I agree with the Cabinet Secretary that transparency is a good thing and that there's no reason why studies of this kind should not be published, because we can then draw our own conclusions, as he says. But would he agree with me that an attempt to predict what the world's going to look like in 15 years' time, especially when those predictions come from economists, is likely to be about as much value as a witch doctor examining the entrails of a chicken? If such a study had been conducted in 1990, nobody would have spotted the existence of Google, Amazon or Facebook. They are now three of the very largest companies in the world.

What we should do, perhaps, is look at the forecasting record of the people behind this. Treasury forecasters, immediately after the referendum, forecast that, in the following three months, the economy would contract by 1 per cent; in fact, it grew by 0.5 per cent. They also predicted that in the following four quarters, there would be negative growth. In fact, we've had growth in every single quarter since June 2016. They also predicted that, two years after the referendum, GDP would fall by -3 per cent to -6 per cent. In fact, in 2016, the economy grew by 1.9 per cent, and in 2017, it grew by 1.8 per cent. It also predicted that unemployment would rise by between 500,000 and 800,000. In fact, unemployment is now at a record low since the early 1970s. It also forecast that borrowing would rise by nearly £40 billion; in fact, Government borrowing has fallen by 12 per cent and is now the lowest since 2007. So, I would advise the Cabinet Secretary not to spend too much time in examining this particular piece of nonsense.