Last December David Davis (HERE) told us his Department was preparing 57 sets of analysis on different economic sectors. By June 25th these were "already done" and by October he was telling a Select Committee these were in "excruciating detail" but he wouldn't release them. When parliament ordered him to do just that on November 1st, he said it wasn't the case that they actually "existed", at least in a form he thought the committee wanted. He was given a deadline of yesterday to prepare them. On Monday a single 850 page paper copy was given to the Brexit Select Committee but these were apparently edited to exclude what he has said is sensitive commercial information or details that would damage our negotiating position.
Labour had an urgent question accepted and The Commons debated the matter at lunchtime yesterday.
It was clear that a majority of MPs were very unhappy. Only a small number of sycophants tried to defend Davis. Even Jacob Rees-Mogg and Peter Bone, hard Brexiteers, were critical of him and his Department. In typical fashion he didn't attend the debate and sent his newly appointed junior minister Robin Walker to face the music instead.
It looks indefensible to me. The Select Committee, through parliament, demanded unredacted original documents do that they could decide what is published. Davis said he had no assurance that members would release information but this has not gone down well. It looks like he doesn't trust Select Committee members.
He has been ordered to appear before the committee in the very near future and it will be interesting to say the least. Nobody doubts that if the impact assessments showed the kind of bright, prosperous future we were promised they would not already be on the front page of every newspaper. It's obvious they are all bad. It is being reported they are very bland with just the basic data about the sectors and the way they are regulated at present. No assessment of the impact of Brexit.
Kier Starmer was withering in his criticism saying the two lever arch files seemed very light, the sort of stuff he would expect from a relatively straightforward legal case, not the background to the biggest shake up of our economy for decades.
