Professor John McHale:

They are the quite different areas. To take the middle one on growth first, we have endorsed the growth projections underlying the stability programme and, as such, we do not have a significant issue with those. We produce our own benchmark forecasts which are a bit different, but certainly the Government's projections are within what we consider to be an endorsable range. Once we look beyond 2016, the Government is over-complying with the fiscal rules. The problem is not that it is not complying; it is actually bringing down the structural deficit by more than 1% of GDP per year and is well above the required level of 0.6%. Our problem after 2016 is that the projections are not based on a plan. For instance, we know the Government has a stated intention to have tax cuts post-2016, but those tax cuts are not built into the projections at all. A matter that came up before and which Deputy Boyd Barrett raised again is that on the expenditure side we know there are underlying demographic pressures and other pressures on Government spending which are not built into the projections post-2016 or certainly they are not adequately built in. It leads to the projection that non-interest spending as a share of GDP will fall by 5% of GDP over that period, which is not credible. That is really what our problem is post-2016. It is not non-compliance with the rules, but there is no proper plan based on proper projections, particularly on the expenditure side.