New Brexit polls suggest shift in favour of leaving the EU

[sandyf]

Will the UK be left at the side of the road?

How has the New Silk Road impacted Chinese-European relations?

"I would say that relations are warming," said the professor. "China has been pretty assertive about going to Europe with various deals. They have already announced deals with Scotland, Italy, and many countries."

Lee suggested that Europe has a lot to be gained by the arrangement, given the continent’s stagnating economy and the desire to explore emerging markets.

"China is offering a way for Europe to reach these markets, so for both sides it is a win-win, and it is fair to say that both sides would only engage in these negotiations if they see benefits to themselves," said Lee.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/news/20160603/1040704275/beijing-europe-washington-trade-geopolitics.html#ixzz4AZTgxN7k

Edited June 4, 2016 by sandyf

[sandyf]

Exactly the point. The implications are global so it has everything to do with them.

This is one of the fundamental problems, the leave campaign cannot see beyond the UK borders.

That is one of the problems Sandy "we don't have any borders"

I must have it all wrong, I was under the impression that people had to show their passports to enter the UK.

[sandyf]

Let me tell you what I see happening, immediately a Brexit vote comes out on top in the referendum.

Firstly, the currency markets will in all probability gyrate for a while whist traders come to terms with the

new reality. Remember that nothing of substance will have taken place on 24th June; only the

emotional or psychological impact of the event! The markets will then settle down and stabilise, and in a

short period of time will not look too much different than the relative pricing levels at which currencies were

trading on the run up to the referendum.

Secondly, there will be a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth by the politicians and bodies who were

campaigning for the United Kingdom to stay in the EU. This will have no tangible expression, anywhere.

They will largely be wondering what their own futures were now going to be.

Thirdly, the European Commission will have to take a hard look at what Brexit will mean to the EU's

structure and stability, going forward, and what the deleterious effects Brexit will have on the value of

the Euro,and what it will mean for their budgets. Probably some "pet" projects are going to have to be put on

hold, for a considerable while. The accession of the poorest of the poor countries waiting in the wings

will have to be put back for an even longer period. Now the hard work begins for these non-elected

officials!

Simultaneously, there will be an enormous amount of soul-searching within the political ranks of the

United Kingdom, followed by a re-shuffle of leading positions and, perhaps, a new political order coming

to the fore. It is possible a General Election will be called within a short period.

Finally, a date will be set by the UK and the EU for the start of the complex negotiations to take place for

an orderly winding down of Britain's involvement within the EU, and a new relationship to take effect. A

full 24-months is provided for, for this process, although that is not to say that it cannot be extended,

subject to negotiation between the parties.

Simultaneously with this, the United Kingdom will continue to trade with the European Union whilst

negotiating and entering into any new global trade, commercial and sovereign agreements with which it will

need to engage, for the future.

Britain has always punched above its weight. Post-Brexit, I expect to see the nation pulling together with common

purpose, as it did in the War years. A bright future beckons.

As to what Brexit means for the United Kingdom: THE SKY WILL NOT FALL, NOR WILL BRITAIN SINK INTO THE

ATLANTIC. NOR WILL THERE BE MASS UNEMPLOYMENT OR SUICIDES. Life will continue largely as before,

whilst world affairs continues to evolve at a calm and measured pace, with not much discernible change.

All of the above, IMHO.

Reasonable hypothesis should the vote go that way. However, even if that were the situation I think that before any negotiations get very far that global events will push the whole issue to one side and the outcome lead to another referendum.

It is very unlikely that the UK will ever leave the EU.

[sandyf]

If the ballot paper was to be reworded, would it affect the polls?

""Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union at any cost?"

Edited June 4, 2016 by sandyf

[RuamRudy]

LOL

" Yes, the EU can be made more democratic " well I wouldn't be holding my breath for that one
the only ones with a bright future will be the politicians and bureaucrats that will go on collecting their obscene salaries year after year as the rest of the real world economy sinks further and further into depression
I very much doubt the UK will prosper within the EU because I doubt whether the EU itself will prosper.look at Greece.
What's it got to offer for God's sake?

The EU has been prosperous for the last 10 years , or so compared to the down turn in the global economy. Without the EU, a number of countries, mostly ex Eastern Block ones, would not have a prospering economy like today. As far as the UK goes, where do the UK exports mostly go to? As far as the London Financial Centre is concerned, just imagine how much it will shrink without the EU. I do know that most of the readers will disagree, but I, and I am an economist, believe that the UK would be better off if it not only stays in the EU but joins the EURO, in spite of the Greek disaster, which albeit, has not been dealt with properly.

