This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/30/the-guardian-view-on-the-secret-brexit-assessment-government-in-denial
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| The Guardian view on the secret Brexit assessment: government in denial | The Guardian view on the secret Brexit assessment: government in denial |
| (about 2 hours later) | |
| Tue 30 Jan 2018 18.21 GMT | Tue 30 Jan 2018 18.21 GMT |
| Last modified on Wed 31 Jan 2018 00.15 GMT | |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| View more sharing options | View more sharing options |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Close | Close |
| The document is official, up to date and damning about a major government policy. Predictably, therefore, the government’s response on Tuesday was to dismiss its own EU exit analysis as being of no account whatever. But how can this be so? The document leaked to Buzzfeed this week was prepared this month, January 2018. It deals with the economic cost of leaving the European Union. And it contains no scenario for Britain after Brexit that does not leave the country worse off than it is now. | The document is official, up to date and damning about a major government policy. Predictably, therefore, the government’s response on Tuesday was to dismiss its own EU exit analysis as being of no account whatever. But how can this be so? The document leaked to Buzzfeed this week was prepared this month, January 2018. It deals with the economic cost of leaving the European Union. And it contains no scenario for Britain after Brexit that does not leave the country worse off than it is now. |
| We do not know – partly because the government will not say and partly because it is divided on the answer – what kind of economic relationship Theresa May wants with the EU after Brexit. But the Whitehall document models three distinctly different scenarios. In the first, with no deal, UK economic growth would be 8% lower over the next 15 years than currently projected. In the second, a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, growth would be 5% lower. In the third, with Britain remaining, Norway-style, in the European Economic Area, growth would be lower by 2%. Remember also that the trend against which these figures are calculated is itself already well below the pre-2008 crash trajectory. | We do not know – partly because the government will not say and partly because it is divided on the answer – what kind of economic relationship Theresa May wants with the EU after Brexit. But the Whitehall document models three distinctly different scenarios. In the first, with no deal, UK economic growth would be 8% lower over the next 15 years than currently projected. In the second, a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, growth would be 5% lower. In the third, with Britain remaining, Norway-style, in the European Economic Area, growth would be lower by 2%. Remember also that the trend against which these figures are calculated is itself already well below the pre-2008 crash trajectory. |
| The impact, in other words, would be bad, worse, or worse still. These would be the only choices. There would be no good economic impact. Almost every sector of the economy included in the analysis would be negatively affected. So would every region of the UK. The civil service authors spell these sectors out in clear terms: chemicals, clothing, manufacturing, food and drink, motor cars and retail. These are all major sectors, generating large numbers of exports, jobs and taxes to pay for public services. All will decline, making it even harder to invest in schools, infrastructure and the NHS. The hardest hit regions would be the north-east, the West Midlands and Northern Ireland. | The impact, in other words, would be bad, worse, or worse still. These would be the only choices. There would be no good economic impact. Almost every sector of the economy included in the analysis would be negatively affected. So would every region of the UK. The civil service authors spell these sectors out in clear terms: chemicals, clothing, manufacturing, food and drink, motor cars and retail. These are all major sectors, generating large numbers of exports, jobs and taxes to pay for public services. All will decline, making it even harder to invest in schools, infrastructure and the NHS. The hardest hit regions would be the north-east, the West Midlands and Northern Ireland. |
| But all this would be offset by all those free trade deals with the rest of the world, would it not? Dream on, for here the nightmare gets worse. Even if Britain made a bilateral trade deal with the US and was able to roll its EU-secured global trading terms into other bilaterals, the impact would be tiny. A trade deal with the US – which since the US is the stronger economy would be concluded on terms favourable to America – would be worth an extra 0.2% to the economy in the long term. Trade deals with other countries like China (where Mrs May arrives on Wednesday), India, Australia, the Gulf states and those in south-east Asia would add 0.1% to 0.4% all taken together. | But all this would be offset by all those free trade deals with the rest of the world, would it not? Dream on, for here the nightmare gets worse. Even if Britain made a bilateral trade deal with the US and was able to roll its EU-secured global trading terms into other bilaterals, the impact would be tiny. A trade deal with the US – which since the US is the stronger economy would be concluded on terms favourable to America – would be worth an extra 0.2% to the economy in the long term. Trade deals with other countries like China (where Mrs May arrives on Wednesday), India, Australia, the Gulf states and those in south-east Asia would add 0.1% to 0.4% all taken together. |
| Challenged on these assessments in the Commons on Tuesday, the Brexit minister, Steve Baker, was utterly cavalier. The Buzzfeed story was a selective interpretation of a preliminary analysis, he said. Yet even if that charge is right, these findings are not just shocking but wholly at odds with the government’s message. Not surprisingly, several Conservative MPs joined the opposition parties in giving voice to completely legitimate concerns about the impact on the country and their own voters. Brexit stirs passions that are hard to alter. Many want Britain to move on. The public’s cynicism towards politics amid cheap claims about fake news and project fear makes reasoned debate on things like impact assessments difficult. When low paid work pervades too many lives, dire warnings about “the economy” can sound like a concern for the rich. Yet this assessment affects everyone. It makes it harder for a future government that was on their side to deliver. It would make poor Britons poorer. The government acts as if it has a blank cheque to vandalise the economy in Brexit’s name. The fight to stop that must not falter. | Challenged on these assessments in the Commons on Tuesday, the Brexit minister, Steve Baker, was utterly cavalier. The Buzzfeed story was a selective interpretation of a preliminary analysis, he said. Yet even if that charge is right, these findings are not just shocking but wholly at odds with the government’s message. Not surprisingly, several Conservative MPs joined the opposition parties in giving voice to completely legitimate concerns about the impact on the country and their own voters. Brexit stirs passions that are hard to alter. Many want Britain to move on. The public’s cynicism towards politics amid cheap claims about fake news and project fear makes reasoned debate on things like impact assessments difficult. When low paid work pervades too many lives, dire warnings about “the economy” can sound like a concern for the rich. Yet this assessment affects everyone. It makes it harder for a future government that was on their side to deliver. It would make poor Britons poorer. The government acts as if it has a blank cheque to vandalise the economy in Brexit’s name. The fight to stop that must not falter. |
| Brexit | Brexit |
| Opinion | Opinion |
| Conservatives | Conservatives |
| Theresa May | Theresa May |
| Article 50 | Article 50 |
| European Union | European Union |
| Foreign policy | Foreign policy |
| comment | comment |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |