Finance committee  No, we have a higher nominal GDP projection relative to the government. That's $8 billion, and that's—

Finance committee  Why? Our projection is different because we have a different profile for GDP growth over the five-year period.

Finance committee  Do you want to answer this one?

Finance committee  There was a total of a $9.1 billion reduction in direct program spending over the five-year period. That consists of many different things, but $9.1 billion is the total.

Finance committee  What we have done in annex D of our report is we have shown all the measures that have been taken in 2013, plus the measures that were taken in budget 2012, and we have measured the impact of all those over the five years. The impact on jobs for budget 2013, by year 2016, is abo

Finance committee  Fifteen thousand. So we are actually projecting an increase in jobs over the forecast period. What that 14,000 means is that the level of jobs would be 14,000 more had the government not introduced the measures it introduced in budget 2013.

Finance committee  The impact on GDP level, not the growth, will be relatively small. It's about 0.12%, I believe.

Finance committee  What we are estimating is a total of about 67,000 jobs. For all the measures from budget 2012 through to the update of 2012, and then budget 2013, it's a total of 67,000.

Finance committee  Sorry, GDP reduction relative to.... I said about 0.5% for the level of GDP.

Finance committee  We are expecting 1.5% growth in 2013, rising to 1.9%. Actually, for both of those two years, growth will be less than the potential growth. The output gap, that's the excess capacity, will actually increase over those two years. Beyond that, the economy will grow much faster. W

Finance committee  As relatively weaker than the potential growth in the economy.

Finance committee  The unemployment rate will stay relatively stable for the next couple of years, and then gradually decline to about 6.3% by the end of the forecast.

Finance committee  We are estimating that the structural surplus by 2017 will remain on the plus side without those measures. It would be a much smaller—

Finance committee  Sir, when we do our projections, we don't go sector by sector, company by company. We provide—

Finance committee  As I said, sir, we don't go sector by sector because there could also be a reduction in other sectors. We don't do that. It's an aggregate forecast.