Commentary on the issues raised in the pre-Budget report.

Forum Response: Britannic Money

Rachel Ramsden of Britannic Money, told ePolitix.com: "First time buyers in London and the South East, already hit by sky high house prices, have been dealt a further blow by the Government's failure to update the zero threshold for stamp duty."

"We are disappointed by the news that the government plans to abolish stamp duty for house purchases up to £150,000 in deprived areas only. The zero threshold for stamp duty has not increased since March 1993. Had it been indexed to the rise in line with house prices, it would now be £108,000. It is the first time buyers who already have a difficult task in climbing up the property ladder, who will be penalised by this decision."

Forum Response: Construction Products Association

Allan Wilén, economics director at the Construction Products Association told ePolitix.com:"The Association is relieved that the chancellor has re-affirmed the government's commitment to the spending plans announced in last year's Comprehensive Spending Review. Furthermore, in line with our Pre-Budget Report submission, he is prepared to fund these by increasing borrowing rather than imposing higher taxes at least in the short term."

"The Association is disappointed, however, that the chancellor has failed to take the opportunity to develop a number of specific measures proposed in its Pre-Budget Submission to support investment in the built environment, to improve industry performance and protect the environment."

Forum Response: Institute of Directors

George Cox, director general of the Institute of Directors told ePolitix.com: "The chancellor is holding fast to economic stability in difficult times. That is very important for business, but we must not ignore the dangers ahead. Public spending cannot rise faster than economic growth over the long term without tax rises. And if businesses are to produce the economic growth which the country will need, they must be set free from the regulatory and administrative burden under which they now labour."

Forum Response: Timber Trade Federation

A spokesman for the Timber Trade Federation told ePolitix.com: "The pre budget report sees both the economy and the public finances in relatively good shape, although we will have to await the real economic decisions in the budget and the comprehensive spending review next year. The chancellor's extremely heavy hint that taxation will go up to pay for improvements in public services is extremely worrying given that business already faces high levels of taxation, a congested transport system and is being smothered by red tape."

The chancellor has repeatedly rejected chances to rationalise and simplify the tax system. The pre budget statement does seem to rely on the most optimistic assumptions regarding economic growth, which could easily be thrown by a poorer than expected performance in any forthcoming global recession. This could lead to a deficit or unwelcome higher taxes."

Forum Response: Sport England

A spokesman for Sport England told ePolitix.com: "clearly the Chancellor is committed to revitalising the NHS. However, we were disappointing that sport and the promotion of healthy living seems to be missing from the Treasury's strategy on the NHS."

"It is important that government sees sport as a way not just to promote social inclusion, but also as a means to improve health levels in the country. But to do this effectively we need the resources and that's where Treasury has a key role to play."

Forum Response: Royal National Institute for Deaf People

A spokesperson for the RNID told ePolitix.com: "A fraction of the billion pounds allocated to health would revolutionise the lives of Britain's 2 million hearing aids users. Ministers have accepted that there are benefits from digital hearing aids. It is now time that they are made available to all."

Forum Response: The King's Fund

A spokesman for the King's Fund told ePolitix.com: "We welcome the government's clear decision to bolster NHS funding from general taxation. This is the fairest and most efficient way of funding health care. We also welcome the chancellor's commitment to raising health spending by £1 billion next year, and the emphasis in the Treasury report on significant and sustained increases in NHS funding through taxation for the forseeable future."

"Increases in NHS funding take many years to bear fruit. Because health care is dependent upon skilled labour, increasing NHS capacity depends on recruiting and training extra people in the health professions and retaining existing staff through improved pay, career opportunities and working conditions. We may, therefore, have to wait some time before the signs of improvement become visible.""It is equally important, though, that any rises in health service spending are matched proportionately in social care. Earlier this year, we warned of a looming crisis in care services without a major boost in resources. It is already evident that social services struggle to keep up with NHS activity rates. If social care spending falls any further behind the NHS, we can expect to see more and more people admitted to hospital for avoidable illnesses and injuries and more delayed discharges. To keep pace, it needs an extra £700 million each year over and above the sum the government has already pledged."

Forum Response: Leonard Cheshire

Rob Banks, parliamentary officer at Leonard Cheshire, told ePolitix.com: "The chancellor's pledge of an extra £1 billion for 2002-2003 for the NHS is welcome; but will there be any extra funding for social care services?"

"The Treasury has announced a series of cross cutting reviews to make sure that social exclusion is tackled and people's quality of life is improved. If the chancellor is serious about reaching these excellent goals, he will make sure there is more funding for social care as well as health care."

"We want to see two urgent problems tackled. First of all, he should scrap personal care charges for disabled and older people. Secondly, he should ensure that cash is available to improve the range of social care and support services on offer. The government's new care standards are good news - but they need proper funding."

"A decently funded system of social care and support that is available without charge will mean less strain on the NHS. This means less expensive medical intervention and fewer blocked beds."

Forum Response: Unison

Dave Prentis, general secretary of Unison, told ePolitix.com: "We welcome the extra cash for the National Health Service and the commitment to the principles that a publicly funded NHS is best for Britain. Those two announcements should go some way to restore confidence that our health service will receive significant amounts of investment to deliver quality patient care."

"But it is vital that steps are taken to ensure that the cash reaches front line care as soon as possible. It would be a tragedy if it remained unspent as it did last year, or that it becomes tied up in unwieldy long term private contracts. Public service workers are ready to deliver given the investment, given the chance."

"The chancellor has laid the foundations to announce increased investment in our public services next year and we hope that this is the purpose of his steady hand."

"There is good news for Britain's pensioners, but we would ask the chancellor to look again at linking the basic state pension to earnings as he has done with the minimum income guarantee."

Forum Response: Federation of Small Business

John Walker, policy chairman of the Federation of Small Business told ePolitix.com: "We are hoping for a hard-hitting report from Patrick Carter on payroll burdens to benefit employers busy collecting taxes and paying benefits on behalf of the government. The Inland Revenue estimates that compliance costs per employee are £288 per annum in the 1-4 employee size group, compared to as little as £5 for 5,000+ group."

"We welcomed the imaginative proposal to introduce a new flat rate scheme because this is the one proposal with real substance. We have been pushing for VAT simplification over many years and a flat rate will give real benefits to small businesses, possibly as high as the Chancellor's estimate of £1,000."

"We welcomed the chancellor's attempts to help the road haulage industry by charging foreign lorries for using the British road system. The FSB is however calling for a more fundamental review of fuel taxes to give the road-haulage sector long-term help."

"We also welcomed the proposals for in-work training tax credits. The government needs to go further in recognising the in-house, informal training offered by small businesses. The fact that the tax credits are for training in the workplace is good news, but employers don't want inappropriate courses imposed on them, and such training has to be demand led."

"We believe that the chancellor's proposals to reduce capital gains tax on business assets will be welcomed by family-owned businesses in particular. The prediction that three quarters of businesses will pay the 10 pence rate will help small owners handing down their businesses to future generations."

"Despite the chancellor's welcomed moves to introduce a tax credit for firms using environmentally friendly technology, we wanted to see the total abolition of the climate change levy. This levy is evidently hurting the very manufacturing firms we need to encourage."

"We are always mindful that the chancellor's speech is followed by more detailed information which we shall be scrutinising closely."

Forum Response: Help The Aged"

"Pensioners have edged up the agenda as a political priority, and will welcome the extension of the £200 Winter Fuel Payment, and the modest guarantee on the uprating of the state pension. However, the chancellor's 'big idea', the Pension Credit, whilst apparently generous, is complex and arbitrary, and draws half of our older population - 5.4 million people - into means testing. We remain unconvinced that that this is the right way forward."