Labour MPs tell Philip Hammond: ‘Publish Brexit impact studies’

Posted On: 
27th December 2017

Labour MPs have urged Philip Hammond to publish Treasury analysis of how Brexit will impact on the UK economy. 

Philip Hammond is under pressure to release Treasury Brexit analysis

In a letter to the Chancellor, 25 Opposition MPs called for the hidden documents – which look at various outcomes including a ‘no deal’ scenario’ - to be released.

They wrote: “The public have a right to know what the impact of Brexit will be for them and for their families.”

Michael Heseltine: Jeremy Corbyn government would do ‘less damage’ than Brexit

Tory Mayor issues ‘no deal’ Brexit warning

Dozens of Labour councillors call on Jeremy Corbyn to pledge Brexit rethink

The MPs include prominent backbenchers Chris Leslie, Catherine West and Maria Eagle and all support the pro-EU Open Britain campaign.

They wrote: “Without access to the latest taxpayer-funded analysis and research, parliament will be hamstrung in its ability to scrutinise the government’s approach and to present the facts to our constituents,” they said.

“It is vital that light is shed on the modelling and analysis that the Treasury has carried out. The best way to achieve that would be for the analysis to be published in its entirety.”

Speaking to MPs earlier this month Mr Hammond said: “When we get to the point where we have a deal negotiated and agreed, and it is being put before parliament, at that stage the maximum amount of analysis being placed in the public domain would be helpful.

“At this stage, when we have not even begun the negotiation yet, I am afraid that to put our analysis in the public domain would be deeply unhelpful to the negotiation.

“There is no decision for parliament to make at this point. Parliament’s decision point will be when the government have negotiated a deal and are presenting it to parliament for endorsement.”

The move comes after David Davis was forced to hand over 58 sectoral analyses to the Brexit Select Committee.

The Brexit Secretary came in for criticism after backtracking over the contents of the documents, having initially suggested they were impact assessments.