thatis support the obvious way to do that is to look at the unexpected benefit that has come the way of the big oil and gas firms, isn t it? it is come the way of the big oil and gas firms, isn t it? gas firms, isn t it? it is to appoint gas firms, isn t it? it is to appoint but gas firms, isn t it? it is to appoint but you gas firms, isn t it? it is to appoint but you also - gas firms, isn t it? it is to appoint but you also havej gas firms, isn t it? it is to i appoint but you also have to offer the small once you have done an awful lot of the exploration in the north sea basin, some form of incentive to look for more resources. this energy crisis is not going to go away, so i think you need to go away, so i think you need to get business on board, particularly energy companies. yes, they have been doing very, very welcome and certainly he has addressed that, particularly with the suppliers by implementing, and probably on that 45% on profits over £75 per megawatt hour, but i
on squeezed middle earners. earlier lindsayjudge, research director at the organisation, gave me her reaction to the statement. it was an incredibly difficult line for the chancellor to walk yesterday. he had to fill his fiscal hole, as he spoke about many times, but also not make the recession worse and also not make household incomes worse, particularly in cost of living crisis. i think the first thing to say is the chancellor did a relatively good job when it comes to the poorest households in the uk. so, we saw the uprating of benefits announced to be fixed with inflation next year and not earnings, as some people had suggested. and also, of course, we are seeing a fairly healthy uplift in the national living wage come april next year. but it is this middle group we are particularly concerned about. and the reason why is because the chancellor put a lot of focus on tax rises but he didn t do them by raising the rates of tax which would hit those on higher incomes more, he s done
chancellor put a lot of focus on tax rises but he didn t do than by raising the rates of tax which would hit those on higher incomes more, he s done it mainly through freezing the allowances, and that means more people over time are pulled into higher tax bands. people over time are pulled into higher tax bands. yes, i think you are saying higher tax bands. yes, i think you are saying that higher tax bands. yes, i think you are saying that tax higher tax bands. yes, i think you are saying that tax rises higher tax bands. yes, i think you are saying that tax rises would - are saying that tax rises would deliver a 3.7% income hit two typical households. i wonder if you could explain a little bit more about what you mean about typical households and also how you reach that figure of 3.7%. by, households and also how you reach that figure of 3.7%. that figure of 3.7%. a typical household that figure of 3.7%. a typical household is that figure of 3.7%. a typical household is y