§ Mr. Lawsonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will revalue, at 1978 survey prices, tables 1 and 12 of the Public Expenditure White Paper, Command Paper No. 7439.

§ Mr. Joel Barnett, pursuant to his reply [Official Report, 15 February 1979; Vol. 962, c. 636], gave the following reply:

There is insufficient information on prices for 1978–79 to make such a revaluation worth while.

§ Mr. Lawsonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will publish estimates of the ratios of public expenditure to gross domestic product consistent with table 3 of the public expenditure White Paper Cmnd. Paper No. 7439, for the years 1979–80 to 1982–83 implied by the growth assumptions for gross domestic product of cases A to C described in the White Paper;

(2) if he will publish estimates of the ratios of public expenditure to gross domestic product consistent with table 3 of Cmnd. Paper No. 7439 for the years 1979–80 to 1982–83 assuming gross domestic product growth from 1977 to 1983 (a) at 0.4 per cent. per annum as recorded for 1973 to 1977 in table 6 of Cmnd. Paper No. 7439 and (b) at 1 per cent. per annum.

§ Mr. Joel Barnett, pursuant to his replies [Official Report, 15 February 1979; Vol. 962, c. 636], gave the following reply:

Ratios for forward years of total public expenditure to gross domestic product implied by the public expenditure plans in Cmnd. 7439 would be affected by the relative movement of costs between the public sector and the economy as a whole—the "relative price effect"—the amount of shortfall in expenditure, as well as the growth of gross domestic product (GDP).

Using the measure of the relative price effect in the White Paper consistent with case B, and the growth of GDP in that case, the ratio of total public expenditure—less 160W the general allowance for shortfall—would be 42 per cent. for 1979–80 and 41½ per cent. for 1980–81. I regret that the other figures sought are not available.