Press

Mrs May told reporters last week that the transition deal would be “a period of practical implementation” and denied reports that Mr Robbins had told EU negotiators that Britain wanted it to stretch for three years. “We are not talking about something that goes on and on,” she said. But veteran Europe watchers note that in Brussels, temporary arrangements tend to last longer than first anticipated. “I think three to five years,” says Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform.

Rees-Mogg stood by his claim that in drawing up its Brexit plans, the Treasury was trying to influence the argument. He also said that Charles Grant, head of the Centre for European Reform, had been given improper briefings. “He is getting private briefings from the Treasury against government policy,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today. “This is very serious. It is not for officials to invent policy. With the referendum and with the EU, the Treasury has gone back to making forecasts. It was politically advantageous in the past. It is the same for them now. I do think they are fiddling the figures.”Grant said it was perfectly normal for officials to talk to think-tanks. “The Treasury cares about economics so it is naturally pushing for the sorts of Brexit that minimise the economic damage,” he said.

Rees-Mogg suggested officials working in the UK Treasury were seeking to keep the country in the EU customs union, and asked Brexit Minister Steve Baker on Thursday to confirm the allegation based on an off-the-record conversation with think tanker Charles Grant, who heads the Centre for European Reform. Baker on Friday apologized to MPs for saying Rees-Mogg’s account of the remarks was “essentially correct.” Speaking to BBC on Saturday, Rees-Mogg stood by his original claim, saying: “With the referendum and with the EU the Treasury has gone back to making forecasts. It was politically advantageous for them in the past. It is the same now … So yes, I do think they are fiddling the figures.”

“I do think they’re fiddling the figures,” Jacob Rees-Mogg MP told BBC Radio Four’s Today programme, after he was accused of suggesting this in the House of Commons without evidence.

 Host Nick Robinson had put it to Rees Mogg that his accusation was “not the behaviour of a man who wishes to lead this country”, adding the “eccentric backbencher” was now being talked about as a future prime minister.

In the Commons this week, Jacob Rees-Mogg, famously the gentleman, slandered a studious and respected think-tanker and some identifiable Treasury officials. He did this by repeating a piece of hearsay, echoing it back to the colleague he’d heard it from, so that parliament and the public could hear it too. Mr Rees-Mogg’s question showed signs of careful preparation and there will be speculation that the pair (the colleague was a minister) had colluded in this exchange. Perhaps. The involuntary wince on the face of the Brexit secretary David Davis spoke volumes. The story was entirely false. The House has now heard an apology from Rees-Mogg’s ministerial colleague. But from Gentleman Jake? From the man who published the story? Only slippery evasion.

The storm erupted after Jacob Rees-Mogg asked the minister to confirm if he had heard from Charles Grant, of the Centre for European Reform think tank, that "officials in the Treasury have deliberately developed a model to show that all options other than staying in the customs union were bad and that officials intended to use this to influence policy." Baker said that account was "essentially correct."  "At the time I considered it implausible because my direct experience is that civil servants are extraordinarily careful to uphold the impartiality of the civil service," he added. Grant strongly denied the claims, and Baker was forced into an apology when an audio recording emerged which contradicted the minister's recollection of the comments.

The latest row blew up when Mr Baker was asked by Jacob Rees-Mogg to confirm that Charles Grant, head of the Centre for European Reform, had told him that “officials in the Treasury have deliberately developed a model to show that all options other than staying in the customs union are bad, and that officials intend to use the model to influence policy”.

Theresa May has said Steve Baker will not be sacked over comments made in the House of Commons which appeared to suggest there was a pro-Remain conspiracy. ...Baker failed to challenge a claim from Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg on Thursday that Charles Grant, from the Centre for European Reform think-tank, had alleged this was the case to the minister. He vowed to apologise after he was criticised by MPs and the trade union for senior civil servants.