THE UK government has not carried out a single impact assessment on the effect leaving the EU will have on the UK economy.
Brexit Secretary David Davis confirmed on Wednesday morning that "there's no sort of systematic impact assessment".
Davis told MPs leaving the EU will provoke a "paradigm change" in the UK economy in a similar way to the financial crash of 2008.
READ MORE: As DUP say no, Brexit trade talks look set to be pushed back ... again
Davis said that in such circumstances, any assessment of the potential impact of the change on various sectors of British industry using existing economic models would not necessarily be "informative" about the likely outcome.
The Brexit Secretary confirmed that no impact assessments had been conducted by the Government on the likely results of Brexit for individual sectors, such as automotive, aerospace or financial services.
Instead, officials will "at some stage" during the forthcoming second phase of Brexit negotiations, dealing with trade, conduct work to quantify the effects of different possible outcomes, such as a free trade agreement with the EU or moving to World Trade Organisation rules, he said.
But the chairman of the House of Commons Exiting the EU Committee, Labour MP Hilary Benn, described the decision as "rather strange" when ministers were hoping within weeks to enter into a fundamental renegotiation of Britain's trade relations with the rest of Europe.
"You have said there are no impact assessments," said Mr Benn.
"You were hoping that at the October (European) Council, the door would be open to phase two of the negotiations, where the question would be asked 'What does the UK Government want?'
"Are you actually telling us that the Government hadn't at that point - and still hasn't - undertaken the assessment?"
Davis, who was appearing before the Committee to defend his refusal to hand over full details of the Government's analysis of the economic impact of Brexit, said that assessments had never been carried out in the form suggested when Parliament demanded their release.
"You don't need to do a formal impact assessment to understand that if there is a regulatory hurdle between your producers and a market, there will be an impact," he told the committee.
"It will have an effect, the assessment of that effect is not as straightforward as people imagine.
"I'm not a fan of economic models because they have all proven wrong. When you have a paradigm change - as happened in 2008 with the financial crisis - all the models were wrong. The Queen famously asked why did we not know.
"Similarly, what we are dealing with here in every outcome - whether it is a free trade agreement, whether it is a WTO outcome or whether it is something between that on the spectrum - it is a paradigm change.
"We know not the size, but the order of magnitude of the impact."
Benn asked him: "Doesn't it strike you as rather strange that the Government undertakes impact assessments of all sorts of things all the time, but on the most fundamental change that we are facing as a country, you've just told us that the Government hasn't undertaken any impact assessments at all on the implications for various parts of the economy?"
Davis last week gave the committee 850 pages of what he terms "sectoral analyses", looking at the condition of various parts of the UK economy and their current involvement in the EU market but making no forecasts on the likely impact of Brexit.
MPs complained that the material had been heavily edited by officials before being released to them, with some suggesting the Brexit Secretary could be in contempt of Parliament for failing to respond adequately to its demand.
Davis's admission that no sectoral impact assessments have been made by the Government provoked outrage among opposition MPs.
A Labour member of the Brexit committee, Seema Malhotra, described the failure to make assessments as "a dereliction of duty".
Labour trade spokesman Bill Esterson said: "Did he know that the impact assessments didn't exist when he said they did? It was either incredibly incompetent or incredibly dishonest. Either way, how is Davis still in his job?"
Scottish National Party MP Joanna Cherry said Mr Davis's evidence appeared to "directly contradict what he and other UK Government ministers have previously told Commons' committees", adding: "This is pretty serious."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel