Well, obviously, if we had more money then we'd be able to do more things. Of course, I fully accept that. But the idea that the UK Government could just ignore the financial inheritance that it had from the Labour Government in 2010 is absurd. Just look at the figures. Since Gordon Brown took the brakes off public spending in 2001, everything went haywire. The Labour Government failed to mend the roof whilst the sun was shining. In 2001—[Interruption.] Because in the first Labour Government—[Interruption.] No, I won't because I'm answering—I've got to finish answering this intervention before I accept another one.

The first Labour Government of Tony Blair of course followed Kenneth Clarke's spending plans, and actually public spending fell during that Labour Government as a percentage of gross domestic product. And then from 2001 it rose relentlessly, from 27 per cent in 2001 to 50 per cent of GDP by the time the financial crisis hit. So, the room for manoeuvre for dealing with the financial crisis was therefore substantially reduced. And Government spending, as a proportion of GDP, rose from 35 per cent in 2000 to 40 per cent in 2009, to 45 per cent to 2012. The idea that this could simply be ignored and there wouldn't have to be some kind of tightening of the belt because of the overspending earlier on is just wholly unrealistic.

So, the big problem that we've got here is, yes, there isn't enough money, but how are we going to get more money? The only way we'll get more money is by harbouring the resources that we've got and diverting from some spending priorities to others. If the Government spends £150 million, nearly, on a planning inquiry on the M4, which then doesn't take place, that is a waste of money, and there are all sorts of other wastes of money that we could name as well. [Interruption.] I haven't got much time, but I will give way.