i asked her about leonid volkov�*s video message blaming president putin for what happened to him. well, certainly that's what leonid volkov has said. he's made a direct link between the brutal attack that he suffered last night with a meat hammer outside his house in vilnius.

with his political activism, he said it was a gangster greeting from vladimir putin from bandit saint petersburg. so he was not mincing his words at all, as you might expect from a very close aide to alexei navalny. that has been backed up to a considerable extent by the lithuanian president, who has also said that he links what has happened to leonid volkov directly to moscow. he said it was a planned attack. he said it was in line with recent events in lithuania. but he also said, as well as stating that this attack would be investigated fully and he hoped that those responsible would be found, they would be punished — he also said that he had a message for vladimir putin, and that message was that nobody in lithuania is afraid of mr putin. but i have to say that this attack will have worried alexei navalny�*s team — most of them, many of them had moved we can take you to parliament where

chancellorjeremy hunt is facing questions on the budget by the parliamentary committee. it is a means, parliamentary committee. it is a means. not _ parliamentary committee. it is a means. not an _ parliamentary committee. it is a means, not an end. _ parliamentary committee. it is a means, not an end. what - parliamentary committee. it is a means, not an end. what the i parliamentary committee. it is a l means, not an end. what the end parliamentary committee. it is a - means, not an end. what the end is, is more investment in the economy, that means more growth, more productivity, ultimately more money for public services that we all depend on. i think the core of what i'm trying to do is more investment, morejobs and prosperity i'm trying to do is more investment, more jobs and prosperity that isn't just concentrated in the south—east of the country but spreads to every corner. . ~' of the country but spreads to every corner. . ~ , ., ~ , ., ., corner. thank you, i think you have done a number— corner. thank you, i think you have done a number of _ corner. thank you, i think you have done a number of fiscal— corner. thank you, i think you have done a number of fiscal events - corner. thank you, i think you have done a number of fiscal events now and we _ done a number of fiscal events now and we see — done a number of fiscal events now and we see a theme coming through in terms _ and we see a theme coming through in terms of— and we see a theme coming through in terms of trying to unlock some of the challenges we had from economists yesterday about productivity, about creating longer term growth capacity in an economy where _ term growth capacity in an economy where employment is relatively high and so _ where employment is relatively high and so on _ where employment is relatively high and so on. noninflationary sustainable growth. we have heard you make _ sustainable growth. we have heard you make quite a few measures that are aiming _ you make quite a few measures that are aiming to do that. i think you

could _ are aiming to do that. i think you could also— are aiming to do that. i think you could also say about the budget last week, _ could also say about the budget last week, there were a lot of very little — week, there were a lot of very little fiscal measures, often quite small— little fiscal measures, often quite small measures in terms of their impact _ small measures in terms of their impact on — small measures in terms of their impact on finances, a lot of smaller tax impact on finances, a lot of smaller lax hikes _ impact on finances, a lot of smaller tax hikes which in aggregate seem to be tax hikes which in aggregate seem to he being _ tax hikes which in aggregate seem to be being driven by the fiscal headroom itself, so you are being almost _ headroom itself, so you are being almost driven by your fiscal target as opposed to being able to take a strategic— as opposed to being able to take a strategic approach to fiscal decisions. do you recognise that characterisation? | decisions. do you recognise that characterisation?— decisions. do you recognise that characterisation? i recognise the first art, characterisation? i recognise the first part. and — characterisation? i recognise the first part. and if— characterisation? i recognise the first part, and if i _ characterisation? i recognise the first part, and if i may _ characterisation? i recognise the first part, and if i may say, - characterisation? i recognise the | first part, and ifi may say, chair, first part, and if i may say, chair, not the second part. yes indeed, the fiscal rules are guard rails and i think it is right to have those guardrails and it's important that everyone can see that we are following rule the rules which mean that by the end of the period you are beginning to bring down debt, so thatis are beginning to bring down debt, so that is absolutely right. but in terms of suggesting that the

