Brexit has cost the UK £140bn so far, according to new analysis, and could see the nation £311bn worse off by the middle of the next decade, according to a new report.
Economists and analysts at Cambridge Econometrics – commissioned by London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan – have modelled how the UK’s economy would have acted were it still in the European Union.
This was compared to data published by the Office for Budget of Responsibility in March 2023, and forecasts based on those data. Those official forecasts have since been downgraded as of November last year.
The headline findings from the report include lower growth, lower employment, strong negative impacts on investment, imports falling more than exports, and a growing gap between London and the rest of the UK.
The report analysed the gross value added – GVA – which is a measure of how much value is added by an area through the production of goods and the actions of services.
Cambridge Econometrics says it found UK GVA was £2,207bn in 2023 under current circumstances, and will be £2,771bn by 2035.
More on Brexit
Related Topics:
But without Brexit, the organisation states the UK would have had a GVA of £2,347bn in 2023, and it would have reached £3,082bn by 2035.
This equates to GVA being 6% lower in 2023 than it would have been without Brexit, and 10.1% lower in 2035.
Advertisement
They found that, by 2035, the UK is anticipated to have three million fewer jobs, 32% lower investment, 5% lower exports and 16% lower imports, than it would have had if the UK had not left the EU.
Cambridge Econometrics also found Brexit is expected to cause the productivity gap between London and the rest of the UK to widen further.
The scenario which included the UK in the EU used an E3ME model, which is used transnationally for forecasting. It includes data from UN, OECD, World Bank, IMF, the ONS and Eurostat.
The report says it tried to “isolate and subtract” the “Brexit effect” from factors like trade and investment in the main scenario – which it says is “effectively modelling a scenario in which other factors (eg, the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine) took place but Brexit did not”.
Image: Mr Khan will use the study to argue for a closer relationship with the EU
Shyamoli Patel, principal economist at Cambridge Econometrics, said: “Our study reveals that London’s economy would have grown faster if Brexit hadn’t taken place. Looking ahead, we project that Brexit will continue to have an impact on the UK and London economies in the medium term.”
Mr Khan is set to use the report to make the case for a closer relationship with Europe on Thursday evening at Mansion House.
The London mayor will say that it is “now obvious that Brexit isn’t working” – blaming the “hard-line Brexit we’ve ended up with”.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Mr Khan will add: “The cost of Brexit crisis can only be solved if we take a mature approach and if we are open to improving our trading arrangements with our European neighbours.
“I agree with the shadow foreign secretary [David Lammy], who has said we urgently need to build a closer relationship with the EU.”
With a general election looming, Brexit will be an issue used to attack Labour and its leader Sir Keir Starmer, who backed a second referendum.
The grooming gangs inquiry has been plunged into disarray this week before it has even started, as four survivors have quit the panel and two frontrunners for chairperson have withdrawn.
The inquiry was announced in June, but frustrations have grown over the pace of progress towards launching it, with pressure mounting on the government to appoint a chair and set out its terms of reference.
Survivors Fiona Goddard and Ellie-Ann Reynolds were first to stand down from their roles over concerns about who could head the inquiry and fears it may be “watered down” – something Sir Keir Starmer has denied, insisting that “injustice will have no place to hide”.
Both candidates shortlisted to lead the inquiry have now pulled out.
Here’s what we know about why panel members have quit and what the government has said in response.
Concerns over inquiry chairs
The resignations came after Sky News revealed the two shortlisted chairs for the inquiry were former police chief Jim Gamble and social worker Annie Hudson.
Image: Jim Gamble and Annie Hudson emerged as the leading candidates
Ms Goddard was the first to resign from the survivors’ liaison panel, expressing deep reservations about the candidates: “One has a background in police and the other, a social worker. The very two services that contributed most to the cover-up of the national mass rape and trafficking of children.
“This is a disturbing conflict of interest, and I fear the lack of trust in services from years of failings and corruption will have a negative impact in survivor engagement with this inquiry.”
The other survivors who resigned also took issue with the shortlisted chairs in their statements.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
In a letter to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood explaining his decision, Mr Gamble said it was “clear that a lack of confidence due to my previous occupation exists among some” and that he did not want to proceed without a consensus among the victims.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “We are disappointed that candidates to chair that inquiry have withdrawn. This is an extremely sensitive topic, and we have to take the time to appoint the best person suitable for the role.”
