LABOUR’S John McDonnell came under fire for refusing to say how much it would cost to service the borrowing needed to fund Labour's infrastructure plans.
The Shadow Chancellor said the financial impact would be "minimal" as the projects would pay for themselves through increased employment and tax revenue.
Pressed repeatedly on how much extra would need to be spent on servicing debt under a Labour government, Mr McDonnell told the BBC: "The type of journalism where you go into an interview and someone asks you a question on a particular figure, to be honest, is a trite form of journalism.
"That's why we have iPads, and that's why I have advisers etc."
Mr McDonnell said borrowing was needed to pay for essential infrastructure like increased house-building.
"What we would do is ensure that day-to-day spending was not paid for by borrowing. It will be paid for through our tax system, and that means stop the tax giveaway to the rich and the corporations.
"We would only invest for our infrastructure and that investment would pay for itself on the basis of the growth that we would achieve on those. And that's a one-to-one return.
"Because immediately that infrastructure puts more people back into work, they pay their taxes and as a result of that you are able to cover your costs."
But Steve Barclay, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, said: "Labour refuse to come clean on how much taxpayers would have to pay for their borrowing binge.
"Labour would add hundreds of billions more to the country's debt, meaning higher taxes on workers and less money for our schools and hospitals."
Sir Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: "It's worrying that the Shadow Chancellor hasn't done his sums or perhaps he has done his sums and he realises they're so horrendous that he's unwilling to acknowledge that his version of a Labour government would put the country into financial difficulties.
"We start from a bad position. The Budget warned of increased borrowing, dependent on the 'kindness of strangers'. A Labour government focused on massive nationalisation would make things even worse," he added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel