£385 and come to a keenness of some of £38.5 billion. they divided that by the number of households in the uk with at least one person working them 18 million and that produces a figure of £2000. but this morning a letter emerged from the chief civil servant at the treasury from the 3rd ofjune casting further doubt on the basis of that figure. it says this, £38 billion figure used by the conservative party publication includes cost beyond those produced by the civil service and published online by hm treasury. any costings derived from other sources or produced by other organisations should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service. and finally i have reminded ministers and advisers that they should be the case. now this is important because the treasury is saying it did produce some costings of labour policies but it did not produce that £38.5 billion figure. that is because other figures were used by the tories to get that overall total. therefore the £2000
but as i say, first, let s hearfrom bbc verify and nick to explain those figures. let s have a look at how the conservatives reached their figures. it was this, 38 5p black hole, and they have basically claimed divided that by the number of working families in the country. a £38.5 billion gap. the conservatives have divided that by the number of working households and come up with their £2,000 figure. note: this is over a four year period, so about £500 a year. the prime minister said last night this was the work of independent treasury officials. it is true that treasury did most of the the sums, but political advisors who work for the chancellor were the ones who set the terms of the calculations by making assumptions about labour s policies. this is the policy list the conservative party produced and how much
a prime minister with his back against the wall, desperately trying to defend 14 years of failure, resorting, and it was a flash of his character, an insight into his character, to lies. and i don t say that lightly. the political aftershocks of last night s debate, as the arguments get angrier. bbc verify s nick eardley has been looking into the figures and is here to explain more about them. let s have a look at how the conservatives reached their number, how they reached their calculations. it was this, £38.5 billion black hole is what they claim, and they have basically divided that by the number of working families in the country and come up
is important. the treasury is saying that it did produce some costings of labour s policies, but that it did not produce that £38.5 billion figure. that is because at the figures were used by the tories to get to that overall total. therefore, the £2000 figure of suppose it tax rises under a future labour government, a figure which derives from the overall total, also cannot be attributed to the treasury. and by the way, the assumption fed into the costings of labour s policies that the treasury did produce were based on assumptions fed to them by political special advisers, and some of those assumptions are questionable. so thatis assumptions are questionable. so that is another reason to be wary of this £2000 per household tax claim which so dominated last night s leaders debate. back to you. thank you very much. the post office inquiry continues in earnest today
labour s additional spending commitments over the next four years. they can do a cumulative same of £385 years. they can do a cumulative same of 58.5 billion. they have then divided this figure by the number of households in the uk with one person in work, around 18 million, and that produces the figure of £2000 per household. but this morning, a letter emerged from the chief civil servant at the treasury, written to labour on the 3rd ofjune, which distances the treasury from that calculation, and it says this. the 13 point £38.5 billion figure includes costs beyond those provided by the civil service and published online by hm treasury. and it adds, any costings derived from other sources or produced by other organisations should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service. and i have reminded ministers and advises that this should be the case. now, this