Speaking to Sky News after Mr Gamble’s resignation, Ms Reynolds said: “The minute that we found out their former employment, it raised red flags.”
She claimed they represented “the very institutions that have failed us” and that their views would not have been “unbiased” or “impartial”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:09
Survivor Ellie-Ann Reynolds speaks after Gamble withdraws
During Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Sir Keir said his government “will find the right person to chair the inquiry”, but did not mention names.
Ms Reynolds and other victims have called for a judge to chair the inquiry, but Sir Keir said he ruled that out because it would require all ongoing criminal proceedings to finish before the inquiry could begin, leading to lengthy delays.
“We’ve waited years for the truth,” Ms Reynolds said. “The timing really doesn’t matter. As long as we know that it’s going to be done properly and impartially… we would be able to wait to ensure that that’s done.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:14
PM explains judge stance and defends Jess Phillips
The full statutory inquiry into how cases of child sexual exploitation have been handled across England and Wales was announced by Sir Keirafter an audit by Baroness Louise Casey found children had been failed by the systems in place to protect them.
On Wednesday, Sir Keir said Baroness Casey would be working in support of the inquiry.
Claims about poor treatment of survivors
Ms Reynolds said survivors were “kept in the dark” and “treated with contempt and ignored” when they asked about Home Office meetings and decisions. She said it was made clear that “speaking openly would jeopardise our place on the panel”.
She told Sky News that victims were “gaslit” and “manipulated” during the process and they had “very little faith in authorities and systems”.
Similarly, Ms Goddard claimed a “toxic, fearful environment” had been created for survivors on the panel, with “condescending and controlling language” used towards them.
Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips has said she “regrets” resignations from the inquiry and that it was “always sad when victims feel that they can’t take part in a process”.
Image: Safeguarding minister Jess Phillips has faced calls to resign. Pic: PA
On Wednesday, Sir Keir said: “I respect the views of all the survivors, and there are different views, I accept that.”
He added that the door was open for people to return to the inquiry panel if they wished.
Fears of ‘diluted’ inquiry
The survivors say they fear the inquiry could be diluted, suggesting the Home Office could broaden its scope beyond group-based sexual abuse and push for it to have a regional focus rather than being truly national.
Ms Goddard said the survivors had “repeatedly faced suggestions from officials to expand this inquiry” and that it risked being “watered down”.
Ms Reynolds said the “final turning point” in her decision to quit the panel was the “push to widen the remit of the National Inquiry in ways that downplay the racial and religious motivations behind our abuse”.
Ms Phillips said allegations that the inquiry is being diluted or intentionally delayed were “false” and that it would “remain laser-focused on grooming gangs”.
Ms Goddard claimed this amounted to the minister calling her “a liar” and said she should apologise and resign.
Ms Reynolds also said she believed Ms Phillips was “unfit for the role”.
During PMQs on Wednesday, Sir Keir defended the safeguarding minister, saying she and Baroness Casey were the “right people” to take the inquiry forward.
He insisted the inquiry “is not and will never be watered down” and that “its scope will not change”.
“It will examine the ethnicity and religion of the offenders, and we will find the right person to chair the inquiry,” he said.
‘They should start again’
The father of a grooming gang victim says the government “should start again” with the national inquiry.
Marlon West, whose daughter Scarlett was a victim of sexual exploitation in Manchester, told Sky News that public “faith” has been “lost”.
He described Ms Phillips in parliament this week as “unprofessional” and “defensive rather than listening to what survivors are saying.”
“I doubt she will resign but she has lost any kind of faith from the public, and more importantly with survivors and families.
He wants to see an inquiry with family members included alongside survivors on the panel.
“Not that I want to go on it, if I’m honest,” he said, “but it’s the families who are dealing with the services, not so much the survivors.
“It’s really important that they get family perspective. I think they should start again.”
Image: Scarlett and her dad Marlon
Government denies ‘watered down’ approach
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood responded to the resignations saying the scope of the inquiry “will not change” and that it will leave “no hiding place” for those involved in the scandal.
In an article for The Times, she vowed the probe “will never be watered down on my watch” – and said it will focus on how “some of the most vulnerable people in this country” were abused “at the hands of predatory monsters”.
The home secretary also insisted the inquiry will be “robust and rigorous” – with the power to compel witnesses, and examine the ethnicity and religion of the offenders.
Speaking to Times Radio on Wednesday, Ms Goddard said the Home Secretary’s statement was “reassuring” but reiterated that Ms Phillips should resign.