I really do believe it will be a disaster for the UK to leave the EU. Apart from the financial and social drawbacks, the nearly certain result will be the succession of Scotland, which is very keen on staying in the EU. Even Wales may follow thereafter. What a disaster that would be!

How as the EU been prosperous when it has one of the lowest economic growths on the planet?

This is the World Bank data for economic growth by country - the first country that is close to one I would want to be part of the labour force is Ireland at number 46. Do you want Europe to mirror the likes of Turkmenistan, Chad or Rwanda? Stable and steady is my preferred option.

With all due respect, I would suggest that you are referring to the incorrect chart in support of your conclusion. You would be much better served by looking
at the per capita GDP rankings, and not at the individual country's ranking. Why? Because total nominal GDP is influenced by a variety of inputs and one is not comparing apples with apples. Thus, in the chart you have cited, China and India, with GDP growth in the period of 7.3% each, ranks them at numbers 13 and
14 respectively. However, if you look at their "per capita" GDP rankings, it tells a whole new story, actually putting them at numbers 77 and 138 respectively, partly because of their huge populations.

GDP per capita does not show a "standard of living" comparison, although it is somewhat of a good guide. You might, for example, therefore, look at Norway (non-EU), Switzerland (non-EU) and Denmark (EU) for "slow and steady" with high GDP per capita rankings. Respectively, and interestingly, the are ranked numbers
2, 4 and 6 on a per capita GDP ranking, according to the World Bank (2014).

Firstly, thank you for bucking the trend and not opening with a salvo of insults about my economic comprehension, as is the way for many TV posters, especially with regards to BREXIT.

I need to digest your comments a while, but thanks for the counterpoint and, hopefully, additional insight.

[Grouse]

They did some geographical analysis of the polls.

Wales & Scotland are firmly Remain, England is a marginal Leave.

Not quite correct, the parts of the country that are willing to give up their independence to the EU are London and to reducing numbers Scotland. The parts of the country that are more likely to vote Brexit are Wales and the remaining parts of England. As for Northern Ireland,they will vote as the always have.

England is essentially 2 countries.

Correct. Yorkshire and the rest!

[allanos]

Let me tell you what I see happening, immediately a Brexit vote comes out on top in the referendum.

Firstly, the currency markets will in all probability gyrate for a while whist traders come to terms with the

new reality. Remember that nothing of substance will have taken place on 24th June; only the

emotional or psychological impact of the event! The markets will then settle down and stabilise, and in a

short period of time will not look too much different than the relative pricing levels at which currencies were

trading on the run up to the referendum.

Secondly, there will be a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth by the politicians and bodies who were

campaigning for the United Kingdom to stay in the EU. This will have no tangible expression, anywhere.

They will largely be wondering what their own futures were now going to be.

Thirdly, the European Commission will have to take a hard look at what Brexit will mean to the EU's

structure and stability, going forward, and what the deleterious effects Brexit will have on the value of

the Euro,and what it will mean for their budgets. Probably some "pet" projects are going to have to be put on

hold, for a considerable while. The accession of the poorest of the poor countries waiting in the wings

will have to be put back for an even longer period. Now the hard work begins for these non-elected

officials!

Simultaneously, there will be an enormous amount of soul-searching within the political ranks of the

United Kingdom, followed by a re-shuffle of leading positions and, perhaps, a new political order coming

to the fore. It is possible a General Election will be called within a short period.

Finally, a date will be set by the UK and the EU for the start of the complex negotiations to take place for

an orderly winding down of Britain's involvement within the EU, and a new relationship to take effect. A

full 24-months is provided for, for this process, although that is not to say that it cannot be extended,

subject to negotiation between the parties.

Simultaneously with this, the United Kingdom will continue to trade with the European Union whilst

negotiating and entering into any new global trade, commercial and sovereign agreements with which it will

need to engage, for the future.

Britain has always punched above its weight. Post-Brexit, I expect to see the nation pulling together with common

purpose, as it did in the War years. A bright future beckons.

As to what Brexit means for the United Kingdom: THE SKY WILL NOT FALL, NOR WILL BRITAIN SINK INTO THE

ATLANTIC. NOR WILL THERE BE MASS UNEMPLOYMENT OR SUICIDES. Life will continue largely as before,

whilst world affairs continues to evolve at a calm and measured pace, with not much discernible change.

All of the above, IMHO.

