Yesterday I got a few questions about a new BMG poll in the Independent that had voting intentions in a hypothetical EU referendum tomorrow at 52% remain, 48% leave. The Indy wrote this up with a pretty hyperbolic “Majority want to stay!!!”. The full results – along with a fair more reasonable and caveated write-up by BMG themselves – are here.

So, what is the bigger picture in terms of attitudes to Brexit, and is there any sign of people changing their minds?

I should start by pointing out that how people would vote in a hypothetical referendum tomorrow is not necessarily the same question as what people think should happen now (perhaps surprisingly!). If you ask people what should happen now, a clear majority say Britain should leave the EU. If you ask people how they’d vote in a referendum now, they are split down the middle between Remain and Leave. The difference appears to be because there is a chunk of people who personally favour remain, but think the government has a duty to leave following the referendum. Neither of these is necessarily a “better” measure of public opinion, opinion is best understood by looking at both: that is, the public are split equally on what they’d prefer, but some remainers think that the referendum means Brexit should go ahead anyway.

If we do look specifically at how people would vote in a referendum tomorrow, there is comparatively little change since 2016. Most Remain voters would still vote Remain, most Leave voters would still vote Leave. People who did not vote at all in 2016 tend to split in favour of Remain, meaning that the overall figure tends to be around a 50-50 split. Polls, of course, typically have a margin of error of around 2 or 3 points. This means if the actual position is a 50-50 split, then normal sample variation will inevitably spit out some results that are 52-48, or 48-52, or whatever. This is the unavoidable result of normal statistical variance, however, it does mean that now and again there will be a poll showing Remain with a small lead, which pro-Remain sorts will get wrongly overexcited about.

In terms of a trend, my impression is that there is some small degree of movement against Brexit… but it is very small. It is hard to discern a trend from questions asking the referendum question because they are infrequent, different companies use different methods and there may be different “house effects”. BMG have probably asked it more regularly than any other company, and looking at just their figures (in the link above) there is a slight trend towards Remain.

YouGov regularly ask a question about whether Britain was right or wrong to vote to Leave the EU (below), which also shows a very tight race, but a slight trend towards Remain. Last year it tended to show slightly more people thought it was the right decision than the wrong decision, now it tends to hover around neck-and-neck.

In summary, there hasn’t been any vast sea-change in attitudes towards Brexit. Most people who voted Remain would do so again, most people who voted Leave would do so again. There is some movement back and forth, but it mostly cancels itself out. If you look at the two most frequently repeated questions, the BMG question on referendum VI and the YouGov question on whether the decision was right or wrong, then there does appear to be movement towards Remain… but it is as yet pretty small and pretty slow. In short, there are some “bregrets”, but not enough to really get excited about. If there is going to be a big change, I still wouldn’t expect to see it until the leaving deal (and the consequences of it) become a bit clearer.

428 Responses to “Bregrets, there are a few… but then again, too few to mention”

1 2 3 4 5 9
  1. JIM JAM

    @”The Irony in the below to Coin tickled me I have say.”

    Me too-but I was too polite to say it :-)

  2. TOH – I hope you are correct about Hammond. I did note BoJo and he had a visible chat for the cameras the other day – maybe I read too much into that. The info Colin posted a few days back about the 13bn improvement in UK finances got very little press (FT only, not even Bloomberg or Reuters picked it up I think).

    My concern with Hammond is about his direct role of responsibility and spending the war chest sooner rather than risk handing the whole 10years of recovery in the public finances over to McDonnell. Regarding the 2y or 3y transition Hammond clearly lost, although he might have won the compromise over offering a few line around what sounded like a larger payment (but actually wasn’t).

    Despite all the headline fodder HMG are only really disagreeing over fine details. I’d prefer they discuss the fine details in committee behind closed doors, then in the HoC in due course but the 4th estate have an insatiable appetite for gossip!

  3. Ah – the wonderful world of Brexit, and the shifting sands of belief.

    It’s a bit like watching the great religions over the centuries insist on timeless truths, like the sun going round the earth, only to conveniently forget tht this is what they insisted was God’s creation when it is proven to be palpably false.

    Here we have @TOH claiming that neither he nor May have changed their stance.

    “Not a complete mess at all IMO, the governments positionhas not actually changed significantly at all.”
    September 24th, 2017 at 8:45 am

    Recall that May has offered perhaps £20b as part of a two year transition deal, in an ‘open and generous’ move, before any talks on a trade deal after even sequenced, let alone commenced.

