Sometimes a story seems to bounce out of
the ether. Take today’s bold story about
how, according to the OECD, the UK is going to be well and truly stuffed when
we leave the EU. Indeed, they rather interestingly
claim that only having a second referendum and reversing Brexit will save the
British economy from apocalypse.
Actually leaving the EU is nothing to do with
economics. It’s about regaining the
power for people to elect (or unelect) the people who make the laws they are governed
by. That is why we are leaving. But let's
leave that to one side for the moment.
So,
based on the word of the OECE, we should overturn a democratic vote. They do have form. Back in the olden days when the elite thought
we should join the ERM, “great benefits” for the UK were forecast. And
look what happened. Then there was the Euro. Remember the elite telling us it would be disaster
if we didn’t join? Who’s laughing now? Though sadly the disaster that is the Euro is
no laughing matter. And there was the instant
“major negative shock” if the people of the UK had the temerity to vote
Leave. Well we did. And the major negative shock is still awaited
15 months on.
Of course these people always
rewrite history. "In spite of
Brexit" usually is the theme as they revise their forecast in the opposite
direction from their original forecasts.
And, like all good reports, they had a disclaimer. The outcome relating to
leaving the EU “could prove more favourable than assumed here”. The small print. Tucked away.
Indeed, even the OCED’s most gloomy
predictions now still predict the economy will grow in the event of no deal.
And it is on these predictions that Cardiff Business School
professor Patrick Minford has his questions about its
modelling and assumptions, saying the OECD's negative findings were at odds
with his own and others' workings, including Oxford Economics adviser Graham
Gudgin. "The OECD has always said we shouldn't leave the EU. It's pretty easy to
see why, most of their members are in the EU - it's no mystery that they are
going to have an institutional bias to find reasons to reject Brexit."
Many other
people of sound mind are not enamoured by the OECD. And you can see why. For example economist Ruth Lea CBE, again,
nobody's fool when it comes to economics, thinks the
OECD's findings were symptomatic of analysis that was "forever
exaggerating the negative".
Speaking
to CityAM she said "I'm getting so
tired of all this," adding "They’ve
all got themselves in some kind of negative time warp. They were very negative
prior to the referendum and can’t get out of that way of thinking. They're
locked into this negative way of thinking.” "A
lot if it is because they feel they have to continue with this narrative to
justify themselves and have some appearance of consistency. But
it’s time they really began to change the narrative, move the dial - this
country is leaving the EU and everyone has to now accept that."
One final wee point. I may have missed it, but I’m not sure I saw
in the report the fact that the OECD has received an incredible £85,173,454.91 from the EU
since 2007. Just thought I'd mentinon it.
No comments:
Post a Comment