Generate an appropriate single-sentence summary for the given text such that it includes the main topic of the text.

[EX Q]: Faisal IslamEconomics editor@faisalislamon Twitter But the new jobs support scheme is a fraction of what we have seen over the past few months, and is concentrated on those deemed to be in "viable" jobs. It cannot prevent a sharp rise in unemployment in the coming months in "non-viable" jobs. Indeed, the economic impact of this package of several billion pounds is likely to be far outweighed, even by this week's announcement that the UK faces a six-month "new normal" of social restrictions. The sight of Chancellor Rishi Sunak flanked by the Trade Unions Congress and the Confederation of British Industry bosses at Number 11 was meant to show the country that a non-ideological innovation to protect livelihoods was on the way. It is an echo of German Chancellor Angela Merkel locking the heads of the equivalent organisations in a hotel for two days in order to come up with the "short-time work" policy, upon which the new jobs support scheme is based. It will be possible to claim the coronavirus job retention bonus for reemploying furloughed workers, too. It has been tailored for the UK's more flexible jobs market. The chancellor has kept a careful eye on schemes from all around the world. But the size of the scheme also reflects the phenomenal amount of borrowing that the government has done, and will continue to have to do, in terms of lost tax revenue as the recovery is subdued by ongoing restrictions. Funding conditions for government remain benign. But the Treasury is keeping an eye on how sensitive the public finances are now to even a small increase in market interest rates. The Treasury has extended the bridge of support it put in place in March to cover the next six months. But the new scheme requires everybody to chip in. That will be too much for many employers. We are about to find out just how many.
[EX A]: The chancellor's statement is a radical attempt to provide a shot in the arm to the jobs market - at a very difficult time.

[EX Q]: Plans for the 300 rental homes have been released by developers UK Regeneration. The company will buy the eight-acre site from Derby Hospitals NHS Trust and plans to rename it the Nightingale Quarter. The famous nurse helped develop the hospital during the 19th Century and is commemorated by a statue on the site. UK Regeneration said it would keep the statue, plus another statue of Queen Victoria, who visited the hospital. It will also incorporate two towers from the old hospital into the development. The scheme, which will also include shops and restaurants, has been called an "urban village" by the developer. UK Regeneration said the rented homes would be for people who did not want or could not afford a mortgage. Outline permission for the scheme was approved by the city council in 2012, along with an application to put a supermarket on the site. Slight concerns Alan Grimadell, vice chairman of the Derby Civic Society, said: "It's an interesting development. "I welcome the fact they are going to keep the statues and the towers and call it the Florence Nightingale Quarter. "I have slight concerns over the supermarket. The centre of Derby struggled when Westfield was built. It took business away. Now the whole of that area is being developed in a big way." The site was home to the Derbyshire General Infirmary, which became the Derbyshire Royal Infirmary. Many of the buildings have been empty since the development of the Royal Derby Hospital in 2009. Derek Conway, of Derby Hospitals NHS Trust, said: "We have land and buildings we no longer use. We put forward a development that would serve Derby for the future." He said money from the sale of the land would be reinvested in health services.
[EX A]: A hospital famous for its association with Florence Nightingale is to be redeveloped as housing.

[EX Q]: By Mark KinverEnvironment reporter Increased CO2 allows trees to develop physiological characteristics, such as greater foliage, that can cope with higher temperatures. But researchers warn that a break in the temperature-CO2 increase ratio could trigger mortality in forests. The findings appear in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "Nobody had really considered incorporating the ability of trees, the forests, to adjust to novel conditions and to acclimate," explained co-author John Sperry from the University of Utah. "So it felt like we were bringing in two new approaches to this longstanding question of whether CO2 or warming were going to play out in the future." Delicate balancing act Higher levels of atmospheric CO2 allow trees to consume relatively less water and photosynthesise more, whereas increased temperatures result in trees consuming more water and photosynthesising less. Using a unique model that took into account the trees' physiology, Prof Sperry and his colleagues reached a rather surprising conclusion. "What's interesting is that it is not the magnitude of the CO2 increase or the magnitude of the warming, it was the ratio of the two," he told BBC News. "For example, it was interesting to see that the low emissions scenario is actually predicted to be closer to the tipping point; closer to the critical ratio than the higher emissions scenario. "That's simply because in the lower emissions scenario, the ratio of CO2 increase for warming is lower." Co-author Martin Venturas said the team did not find many differences between species in the study, which covered 20 locations across the mainland of the US, and included both deciduous and conifer species. But Dr Venturas added: "There is still a huge amount of uncertainty, despite the fact that we have reduced uncertainty related to the physiology of the forest." One such uncertainty, he explained, was precipitation levels in a changing climate and how this change affected soil moisture levels. However, the researchers said the study findings helped move the debate forward. "If you were coming at this naively, you would think the more emissions, the worse the forest was going to be affected because it was going to get warmer," observed Prof Sperry. "But it is really the ratio of the two that is important. You can have a massive shift in CO2 and warming but as long as they travel along that neutral ratio, the force is physiologically neutral and you'll have no response."
[EX A]:
Forests can cope with a warming world if - and only if - temperature rises increase in line with increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide.