measures were ray bit higgledy—piggledy, for want of a better word, higgledy—piggledy, for want of a betterword, i higgledy—piggledy, for want of a better word, i wouldn't agree with that. on tax, there is a very clear plan, we want to bring down the tax on work and the unfairness of double taxation on work, because that brings more people into the labour market. so national insurance cuts bring about 100,000 people in, and another 100,000 from national insurance cuts announced in the autumn, filling about one in five vacancies across the economy. so they are in terms of economic growth some of the most destructive taxes. so it was my strategy to arrange our tax affairs too, wherever possible, reduce the disincentives to work and i think that is a consistent pattern. i i think that is a consistent attern. . , i think that is a consistent pattern-— i think that is a consistent attern. . , ., ., pattern. i am sure we will have more ruestions pattern. i am sure we will have more questions about _ pattern. i am sure we will have more questions about national— pattern. i am sure we will have more questions about national insurance . questions about national insurance as we _ questions about national insurance as we go— questions about national insurance as we go through the session this afternoon — as we go through the session this afternoon. i also wanted to ask you about _ afternoon. i also wanted to ask you about the _ afternoon. i also wanted to ask you

about the fact it was in the newspapers the morning of your budget— newspapers the morning of your budget that you were going to make this change to national insurance. you can't — this change to national insurance. you can't have been happy about that _ you can't have been happy about that that — you can't have been happy about that. that must have been an unintentional leak, where did it come _ unintentional leak, where did it come from? | unintentional leak, where did it come from?— unintentional leak, where did it come from? �* ., , _ come from? i wasn't happy, it was not an intentional _ come from? i wasn't happy, it was not an intentional leak. _ come from? i wasn't happy, it was not an intentional leak. i - come from? i wasn't happy, it was not an intentional leak. i think- come from? i wasn't happy, it was not an intentional leak. i think alll not an intentional leak. i think all chancellors would prefer the contents of their budgets to remain secret until the final decisions are made and until they have been announced to parliament. and it is very disappointing, actually not just for this fiscal events but for the last few fiscal events, it has been very difficult. partly because journalists call up people in the treasury and say, i'm going to run this story unless you give me a flat denial it will be in the budget and we don't want to see anything that isn't true to journalists, so they make a gamble on that. so i do think

that it make a gamble on that. so i do think thatitis make a gamble on that. so i do think that it is incredibly frustrating for all concerned, that it is incredibly frustrating forall concerned, not that it is incredibly frustrating for all concerned, not least because some of the stories that went out about the contents of the budget actually did so before final decisions had been made so they were purely speculative. can decisions had been made so they were purely speculative.— purely speculative. can you outline for the committee _ purely speculative. can you outline for the committee which _ purely speculative. can you outline for the committee which parts - purely speculative. can you outline for the committee which parts of i purely speculative. can you outline i for the committee which parts of the budget— for the committee which parts of the budget that were released over the week before were deliberate news stories _ week before were deliberate news stories planted by the treasury or number— stories planted by the treasury or number ten, stories planted by the treasury or numberten, and which stories planted by the treasury or number ten, and which were just educated — number ten, and which were just educated and informed guesswork by journalists? educated and informed guesswork by “ournalists? ~ ., educated and informed guesswork by “ournalists? ~ . ., ,, educated and informed guesswork by “ournalists? . journalists? what i can assure you, because i journalists? what i can assure you, because i don't— journalists? what i can assure you, because i don't know _ journalists? what i can assure you, because i don't know the _ journalists? what i can assure you, because i don't know the details i journalists? what i can assure you, because i don't know the details of| because i don't know the details of these conversations because i am not part of them, but i can assure you that principal measures were not leaked in advance, that what you would consider to be the main points in the budget, and we wouldn't have wanted them to be.— in the budget, and we wouldn't have wanted them to be. would you agree with my hunch _ wanted them to be. would you agree with my hunch that _ wanted them to be. would you agree with my hunch that the _ wanted them to be. would you agree with my hunch that the national- with my hunch that the national assurance — with my hunch that the national assurance was inadvertently in the newspapers that morning? correct. what about the _ newspapers that morning? correct. what about the claim _ newspapers that morning? correct. what about the claim from - newspapers that morning? correct. what about the claim from martin | what about the claim from martin lewis _ what about the claim from martin lewis that — what about the claim from martin lewis that he was told about the change — lewis that he was told about the change to — lewis that he was told about the change to high income child benefit charges _ change to high income child benefit

charges before parliament was? no. no, he charges before parliament was? no. no. he wasn't _ charges before parliament was? firm no, he wasn't told? charges before parliament was? no. no, he wasn't told? correct. - charges before parliament was? no. no, he wasn't told? correct. so - no, he wasn't told? correct. so martin lewis — no, he wasn't told? correct. so martin lewis isn't _ no, he wasn't told? correct. so martin lewis isn't telling - no, he wasn't told? correct. so martin lewis isn't telling the i martin lewis isn't telling the truth? — martin lewis isn't telling the truth? l— martin lewis isn't telling the truth? ., ., , , , truth? i have not seen his comments but he was — truth? i have not seen his comments but he was not _ truth? i have not seen his comments but he was not told _ truth? i have not seen his comments but he was not told about _ truth? i have not seen his comments but he was not told about the - but he was not told about the increase in threshold in high income child benefit charge, no. i will chance child benefit charge, no. i will change the — child benefit charge, no. i will change the question - child benefit charge, no. i will change the question to - child benefit charge, no. i will change the question to the i child benefit charge, no. iwill change the question to the high income — change the question to the high income benefit charge itself. you acknowledge in your document that the government has yet again miss the government has yet again miss the welfare target. that's something parliament has enacted and we keep on missing _ parliament has enacted and we keep on missing it. are you going to ask parliament— on missing it. are you going to ask parliament to change that or will you try— parliament to change that or will you try to— parliament to change that or will you try to get back under the welfare — you try to get back under the welfare target? the you try to get back under the welfare target?— welfare target? the way that particular — welfare target? the way that particular element _ welfare target? the way that particular element of - welfare target? the way that| particular element of scrutiny welfare target? the way that i particular element of scrutiny is set up is that ministers have to report at the start of every parliament whether they are on track, and if they are not on track, what they will do to get back on

track. and that remains the case. but to answer your question very directly, i am concerned we are breaching that cap. and we have announced a number of very significant measures that bring down welfare spending, but in a way that is compassionate and in the interests of disadvantaged people, because we think the vast majority of times it is in people's interests to be in work and not dependent on welfare. and the back to work programme announced at the autumn statement by myself and mel stride will for example see a reduction by two thirds in the number of people being signed off as long—term sick and disabled and not having to look for work. that has been verified by the 0br. for work. that has been verified by the obr. there are some very significant welfare changes and we continue to look very carefully at more we can do. 50

continue to look very carefully at more we can do.— continue to look very carefully at more we can do. so are you saying we can exect more we can do. so are you saying we can exnect a — more we can do. so are you saying we can exnect a plan _ more we can do. so are you saying we can expect a plan to — more we can do. so are you saying we can expect a plan to get _ more we can do. so are you saying we can expect a plan to get back - more we can do. so are you saying we can expect a plan to get back under i can expect a plan to get back under the welfare — can expect a plan to get back under the welfare cap?— the welfare cap? specifically with resect to the welfare cap? specifically with respect to the — the welfare cap? specifically with respect to the welfare _ the welfare cap? specifically with respect to the welfare cap - the welfare cap? specifically with respect to the welfare cap we i the welfare cap? specifically with i respect to the welfare cap we need to see where we are at the start of the next parliament. but if you are saying, will we keep looking for reforms that can bring people off welfare and into work, absolutely, yes. welfare and into work, absolutely, es. ., , ., yes. one of the things we heard esterda yes. one of the things we heard yesterday from _ yes. one of the things we heard yesterday from economists i yes. one of the things we heard yesterday from economists was| yes. one of the things we heard - yesterday from economists was around this stated _ yesterday from economists was around this stated objective of debt falling _ this stated objective of debt falling. and we know you have made your fiscal— falling. and we know you have made your fiscal headroom i think with 5&9— your fiscal headroom i think with £8.9 billion to spare. but can we ever— £8.9 billion to spare. but can we ever expect as a country to see a sustained _ ever expect as a country to see a sustained reduction in the country's outstanding debt as a percentage of the economy back to the same sort of levels _ the economy back to the same sort of levels we _ the economy back to the same sort of levels we had before the pandemic? | levels we had before the pandemic? i think levels we had before the pandemic? think it will levels we had before the pandemic? i think it will be a long and

difficultjourney but i think it's right we try. i read the transcripts of your interviews yesterday with the iss and resolution foundation and obr and it is interesting that they commented that the fiscal rules are some of the loosest. —— yesterday with ifs. then you have other respected economists like andy haldane who say they are too tight. i think we are broadly in the middle ground. in a situation where we were encouraged to hear the january growth figures this morning but the economy is not going particularly fast at the moment. the last published numbers, we are in a technical recession because we are in a high interest rate environment because of the need to bring down inflation. but in that context it is right to try within sensible fiscal

rules to do everything you can to get the economy back growing again and that is what i have been trying to do. ., ., , , and that is what i have been trying to do. ., .,, , ., and that is what i have been trying todo. ., , ., ., to do. your hope is that growth will be the thing _ to do. your hope is that growth will be the thing that _ to do. your hope is that growth will be the thing that changes, - to do. your hope is that growth will be the thing that changes, that i to do. your hope is that growth will be the thing that changes, that willj be the thing that changes, that will actually— be the thing that changes, that will actually start to see out performance in terms of that percentage debt in the economy? growth _ percentage debt in the economy? growth is — percentage debt in the economy? growth is the kind of alexia that chancellors, shadow chancellors, all political parties say they are aiming for. perhaps the best way of putting it is, if you deliver growth, and i think we have a very strong plan to deliver much higher levels of growth and we are currently seeing, then you have choices. —— growth is the kind of elixir. you can use that growth to bring down taxes, and debt. the smart thing to do is to give yourself those choices. the measures ou have yourself those choices. the measures you have brought _ yourself those choices. the measures you have brought in _ yourself those choices. the measures you have brought in in _ yourself those choices. the measures you have brought in in all— yourself those choices. the measures you have brought in in all your- you have brought in in all your fiscal— you have brought in in all your fiscal event so far, i think the obr says they— fiscal event so far, i think the obr says they do increase the sustainable growth potential of the uk by— sustainable growth potential of the

uk by about 0.7%. you recognise that number? _ uk by about 0.7%. you recognise that number? ., . uk by about 0.7%. you recognise that number?- angela. _ uk by about 0.7%. you recognise that number?- angela. firstly, i number? correct. angela. firstly, chancellor. _ number? correct. angela. firstly, chancellor, you _ number? correct. angela. firstly, chancellor, you have _ number? correct. angela. firstly, chancellor, you have seen - number? correct. angela. firstly, chancellor, you have seen diane i chancellor, you have seen diane abbott _ chancellor, you have seen diane abbott on — chancellor, you have seen diane abbott on the _ chancellor, you have seen diane abbott on the tv— chancellor, you have seen diane abbott on the tv and _ chancellor, you have seen diane abbott on the tv and you - chancellor, you have seen diane abbott on the tv and you just i chancellor, you have seen diane i abbott on the tv and you just want to hate _ abbott on the tv and you just want to hate all— abbott on the tv and you just want to hate all black _ abbott on the tv and you just want to hate all black women _ abbott on the tv and you just want to hate all black women because i abbott on the tv and you just want i to hate all black women because she is there _ to hate all black women because she is there i_ to hate all black women because she is there. ithink— to hate all black women because she is there. i think she _ to hate all black women because she is there. i think she should _ to hate all black women because she is there. i think she should be - is there. i think she should be shot — is there. i think she should be shot mr— is there. i think she should be shot. mr frank— is there. i think she should be shot. mr frank hester. - is there. i think she should be shot. mr frank hester. was . is there. i think she should be i shot. mr frank hester. was this route _ shot. mr frank hester. was this route or— shot. mr frank hester. was this route or racist _ shot. mr frank hester. was this route or racist as _ shot. mr frank hester. was this route or racist as a _ shot. mr frank hester. was this route or racist as a comment? i shot. mr frank hester. was this| route or racist as a comment? it shot. mr frank hester. was this route or racist as a comment? it was both. it route or racist as a comment? it was both- it was _ route or racist as a comment? it was both- it was a — route or racist as a comment? it was both. it was a despicable _ both. it was a despicable comment that should not have been made. he has not apologised for being racist. he has— has not apologised for being racist. he has only— has not apologised for being racist. he has only apologised _ has not apologised for being racist. he has only apologised for - has not apologised for being racist. he has only apologised for being i he has only apologised for being route~ _ he has only apologised for being route. he— he has only apologised for being route. ., , he has only apologised for being route. ., ., , ., he has only apologised for being route. ., ., ., , ., , route. he has apologised for his comments _ route. he has apologised for his comments which _ route. he has apologised for his comments which i _ route. he has apologised for his comments which i believe i route. he has apologised for his comments which i believe were | comments which i believe were racist, and rightly so. you comments which i believe were racist, and rightly so.— racist, and rightly so. you are chancellor — racist, and rightly so. you are chancellor for _ racist, and rightly so. you are chancellor for the _ racist, and rightly so. you are chancellor for the entire i racist, and rightly so. you are i chancellor for the entire country but if _ chancellor for the entire country but if you — chancellor for the entire country but if you were _ chancellor for the entire country but if you were treasurer - chancellor for the entire country but if you were treasurer of i chancellor for the entire country but if you were treasurer of the i but if you were treasurer of the conservative _ but if you were treasurer of the conservative party _ but if you were treasurer of the conservative party would - but if you were treasurer of the conservative party would you i but if you were treasurer of the i conservative party would you return the £10 _ conservative party would you return the £10 million— conservative party would you return the £10 million that _ conservative party would you return the £10 million that this _ conservative party would you return the £10 million that this man - conservative party would you return the £10 million that this man has i the £10 million that this man has donated — the £10 million that this man has donated to — the £10 million that this man has donated to the _ the £10 million that this man has donated to the conservative i the £10 million that this man has i donated to the conservative party? i am donated to the conservative party? am not treasurer of the donated to the conservative party?“ am not treasurer of the conservative

party but i don't believe that someone should be cancelled for a comment they made in the past and for which they have apologised. but that does not make the comments any less despicable and i don't defend them. ., ., ., , _ less despicable and i don't defend them. ., . . , ,, ., less despicable and i don't defend them. ., ., ., , _ ., , them. you are happy to accept the money but — them. you are happy to accept the money but you _ them. you are happy to accept the money but you don't _ them. you are happy to accept the money but you don't defend i them. you are happy to accept the money but you don't defend the i money but you don't defend the comments _ money but you don't defend the comments l— money but you don't defend the comments-— money but you don't defend the comments. ,, . ., , ., comments. i think the comments are desicable comments. i think the comments are despicable and _ comments. i think the comments are despicable and l _ comments. i think the comments are despicable and i also _ comments. i think the comments are despicable and i also think _ comments. i think the comments are despicable and i also think the i despicable and i also think the conservative party's record on these issues speaks for itself. with the first ethnic minority prime minister, an incredibly diverse cabinet, i am minister, an incredibly diverse cabinet, iam incredibly minister, an incredibly diverse cabinet, i am incredibly proud of what my party has done to increase diversity and we stand on that record. d0 diversity and we stand on that record. ,, diversity and we stand on that record. , ., ,, diversity and we stand on that record. i. ,, ., ,, diversity and we stand on that record. ,, ,, . ,, , , record. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper— record. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person _ record. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person to _ record. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person to be - record. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person to be in i a fit and proper person to be in receipt — a fit and proper person to be in receipt of— a fit and proper person to be in receipt of hundreds _ a fit and proper person to be in receipt of hundreds of- a fit and proper person to be in receipt of hundreds of millions| a fit and proper person to be in i receipt of hundreds of millions of pounds _ receipt of hundreds of millions of pounds of— receipt of hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayer— receipt of hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayer money- receipt of hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayer money in i receipt of hundreds of millions of i pounds of taxpayer money in public contracts _ pounds of taxpayer money in public contracts given _ pounds of taxpayer money in public contracts given his _ pounds of taxpayer money in public contracts given his private - contracts given his private attitudes? _ contracts given his private attitudes? [— contracts given his private attitudes?— contracts given his private attitudes? ., ,, . ., , attitudes? i was health secretary when he- -- _ attitudes? i was health secretary when he... there _ attitudes? i was health secretary when he... there are _ attitudes? i was health secretary when he... there are quite i attitudes? i was health secretary when he... there are quite a - attitudes? i was health secretary when he... there are quite a lotl attitudes? i was health secretary. when he... there are quite a lot of black and ethnic _ when he... there are quite a lot of black and ethnic minority - when he... there are quite a lot of black and ethnic minority workers l when he... there are quite a lot of. black and ethnic minority workers in the health_ black and ethnic minority workers in the health service _ black and ethnic minority workers in the health service after _ black and ethnic minority workers in the health service after all. - black and ethnic minority workers in the health service after all. i- black and ethnic minority workers in the health service after all. i was i the health service after all. i was health secretary _

the health service after all. i was health secretary when _ the health service after all. i was health secretary when a - the health service after all. i was health secretary when a number| the health service after all.“ health secretary when a number of those contracts were given to him. first of all, no contract is ever decided by ministers, they always done at arm's length. but i believe the vast majority of the contracts he won were with individual gp surgeries because i think what he does is a piece of gp software, so they were not even... green that he has all our data? that data sits with the nhs and that's a decision gp surgeries have made in order to modernise their systems. in gp surgeries have made in order to modernise their systems.— modernise their systems. in the financial services _ modernise their systems. in the financial services sector - modernise their systems. in the financial services sector we - modernise their systems. in the | financial services sector we have regulation — financial services sector we have regulation to _ financial services sector we have regulation to back _ financial services sector we have regulation to back fit _ financial services sector we have regulation to back fit and - financial services sector we have regulation to back fit and properj regulation to back fit and proper persons — regulation to back fit and proper persons do— regulation to back fit and proper persons. do you _ regulation to back fit and proper persons. do you think— regulation to back fit and proper persons. do you think frank - regulation to back fit and proper i persons. do you think frank hester is a fit _ persons. do you think frank hester is a fit and — persons. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper _ persons. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person _ persons. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person to - persons. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person to be - persons. do you think frank hester is a fit and proper person to be in l is a fit and proper person to be in receipt _ is a fit and proper person to be in receipt of— is a fit and proper person to be in receipt of so _ is a fit and proper person to be in receipt of so many _ is a fit and proper person to be in receipt of so many hundreds - is a fit and proper person to be in receipt of so many hundreds of. receipt of so many hundreds of mitiions— receipt of so many hundreds of millions of— receipt of so many hundreds of millions of pounds _ receipt of so many hundreds of millions of pounds of— receipt of so many hundreds of| millions of pounds of taxpayers money? — millions of pounds of taxpayers money? i— millions of pounds of taxpayers mone ? ., , money? i will not defend his comments. _ money? i will not defend his comments, as _ money? i will not defend his comments, as i _ money? i will not defend his comments, as i said - money? i will not defend his comments, as i said to - money? i will not defend his comments, as i said to you. | money? i will not defend his| comments, as i said to you. i money? i will not defend his - comments, as i said to you. i think they were despicable and wrong. and he has apologised for them. and i

don't think the contracts you talk about, my understanding is most of them were granted long before those comments were made. but that is really irrelevant. the point is those comments were wrong, they were racist, he has apologised for them and i think we should accept that apology and i think that is all i have to say. apology and i think that is all i have to say-— have to say. should there be consequences _ have to say. should there be consequences for _ have to say. should there be consequences for having - have to say. should there be| consequences for having that have to say. should there be - consequences for having that kind of you or— consequences for having that kind of you or behaving _ consequences for having that kind of you or behaving in— consequences for having that kind of you or behaving in that _ consequences for having that kind of you or behaving in that manner- consequences for having that kind of you or behaving in that manner if. you or behaving in that manner if you or behaving in that manner if you are _ you or behaving in that manner if you are rich, _ you or behaving in that manner if you are rich, or— you or behaving in that manner if you are rich, or a _ you or behaving in that manner if you are rich, or a company- you or behaving in that manner ifl you are rich, or a company owner, there _ you are rich, or a company owner, there should — you are rich, or a company owner, there should be _ you are rich, or a company owner, there should be consequences? i you are rich, or a company owner, there should be consequences? [i there should be consequences? i think there should be consequences? think the consequences in there should be consequences?” think the consequences in terms there should be consequences?" think the consequences in terms of public shaming of what he has done have been pretty significant, actually. and he has apologised. it actually. and he has apologised. it has been referred to the police as welt _ has been referred to the police as well. �* . , , , has been referred to the police as well. .,, ., ., has been referred to the police as well. analysis shows that for every 10 - taxes well. analysis shows that for every 10p taxes have _ well. analysis shows that for every 10p taxes have gone _ well. analysis shows that for every 10p taxes have gone up _ well. analysis shows that for every 10p taxes have gone up in - well. analysis shows that for every 10p taxes have gone up in this - iop taxes have gone up in this pariiament— 10p taxes have gone up in this parliament you _ 10p taxes have gone up in this parliament you have _ 10p taxes have gone up in this parliament you have only - 10p taxes have gone up in this| parliament you have only given 10p taxes have gone up in this - parliament you have only given back five p~ _ parliament you have only given back five p~ at— parliament you have only given back five p~ at the — parliament you have only given back five p. at the end _ parliament you have only given back five p. at the end of— parliament you have only given back five p. at the end of this— five p. at the end of this parliament— five p. at the end of this parliament taxes- five p. at the end of this parliament taxes are -

five p. at the end of this. parliament taxes are going five p. at the end of this- parliament taxes are going to be higher— parliament taxes are going to be higher than— parliament taxes are going to be higher than they— parliament taxes are going to be higher than they have _ parliament taxes are going to be higher than they have been - parliament taxes are going to be higher than they have been as i parliament taxes are going to be higher than they have been as a i higher than they have been as a percentage _ higher than they have been as a percentage of— higher than they have been as a percentage of gdp _ higher than they have been as a percentage of gdp since - higher than they have been as a percentage of gdp since world. higher than they have been as a i percentage of gdp since world war ii. percentage of gdp since world war ii its— percentage of gdp since world war ii it's not— percentage of gdp since world war ii it's not nruch— percentage of gdp since world war ii. it's not much of— percentage of gdp since world war ii. it's not much of a _ percentage of gdp since world war ii. it's not much of a record, - percentage of gdp since world war ii. it's not much of a record, that, i ii. it's not much of a record, that, is it? _ ii. it's not much of a record, that, is it? [_ ii. it's not much of a record, that, is it? ~' ., , , . is it? i think, with great respect here, is it? i think, with great respect here. angela. _ is it? i think, with great respect here, angela, you _ is it? i think, with great respect here, angela, you should - is it? i think, with great respect here, angela, you should listenj is it? i think, with great respect i here, angela, you should listen to the people who you had in front of the people who you had in front of the committee yesterday. corston bell, who is not known for his conservative sympathies, said that the reason taxes have gone up is because of the pandemic, because of higher debt interest costs. the office for budget responsibility, david miles, pointed to the war in ukraine. —— torsten bell. i think it is right that we gave £370 billion of support to businesses during a pandemic. it stopped thousands of businesses going bust. i think the labour party supported that support wholeheartedly. we then gave a further 94 billion of support during the cost of living crisis during the ukraine war, paying about half of