    How do we square this then, from @TOH?

    “I cannot see the UK government shifting its position on not agreeing money until a trade deal is available.”
    September 6th, 2017 at 10:15 am

    The denial of any shifts of view and the attempts to claim theological constancy are some of the least endearing aspects of religions, and Brexit is much the same.

    There is a seamless move, by government ministers,UKPR posters and many other Brexit supporters, to claim that everything they said would pass is indeed coming to pass, and a bewlidering denial that they are slowly but surely shifting their position as reality dawns.

    I note also that May agreed that there would indeed be a role for the ECJ in overseeing EU citizens rights post Brexit, ill defined as this was – but, no doubt, the zealots will tell us that this was the plan all along and nothing has changed.


    the Government and the Prime Minister needed in such a close result and given the evident dvision of interests, sections and regions, should be required to exercise a Chairman’s vote and – on the basis of the consultation which is needed – explain their reasons in terms of the whole nation’s interests

    Agreed, and what would happen in a functioning democracy.


    did you guys miss all the votes in HoC and HoL that led to triggering A50?


    Did you miss that it took more than six months and HMG appealing and losing in the UK Supreme Court for A50 discussion to begin in the Westminster parliament? That period could and should have been used to establish a consensus of which of the potentially viable deals with the EU was leastworst.

    The rest of your post is your own conjecture, but you seem not to have noticed that there is no requirement in A50 for the EU to offer any deal post UK membership.

    An indefinite transitional deal is likely to be needed whichever model is eventually chosen for as long as it takes to build adequate customs clearance facilities in all relevant UK ports and the “magic” border in NI is designed, built and becomes operational.

    Given that EU co-operation for that will be necessary, discussion of “absurd terms from EU” is likely to be unhelpful, as is the ludicrous denial of any ECJ involvement.


    You will probably have heard or read of doubt being raised about the A.50 bill that was passed and whether it did meet with UK constituional requirements. It is not impossible that the Supreme court will be asked to examine this issue and at the same time the irrevocability of A.50 will also be raised. In regard to the latter, this might end up being referred to the ECJ.

    Fair point, although as long as the current HMG behave like ferrets fighting in a sack, it is hard to imagine that the EU or ECJ would want the pain of haing anything to do with them. If they lose confidence soon and Lab become HMG then it might change.

  7. On the shifting sands and the ECJ, this from the FT is worth reading (in detail) –

    It lays out how the government’s initial position in the white paper was simple – “…bring an end to the jurisdiction in the UK of the Court of Justice of the European Union” but that the recent position paper now talks only of ending ‘direct control’, without defiing this.

    The article goes on to say that the position paper now admits “there will still be scope for settling disputes on matters arising before the day of departure, as well as under the interim transitional arrangements and (any) withdrawal agreement.”

    It also says – “There also appears to be little difference from the status quo when it comes to UK courts taking account of ECJ case law. A “shared interest in reducing or eliminating divergence” is described. Case law could be taken “into account”. As a great deal of EU rulings will survive Brexit — even though it will incorporated as domestic law under the intended repeal bill — this means ECJ case law will continue to be determinative in practice.”

    In other words, if the ECJ makes a judgement, we would adopt it – the ECJ would remain determining UK laws.

    The FT item concludes – “But the relationship white paper is mostly a discussion document. It offers no solutions, only options. And, tellingly, none of those options is consistent with a “hard” Brexit of removing the ECJ’s role completely.”

    Of course, Brexiters will deny anything has changed, and when they said the ECJ would have no effect in the UK after Brexit, what they really meant was that the earth goes round the sun.

  8. Employment in the financial services sector from the first quarter of 1997 to the most recent (from the earlier linked ONS spreadsheet)



    rather than the unquestioning acceptance of every EU position ,which is the criterion for those like you John.

    Until A50 was triggered, HMG could have tried informal discussions with the EC and at least established which of the options in the Cabinet Office paper on options, if only to get them ranked in order of likely possibility.

    Once A50 had been triggered, we have only the rights listed therein. We may like or not the positions which Barnier & Co take but none of us has any power to change them. Conceivably, the exit polls from Germany which are predicted to come soon after 16:00 UTZ may indicate possible changes in the German Government which leads to change in the EU27 consensus, but that’s the most any UK citizen can hope for [not me, BTW] in the short term.

  10. Alec

    How do we square this then, from @TOH?

    “I cannot see the UK government shifting its position on not agreeing money until a trade deal is available.”
    September 6th, 2017 at 10:15 am

    May has said we will be prepared to continue to pay into the EU for the two years of an interim deal while final details are resolved once we have left in 2019. However the EU would have to agree an interim deal for that to happen. I see no sign of that being offered yet, so in fact at the moment the EU are on track to get nothing, and we are on track to get no deal. As I said earlier you completely misunderstand the governments position.

    As to your comments about the ECJ you clearly did not listen to Davis on Marr this morning. If you are going to challenge other posters opinions you should at least keep yourself up to date.

  11. @ LASZLO – thanks, yep that looks like “noise” to me. I’ll try and open the link later as I’m curious where all the net increase in jobs have been coming from.

    @ BZ – the default is “no deal”

  12. A poll of all voters found Sadiq Kahn to be the most popular choice, by far, for the next Labour leader.

    Make of that what you will, my hunch is it will never happen and that this poll is a reflection of his high mayoral profile.

  13. @TOH – of course the government hasn’t changed it’s mind. How could they? Unthinkable! And you never said that payments wouldn’t be promised until we had a trade deal!

    [Most UKPR posters have the capacity to read, so we’ll just politely put that one to bed I think].

    As for what DD said this morning, yes indeed, politicians never say one thing and do another, do they? How very trusting of you.

    The point here is that you should forget what DD said this morning. What they have actually written and presented to the EU in their own, considered position paper, is not what DD said this morning, nor what was promised in the white paper.

    If you think they haven’t changed, then more fool you.

  14. National unity

    The only thing that can heal the divisions of the country is a clean no deal bexit. Everybody knows where they stand economically and politically. For good or ill economically that is where we are heading.

    Everybody will need to pick up the pieces afterwards and that is what will happen.If no talks by the start of 2018 then contrary to what i said in a frostie induced coma we should continue to negotiate as a way of blaming the EU for lack of a deal.

    i am not saying it is ideal but i consider it 80% likely to be the outcome

    Just back from being out to lunch (literally, not figuratively Trev).
    Strikes me all we have to go on is Kremlinological guess work as to what happens next. My guess is that Boris has a big enough ‘kidney’ to bring the Govt down.

  16. @S Thomas

    I don’t think for a minute there is any chance of national unity for a very long time.

    A clean Brexit will have consequences, and those who voted Remain will not easily forgive or forget.

    I can see the Leave/Remain polarisation lasting a decade.

  17. Back on proper access. I opened up my old Remain/Leave economic model, some of the links seem to have gone dead and so its going to take ages to fix it properly and frankly cant be bothered. Reverting to very basic fag packet maths (all per annum basis with heavy rounding)

    UK trade deficit in goods with EU = 140bn
    UK trade surplus in services with EU = 80bn
    UK GDP = 2,000bn
    Current net EU payment = 10bn, rebate = 5bn
    WTO tariff on average of EU trade deficit = 3%

    EU contribution and future tariff scenarios (long-term, post transition, assuming growth offset by inflation, etc to keep the numbers simple)

    No deal
    EU payment 0bn
    EU tariff 4bn
    sum 4bn (+0.2% of GDP)

    EU payment -4bn
    EU tariff 0bn
    sum -4bn (-0.2% GDP)

    EU payment -15bn
    EU tariff 0bn
    sum -15bn (-0.8% GDP)

    Obviously this ignores services, a lucrative export to the EU. It becomes subjective at this point but the difference between “return” and “no deal” is around 20bn (1% of GDP) which provides a fairly decent cushion. My longer-term model guesstimates we’d drop around 0.4% of GDP from EU based loss of services (coincidentally the difference between no-deal and EFTA)

    The next huge jump into subjectivity is gain from non-EU trade. The hypocrisy of IMF approach, etc was to assume we’d be hit hard on trade with EU by leaving (as free trade is good) but gain nothing when on the outside putting UK interests first, etc. (free trade now being worth 0?) I disagree strongly with that and believe in the long-run we’d be 0.5%/annum better off outside the EU given the relative growth and trade oppos with non-EU (broken down as +1% genuine benefit adjusted -0.5% due to our reduced power status batting solo).

