“I accept criticism from members of the public on the Dome but not from him,” Mr Blair said. “When Labour was in opposition we were asked for our support for the Dome. We were told that if we did not support it, thousands of jobs would be at risk.”Mr Blair accused Mr Hague, the former secretary of state for Wales, of denying the part he had played in the Dome as a member of a cabinet committee, GEN36, set up under the last government to plan the Millennium Festival. The group, chaired by Michael Heseltine, took the early decisions about the Dome’s design, planning, management and likely visitor numbers.”The only difference between the robbers caught at the Dome yesterday and you is that the Tories are never caught at the scene of the crime,” Mr Blair told Mr Hague.Ministers who have seen a draft of the report said that it will not be a “demolition job” on Lord Falconer or the Government, and that some of the mistakes will be traced back to the previous administration.Virginia Bottomley, the former secretary of state for national heritage, chaired the Millennium Commission, which estimated in 1995 that between 15 million and 30 million people would visit the Dome This was cut to between 10.9 million and 16 million in 1996. The final 12 million official target was cut to 6 million amid this year’s financial problems.Ministers will also counterattack against Peter Ainsworth, the Tory spokesman on culture and another strong critic, by recalling that he served as parliamentary private secretary to Ms Bottomley.While Mr Blair may not welcome the NAO report, he may take comfort from its finding that the project was completed on time and within budget.The Tories will dismiss Labour’s counter-attack as a smokescreen. “The problems were not with the building but what Labour put inside it,” a Tory source said. “Remember that Peter Mandelson visited Disneyland when he was minister for the Dome.”.

Parents, including single mothers, received a boost yesterday with a package of measures designed to cut the tax burden on families. Parents, including single mothers, received a boost yesterday with a package of measures designed to cut the tax burden on families.
Gordon Brown exceeded expectations when he said that about five million families would gain a £520-a-year tax cut in the next Budget, and announced plans to increase the proposed £8.50-a-week tax cut for families to £10 from the next Budget.He said the new family tax cut, which replaces the married couple’s allowance, would form part of a “new integrated system of child support”. Parents would receive the £10-a-week tax cut on top of child benefit.In a measure aimed at single parents, Mr Brown extended the New Deal jobs programme to help back to work 150,000 more lone parents who do not receive income support.He said that his proposals would mean that the tax burden on a typical family would fall below 20 per cent, to the lowest level since 1972. The tax burden on the average family falls from 20.3 per cent to 18.6 per cent, he announcedMr Brown said his plans for families formed part of a package of measures introduced by the Government to halve child poverty in the next decade.Charities campaigning for rights of single parents welcomed the extra cash in the Chancellor’s announcements. The National Council for One Parent Families said that Mr Brown had presented “a great Budget for lone parents”.The council’s policy and research officer, Alison Garnham, said: “The New Deal will be extended to single-parent families who, for whatever reason, are unable to claim Income Support. These 150,000 lone parents will benefit greatly from the help available. It’s very good news – they’ll be very pleased that they can get the help that everyone else receives.”However, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children said that more was required from government to end child poverty.”We need a coherent national strategy for preventing and eradicating child poverty,” said a spokesman.

“At its core must be a new minimum income standard to maintain the health and well-being of the most vulnerable children.”. Two concessions were offered by the Chancellor to the agricultural industry in acknowledgement of their key role in September’s fuel protests. Two concessions were offered by the Chancellor to the agricultural industry in acknowledgement of their key role in September’s fuel protests.
Gordon Brown said he intended to introduce a freeze on duty on red diesel – a fuel specially dyed so that it can only be used by farmers. He also proposed abolishing vehicle excise duty on tractors and other agricultural vehicles.Ben Gill, president of the National Farmers’ Union, said that together with the 3p cut in diesel, the proposals would mean positive benefits for hard-pressed farming communities. But Mr Gill expressed his fears that some farmers would still feel frustration that Mr Brown had not offered a larger cut in fuel taxes.He said the abolition of vehicle excise duty for tractors and agricultural machinery would save farmers £40 per tractor – £9m in total. A freeze on red diesel duty would also help reduce the pressure on farming businesses.He added: “I must, however, point out that the farming industry is in such a state that it is inevitable that many will be distressed that there have not been bigger cuts in fuel tax when it so clearly would have helped to alleviate their problems.”Brynle Williams, the Welsh farmer at the forefront of the protests, said there would be no return to blockade the oil refineries, but described concessions as “an insult” to industry and the public.He said: “I believe the Chancellor is trying to drive a wedge between the haulage industry, agriculture and the general public and I don’t believe he is going to succeed The general public will see through this for what it is. He has tried to seduce us with tokens like three pence off a litre, but it is not going to work.”He said there would be no return to refinery blockades, but he could not speak for “hard-liners”.