people's energy bills. i'm sure you and your party supported that. but you have to be honest with people, when you have those extremely unusual global emergencies there are financial consequences. that's why i have never hidden from the fact is that it have never hidden from the fact is thatitis have never hidden from the fact is that it is more painfulfor me have never hidden from the fact is that it is more painful for me than i expect it is for you as a labour politician but i had to put up taxes, yes. and i now want to bring them down. you're not going to bring them down. you're not going to bring them down. you're not going to bring them down all in one go. it will take time but the autumn statement and in the spring budget we made a start. and tax cuts i chose were the ones that are most going to help the growth of the economy and deliver the 0.7% increase in gdp that the chair was referring to.— chair was referring to. analysis shows that _ chair was referring to. analysis shows that two _ chair was referring to. analysis shows that two thirds - chair was referring to. analysis shows that two thirds of - chair was referring to. analysis shows that two thirds of the i chair was referring to. analysis i shows that two thirds of the cost chair was referring to. analysis - shows that two thirds of the cost of the tax _ shows that two thirds of the cost of the tax reductions _ shows that two thirds of the cost of the tax reductions you _ shows that two thirds of the cost of the tax reductions you have - the tax reductions you have announced. _ the tax reductions you have announced, albeit - the tax reductions you have announced, albeit within i the tax reductions you havej announced, albeit within an the tax reductions you have - announced, albeit within an envelope that is— announced, albeit within an envelope that is rising. — announced, albeit within an envelope that is rising, are _ announced, albeit within an envelope that is rising, are actually— that is rising, are actually financed _ that is rising, are actually financed try— that is rising, are actually financed by borrowing. i

that is rising, are actually. financed by borrowing. why that is rising, are actually- financed by borrowing. why did you decide _ financed by borrowing. why did you decide that — financed by borrowing. why did you decide that you _ financed by borrowing. why did you decide that you could _ financed by borrowing. why did you decide that you could cut _ financed by borrowing. why did you decide that you could cut taxes i financed by borrowing. why did you decide that you could cut taxes andj decide that you could cut taxes and finance _ decide that you could cut taxes and finance two — decide that you could cut taxes and finance two thirds _ decide that you could cut taxes and finance two thirds of— decide that you could cut taxes and finance two thirds of those - decide that you could cut taxes and finance two thirds of those cuts i decide that you could cut taxes and finance two thirds of those cuts byl finance two thirds of those cuts by borrowing — finance two thirds of those cuts by borrowing rather— finance two thirds of those cuts by borrowing rather than _ finance two thirds of those cuts by borrowing rather than raising i finance two thirds of those cuts by| borrowing rather than raising other revenue _ borrowing rather than raising other revenue elsewhere? _ including the current year i was talking about at the autumn statement and the office for budget responsibility confirmed if you take those full six years, borrowing has not gone up. in fact, it has gone down very slightly. that is because your rule says it has to in the running for three of the programme but borrowing goes up to pay for the front—end loaded tax cuts which are conveniently ahead of the election but it does not actually come down until the very, very end of that period, does it? it until the very, very end of that period, does it?— period, does it? it is rather a convenient — period, does it? it is rather a convenient fiscal _ period, does it? it is rather a convenient fiscal rule - period, does it? it is rather a convenient fiscal rule from i period, does it? it is rather a l convenient fiscal rule from that point.

convenient fiscal rule from that oint. ., , ., , convenient fiscal rule from that oint. ., ,., , , point. the reason why it is important _ point. the reason why it is important is _ point. the reason why it is important is it _ point. the reason why it is important is it is _