Graun recycles old data yet again

Some people seem to find it impossible to grasp the issues even now. D Conn (sic) a 'Guardian writer' is still in denial:

New Tory MPs have promised to transform the region, but its greatest threat will come in days, when Britain leaves the EU

 The north is promised bounty from the “shared prosperity fund” – the cynically named, back-of-an-envelope replacement for EU structural funds, which for decades have invested billions in Britain’s regions to encourage economic revival....Efforts have been made over three decades to regenerate deindustrialised areas – including investment, consistently, from the now-disappearing EU funds that are specifically targeted at deprived areas of Europe.

What can you say? Is it possible he still thinks the EU has magnanimously given us its own funds? Is this along-term play to rejoin in 2030?

He recycles the impact costs warnings of January 2018 once more:

The impact assessments found that [the North-east], with its high-quality manufacturers principally exporting to Europe, faces losing the most: an 11% hit even with a trade deal, if Johnson achieves the incredible and strikes one by the end of this year. If there is no deal, and full barriers and tariffs are erected with Europe, the projected hit is 16%....The north-west – where Leigh, Burnley and Blackpool South voted for Johnson but where there are still strong chemicals, machinery and transport export industries – faces an 8% economic decline, rising to 12% if there is no trade deal. The damage to the West Midlands, east Midlands, and Yorkshire and Humber is projected to be at least 5%, and up to 13% for the West Midlands if there’s no deal.

I could hardly bear to revisit the impact assessment documents again but they are really quite good, suitably cautious and quite authoritative in the warnings they give about the lack of reliability of calculations over 15 years. The key point for we laypersons is developed on p. 16, where overall the UK is presumed to grow by 25%, but the various scenarios reduce that rate --but never to anything negative. If the worst case scenario is enacted, the UK economy still grows by 15%--17% . Obviously, the documents do not consider the impact of any new Government policies, so Conn is assuming,in effect, [sic] that they will have no effect. 

Interesting to juxtapose the impact predictions with the votes -- maybe the voters think that even if it is all accurate and nothing is done, the price is still worth paying?

There is only one explanation for Grunistas, of course:

The efforts of UK business organisations, trades unions and other experts to explain the EU’s benefits and the risks of leaving have been bulldozed by three-word slogans, preceded by years of misinformation, all gleefully fuelled by the current prime minister.

The real point might be in his argument that 

And the chancellor Sajid Javid’s insistence that Britain will diverge from EU industrial and social standards puts the risk to the regional economy at the more serious levels calculated by those assessments.