He added: “This is a final slap in the face for the general public and Mr Brown is insulting our integrity.”. The Chancellor gambled that households would rein in their spending plans fast enough to keep interest and mortgage rates on hold until the next general election. The Chancellor gambled that households would rein in their spending plans fast enough to keep interest and mortgage rates on hold until the next general election.
In his pre-Budget report (PBR) Gordon Brown forecast that economic growth would slow next year, as it must do if the Bank of England is to keep its hand off the trigger of the interest-rate gun.”Our choice is to lock in the stability by prudently cutting debt and debt interest payments to keep inflation and interest rates low,” he told a packed House of Commons.The PBR showed GDP growth slowing from 3 per cent this year to between 2.25 and 2.75 per cent in each of the next three years. This is unchanged from the March Budget.It also brings growth down to the 2.5 per cent level using a mid-point of the forecast range and the Government believes the economy can grow without triggering inflationUnsurprisingly, inflation is forecast to meet the Government’s official target of 2.5 per cent next year and stay there until at least 2003. The key to this positive outlook for growth and inflation is the output gap – the difference between the actual output and trend output measured as a percentage of trend output.A year ago this was estimated to be 0.25 per cent, but the figure was revised to 0.5 per cent in the March Budget, with a warning attached that the economy could “not afford to out-run its trend growth rate in future years”.The Government now estimates the output gap to be at “around 0.5 per cent”.The Chancellor continued: “Strong output growth can be accommodated for a period. However, as the Monetary Policy Committee has made clear, it is important that growth in aggregate demand does not outpace potential output growth for long.”The main force behind the slowdown is household spending, which was rising by 4.25 per cent in 1999. It is forecast to slow to between 2.25 and 2.5 per cent in 2001 and then to between 1.75 and 2.25 per cent in 2002 before climbing back.In contrast, government spending will accelerate sharply from 2.25 per cent this year to 4 per cent for each of the following two years and 3.5 per cent in 2003 The Treasury is more cautious than independent forecasters.

The average forecast from 29 economists shows growth hitting 3 per cent for this year but slowing to 2.7 per cent next year. They believe private consumption will slow only to 2.8 per cent.Philip Shaw, UK economist at Investec in London, said: “It is a very benign economic scenario, with domestic demand moderating and an output gap that is positive but moving towards zero.”He said that while the overall picture supported the Chancellor’s stated aim of lowering interest rates, the greatest threat was from the public finances. “They tend to support our view that rates will have to rise at some point,” he said.The Government is also relying on the continuation of a benign labour market, with unemployment falling without triggering a surge in inflation.For the first time it gave a figure for the sustainable rate of unemployment. It said this had fallen from 7 per cent three years ago to 5.5 per cent now – only just above the current level of 5.3 per cent.The most significant change between the Budget and the PBR was in the outlook for the UK’s trade position. Exports are now expected to rise 8 per cent this year and by 7 to 7.25 per cent in 2001 before slowing to around 6 per cent in 2002 and 2003. These forecasts are as much as 2 percentage points higher than in March.As a result, the balance of payments deficit comes at £14.5bn and £15bn for this year and next – £5bn better than in the March Budget.A Treasury spokesman said this was based on a positive outlook for world demand. “The risks are well known,” he said.Nick Stamenkovic, a senior European analyst at Nomura International, said: “I am a little bit concerned about the global picture.