    A few things to note:
    1/ the %s are quite small – Brexit is massively exaggerated as a threat to our economy
    2/ transition is different – the shock to supply chains of a “no deal” scenario would hurt certain businesses and sectors quite dramatically, the impact on consumer confidence would be -ve in the short-term and that could provide dynamic feedback to burst our debt bubble, etc. The govt could try and offset this with Keynesian boost to GDP (sadly BoE have no ammo as Carney is busy playing politics) – risky!
    3/ Why we would pay to access the EU when we have a huge trade deficit on goods is crazy. Liberation of services (despite what EU might claim) is slow. Visible and especially invisible barriers are still quite high. It is risky but in services they probably do, at least in the short term, need us more than we need them. We can take a GDP hit on lost revenues but the precarious nature of Italian banks, etc mean the EU project would be stressed pretty badly

    Point 3/ has further relevance. If transition is too long then EU will have made preparations for the potential shock to their financial sector. This is (IMHO) why May-DD might be playing a very dangerous feint and we have to carefully consider the use of the “walk-away” card. Not only would EU have a short-term budgetary black hole their whole project would face a challenge that they could avoid.

    The truth is, no one knows the future. My decision to vote Leave was based on my expectation we’d do slightly better economically in the long-term by leaving (the longer out you go the more the non-EU growth potential kicks in). Against that, I netted off the risk we’d c0ck it up and get “lost in transition” and the risk if we didn’t leave we’d end up with someone like Farage as PM one day. It was a close call. However, now we have triggered A50 we have no choice but to play it out.

  18. TW

    i agree no option but to play it out. Everybody can blame everybody else in a funfest of recrimination. The only group who will not blame themselves will be the electorate. Having voted for Brexit and then stopped the person in charge from carrying it out they will blame the politicians and move serenely on to the next vote at the GE.there they will vote to give us a hung parliament.(IMHO)

  19. This will be an interesting week. The EU waits for detail to be put on whatever it was that Mrs May meant in her Florence speech.

    Progress, but not yet enough, has been made on citizens’ rights. If the UK wishes to keep to the leaked draft and maintain that there will be restrictions on the family members that a post-Brexit EU migrant can bring to UK there is unlikely to be movement to stage 2. There is, at least, room to negotiate.

    Mrs May said nothing about Ireland. In part this is because the UK wishes to use NI as a bargaining chip to encourage the EU to move to stage 2. The UK stance is that nothing much can be done until the terms of a deal are known. I doubt that this will do for the EU and impasse may continue – stuck in stage 1. In part, Mrs May has said nothing because there is no acceptable solution to the NI / Ireland border problems at present and no prospect of one.

    There has been a hint that there is room for negotiation on how to calculate the divorce bill. Much more clarity on the UK position is needed. I doubt if it will come this week. It is possible that internal division in the UK government (the EU also?) will prevent this topic from being resolved.

    To get to talk about a transition it would be helpful if the UK knew where it was going. It does not and it may not know this for some time, if ever. Also, the UK has not yet understood that the EU will not, under any circumstances, allow more favourable conditions for the UK, even in transition, outside the EU than in it.

    If I was betting on the outcome I would be thinking about no deal as a good bet but they can’t be that mad, can they?

  20. Trevor Warne

    “where all the net increase in jobs have been coming from.”

    it’s interesting. The big ones are from distribution, wholesale and retail; hospitality; and something called professional, scientific and technical activities (I guess it’s a very broad SME group).

  21. Regarding the ONS data, here is a link to a control chart of the data (xbar).

  22. Alec

    “If you think they haven’t changed, then more fool you.”

    Well if i am a fool your also calling MONOCHROME OCTOBER a fool as he agrees that the Government position hasn’t really changed at all.

    As I say you clearly do not understand the Governments positioning. It will all become clear as time goes on. Watch and learn.


    Woinderful 100 by Moin today. Windies need 370 to win.

  24. Good Afternoon all from a warm Bournemouth, Dorset, where I ran past the Lib Dem Conference at the BIC last week.

    MARKW: Hello to you. The pollster may have forgotten that S.Khan is not a member of Parliament and that JC will never leave or depart for lower or higher pastures. IMO

  25. S Thomas

    Agreed on your forecast.

  26. @TOH

    England are looking pretty hot at the moment.

  27. Chrislane1945,

    Yes, it seemed odd to include him given what you highlight.
    The poll was commissioned by the Huffington Post so it looks like a poll commissioned for a headline.

    Suprisingly warm in Bristol too, but noisy as the local park is a music festival this weekend, gitters.

  28. @S Thomas
    The electorate – having been told definitively that cake can be eaten and yet remain intact for future consumption – are perfectly entitled to respond to the people who told them that and say: “go on then”.

    If May had a decent plan it would sail through Parliament, as Labour would be unable to vote against it. The fundamental reason she has a problem is not lack of MPs, it’s lack of a decent plan.

    Like all prime minsters, she only needs a large majority if she intends to steer through a weak, damaging or ideological proposal….

  29. Re the lower than expected budget deficit in August, it is a mixed bag really; tax receipts are higher, but it is almost all from VAT (i.e. consumption) with a bit from NI offset by a fall in Income Tax (which, taken together, imply growth in low paid jobs but generally falling living standards).

    It doesn’t take a genius to realise that increased consumer spending without increased income is not really a sustainable solution to the UK’s budget deficit – which is probably why the Treasury haven’t made a big splash of it.

  30. Turnout in Germany is apparently up, especially in large cities. This could be quite important (also that it is down in Saxony and Thüringia).

  31. s thomas: National unity

    The only thing that can heal the divisions of the country is a clean no deal bexit. Everybody knows where they stand economically and politically. For good or ill economically that is where we are heading.

    Everybody will need to pick up the pieces afterwards and that is what will happen.If no talks by the start of 2018 then contrary to what i said in a frostie induced coma we should continue to negotiate as a way of blaming the EU for lack of a deal.

    i am not saying it is ideal but i consider it 80% likely to be the outcome

    I think you are very much mistaken here. Unless this is meant in the sense that we have the no deal brexit and are thereafter open to the idea of crawling back to the EU when in 2030 ToH has the discussion he has promised and everyone admits that Brexit was a huge mistake.

    I am in no mind to forgive Cameron [with patriots like this, who needs a fifth column] or Farage or Johnson or the Tories or even Corbyn. This is a lifelong position. And although I do not count myself in the 27%, I think that they too would be similarly minded.

    Face it, we have a broken country, and for me or anyone like me, it would be the antithesis of patriotism to march along to the drumbeat of whatever pathetic mess we end up with from the present government.

  32. “As I say you clearly do not understand the Governments positioning. It will all become clear as time goes on. Watch and learn.”

    That’s unsurprisingly patronising from you, much in line with expectations. Mr Polite, please step forward.

    You clearly previously denied any payment would be offered until trade talks commenced, as did the government. Now they have offered a payment, wih no certainty of trade talks. I don’t expect you to accept your position has changed, but everyne here will know that it has. They can read your posts.

    The government has also changed it’s position on the ECJ – that’s a simple matter of published fact, which has been picked up by numerous legal experts, including the one in the FT article I cited.

    Most of us here certainly do understand the government’s positioning, They started off sounding very bullish, but realised very quickly that they will need to primarily accede to EU demands in most of th key areas. This is what they are doing, slowly but surely, but in a way that tries to keep people like you and Boris convinced that it’s all going to plan.

    My personal take on this is that you are by your own admission the type of person that reads two or three books per week, but by default doesn’t do detail. Skimmers will pick up the headline messages but often lack the time to dig through the obvious and spot the detail. This may be why you set great store on what DD says in a TV inteview but haven’t read the white paper or the follow up position paper, which show the TV interview to be a completely false representation of the government’s position.

  33. Thanks for the job gains analysis. Imho this suggests what I have always suspected about the current measurement of productivity. Our flexible workforce are finding jobs like amazin prime, Tesco delivery, taxi services, pizza delivery, etc. The gain to GDP is tiny but it takes people off benefits and gives those in more productive jobs more genuine leisure time. It’s optional for each person but i very rarely visit physical stores anymore, saving time and parking/transport costs and even in semi rural location we have decent choice of ????, curry, etc. I expect it is highly subjective to adjust the current approach and giving folks pay day loans at 1000% APR and a mouse click to delivery of things they might not truly need has longer term issues

  34. “[Most UKPR posters have the capacity to read, so we’ll just politely put that one to bed I think].”
    @Alec September 24th, 2017 at 2:12 pm

    Most? Who are the ones that can’t?

  35. The Other Howard: Alec

    “If you think they haven’t changed, then more fool you.”

    Well if i am a fool your also calling MONOCHROME OCTOBER a fool as he agrees that the Government position hasn’t really changed at all.

    As I say you clearly do not understand the Governments positioning. It will all become clear as time goes on. Watch and learn.

    If Alec chooses to call me a fool, then so be it, but it is not your place to call fool on behalf of others.

    I think you are right that the government’s position will become clear as time goes on, but as it has not become clear to the government themselves yet, clearly it is presumptuous of you to say ‘watch and learn’.

    There is no real change in government position on brexit, because they have no settled position on this apart from doing what is necessary to survive.

    All that has changed is that with the Florence speech, they have decided that their chances of survival are better if they do not leap into the unknown with no deal just yet.

  36. SThomas

    National Unity will be hopelessly broken in March 2019 if we leave the EU, especially if there is no deal.

    People here will totally refuse to obey orders from a London government. They will not round up their doctors and nurses to send them back to their EU countries; they will not report illegal immigrants arriving through our many ports and shores, but will do all they can to facilitate immigration.

    We have a moral right to disobey since we voted 62/38% to stay in the EU, and we were promised in leaflets and in the HoC before the referendum that the result in each nation would be respected.

    You simply do not understand, ST, the basis of democracy. And that governments cannot take absolutely no notice of democratic votes.

    A clean break in 2019 will cause utter chaos, and certainly put the Tories out of government for many years..

  37. Trevor

    Re, uber

    I was quite shocked when I started looking in to the reasons uber were denied a licence renewal. Most concerning was their deliberate attempt to evade regulatory oversight. A free and fair market demands that all market participants are subject to the same rules and regulatory oversight. Uber is a case where conservatives and socialists should theoretically agree, Uber is clearly behaving in an anti competitive way.

    I have some sympathy with the views of the black cab drivers that Uber intends to drive them out of business and then jack up prices. Indeed given their insane market valuation, a global monopoly position must be the expectation of their shareholder otherwise they will lose their shirts.

    I think an investigation by competition regulators should be started asap

  38. @bigfatron

    “It doesn’t take a genius to realise that increased consumer spending without increased income is not really a sustainable solution to the UK’s budget deficit”

    It’s also important to remember the increasing amount of consumer debt which is fuelling retail sales and VAT receipts.

  39. Seeking monolpoly positions and seeking to wreck the free market is normal under capitalism. And what would one expect from a company calling itself Uber?

    the default is “no deal”

    Sadly, you may be correct although I doubt the DUP are quite loony enough to allow it.

    I can’t see it being a boon to reactivating UK full membership if we’re unable to do a deal with our partners of 40+ years.

    Looking on the bright side, I suppose it will provide a massive army of unemployed to build the new Irish border and customs parks for all the ports to comply with WTO rules if we’re not blackballed from rejoining.

  41. @lazslo

    How is the differential regional turnout expected to affect different parties in Germany?

  42. Not going to be just FDP, either Jamaica or previous set-up

  43. @Carfrew

    I do have some sympathy for how Uber have been treated.

    Their model is revolutionary in terms of the use of technology and the engagement of employees and customers.

    It does test the regulations, and I’m sure they could be more compliant. However, I suspect some of the opposition is nothing more than protectionism from the current market participants.

    I know plenty of people who are delighted with Uber.

  44. AfD better than expected, if Merkel goes in with SPD again then AfD official opposition (not good). Can FDP and Greens team up? Nothing more to know today, talks might take a while.

  45. Catmanjeff, Uber have used a canny software trick to avoid giving rides to anyone they suspect is monitoring their service.

  46. @MarkW

    The final analysis for me is are Uber’s customers happy.

    Most I’ve read or heard suggests this is mostly the case.

  47. UBER Petition-667,000 & counting.

  48. @ BZ – we agree a no deal is not the best outcome. I dont see this unemployment issue though, possibly the opposite as even more EU go home, the goods deficit is taken up by a boost to domestic co.s, etc. At 4.3% unemployment wages would rise, possibly quite dramatically in some sectors. Also big short-term boost in inventories as the cliff-edge approaches, rush to get capacity in place for handling tariff regime, etc. Against that the pound would drop, confidence would probably drop but we have the fiscal headroom to inject. Messy, but not a calamity if handling well.

    A few bankers might need to start delivering pizzas, retire or move to germany – the friends i have left in the city will take the middle option i suspect :)

  49. @CMJ – “Their model is revolutionary in terms of the use of technology and the engagement of employees and customers.”

    Except for the fact that pre Victorian employers did the bit about the engagement of employees a couple of centuries ago.

1 2 3 4 5 9