"Firstly, the currency markets will in all probability gyrate for a while whist traders come to terms with the

new reality. Remember that nothing of substance will have taken place on 24th June; only the

emotional or psychological impact of the event! The markets will then settle down and stabilise, and in a

short period of time will not look too much different than the relative pricing levels at which currencies were

trading on the run up to the referendum".

You appear to have glossed over a series of hugely important events and consolidated several years of change into a few throw away lines, perhaps we can look at them in more detail.

Here's a link to three different scenario's put together by the FT, your preferred scenario is outlined in Option 1, the one that is caveated with the words, "Most economists question the underlying assumptions in this scenario".

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/70d0bfd8-d1b3-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377.html

Poster/readers who are interested in the financial implications of Brexit may wish to read and understand those options.

Clearly, what has eluded you, or that you have failed to understand, is that the whole of the Brexit debate, on both sides, is predicated upon "assumptions".

[chiang mai]

"Firstly, the currency markets will in all probability gyrate for a while whist traders come to terms with the

new reality. Remember that nothing of substance will have taken place on 24th June; only the

emotional or psychological impact of the event! The markets will then settle down and stabilise, and in a

short period of time will not look too much different than the relative pricing levels at which currencies were

trading on the run up to the referendum".

You appear to have glossed over a series of hugely important events and consolidated several years of change into a few throw away lines, perhaps we can look at them in more detail.

Here's a link to three different scenario's put together by the FT, your preferred scenario is outlined in Option 1, the one that is caveated with the words, "Most economists question the underlying assumptions in this scenario".

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/70d0bfd8-d1b3-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377.html

Poster/readers who are interested in the financial implications of Brexit may wish to read and understand those options.

Clearly, what has eluded you, or that you have failed to understand, is that the whole of the Brexit debate, on both sides, is predicated upon "assumptions".

Assumptions, you don't say!

So which of the three options are you going to choose to fill in the gaps in your post Brexit scenario?

[allanos]

If the UK needs any further motivation to BREXIT this video is it. With just weeks left to one of the most important votes of the EU...one of the most important of a member state, this kpjackarse is drunk, acting the fool. Considering the hour and those meeting, this is effed up.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?ebc=ANyPxKoAoYsmJKdpJR8_QB2xKuX-oUHNYUD1NjseHdfiC7tIahwAx6VnuvVHGIivAC6Hy4GyiSgu_Iq6dyCU_c3WTWGoFkVR_g&v=XPgiI46FCDU&time_continue=62

"All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Sir John Dalberg-Acton

1834-1902

[allanos]

"Firstly, the currency markets will in all probability gyrate for a while whist traders come to terms with the

new reality. Remember that nothing of substance will have taken place on 24th June; only the

emotional or psychological impact of the event! The markets will then settle down and stabilise, and in a

short period of time will not look too much different than the relative pricing levels at which currencies were

trading on the run up to the referendum".

You appear to have glossed over a series of hugely important events and consolidated several years of change into a few throw away lines, perhaps we can look at them in more detail.

Here's a link to three different scenario's put together by the FT, your preferred scenario is outlined in Option 1, the one that is caveated with the words, "Most economists question the underlying assumptions in this scenario".

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/70d0bfd8-d1b3-11e5-831d-09f7778e7377.html

Poster/readers who are interested in the financial implications of Brexit may wish to read and understand those options.

Clearly, what has eluded you, or that you have failed to understand, is that the whole of the Brexit debate, on both sides, is predicated upon "assumptions".

Assumptions, you don't say!

So which of the three options are you going to choose to fill in the gaps in your post Brexit scenario?

My original post was of necessity, conflated. However, the comments made there are not "throw away lines", as you so sneeringly call them, but considered

opinions which I have formed over time.

I do not set great store by economists "forecasts". They, and the "modelling" they choose to use, often make the wrong call. They will then spend a considerable amount of time and effort to explain why they were wrong. It is counter-productivity at its most egregious.

I stand by my original thoughts on the subject, but will lighten the tone a little, with the following quotes.

Economic forecasting is like trying to drive a car blindfolded and following directions given by a person who is looking out of the back window.

OR

A physicist, a chemist, and an economist are stranded on an island with nothing to eat. A can of soup washes ashore.

The physicist says, "Let's smash the can open with a rock."

The chemist says, "Let's build a fire and heat the can first."

The economist says, "Let's assume that we have a can opener."

I hope you will be able to appreciate the irony. If you struggle to understand, let me know and I may be able to take the time to explain it to you.

[chiang mai]

Assumptions, you don't say!

So which of the three options are you going to choose to fill in the gaps in your post Brexit scenario?

My original post was of necessity, conflated. However, the comments made there are not "throw away lines", as you so sneeringly call them, but considered

opinions which I have formed over time.

I do not set great store by economists "forecasts". They, and the "modelling" they choose to use, often make the wrong call. They will then spend a considerable amount of time and effort to explain why they were wrong. It is counter-productivity at its most egregious.

I stand by my original thoughts on the subject, but will lighten the tone a little, with the following quotes.

Economic forecasting is like trying to drive a car blindfolded and following directions given by a person who is looking out of the back window.

OR

A physicist, a chemist, and an economist are stranded on an island with nothing to eat. A can of soup washes ashore.

The physicist says, "Let's smash the can open with a rock."

The chemist says, "Let's build a fire and heat the can first."

The economist says, "Let's assume that we have a can opener."

I hope you will be able to appreciate the irony. If you struggle to understand, let me know and I may be able to take the time to explain it to you.

The one thing the Brexit campaign has lacked since day one is that nobody has been prepared to set out any form of financial model detailing what the financial impacts of a Brexit might be. Even when presented with different models that set out various scenarios they have been unanimously unable to point to one and say yes, this is what we think will happen, this is the most likely. Instead, In the absence of any even remotely vague economic or financial model of their own, Remain has constructed models and said here, this is what we think will happen and Team Brexit turns around and says no, that's all lies and propaganda! That experience is rather like going shopping for a birthday present with a fickle partner who doesn't like anything that is suggested to her yet still can't decide or describe what she wants!

OK so no financial model from you guys and no comment from you on the options already prepared for you, cool! So is your reason for wanting Brexit based just based on nostalgia, patriotism, a feeling that it's what we should do or what? What exactly is your argument that will convince people they should vote for Brexit and how do you set aside all the potential economic woes that nearly every economist and informed interested player in the debate has expressed?

[Grouse]

The most cogent Brexit comment was from that woman from Romford:

Which way are you inclined to vote?

OUT

And why is that?

I DONT KNOW BUT I WANT OUT!

(Fools)

[chiang mai]

If that came back as the answer I may actually be OK with it, to a (small) degree. What I find bizarre though is that no answer comes back, no logical reasoning, no supportable facts, no detailed rebuttal of financial/economic arguments, no substance, nothing and I'm certain I'm not the only person who's having difficulty with that.

[chiang mai]

The most cogent Brexit comment was from that woman from Romford:

Which way are you inclined to vote?

OUT

And why is that?

I DONT KNOW BUT I WANT OUT!

(Fools)

Not really a fool, the lady has seen how her country has gone to sponging foreign folk.

You quote you have a business, perhaps you fear Brexit cos you fear a financial business problem, same as Cameron fears a financial problem with himself and his chums eh...?

With all due respect, the question is not why someone might fear Brexit, the question is why do you want it, what does it give us and at what cost.

[oxo1947]

If the ballot paper was to be reworded, would it affect the polls?

""Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union at any cost?"

Is it really slanted like that sandyf---?--I didn't realise "Dodgy" Dave had gone that far.

.

I do remember the Irish voting not to take the Euro......then the politicians took it back to them with even stronger fear pills to vote on it again, until they got the answer that they wanted. I wonder if that could be a scenario here.

[oxo1947]

With all due respect, the question is not why someone might fear Brexit, the question is why do you want it, what does it give us and at what cost.

Control of our borders....

.

That's something important enough that Mr Trump could become the next USA president promising our friends across the pond...........

[allanos]

The fact of the matter is, that despite the "Economist" highlighting 3 scenarios in its magazine piece, "What are the economic consequences of Brexit", anyone who has done any scenario planning will know that one projects a "best case", "worst case" and "most-likely case" in their deliberations.

Firstly, I don't believe that the "Economist" did this in their article. They simply cited 3 "options". However, in truth (and in reality), there are considerably more than 3 options (and scenarios) for the "Out" campaign to deliberate over. At the end of the day, there will probably be a "mix and match" approach to securing the most favourable terms for the United Kingdom, going forward. This model will not, and should not, be set in stone, and there is no reason why it should be decided upon at this moment in time.

Secondly, the "Economist" also falls into the trap of being "guilty by omission", in that it implies that events will happen in "immediate" fashion. For example, that trade and commerce with the EU will cease immediately upon a Brexit vote. This is simply not the case. As previously mentioned by a number of us, there is a "pencilled in" negotiation period for Brexit to take place, of 24 months. A longer period can, and perhaps will, be negotiated.

I will give you an example of "hard and fast" rules and rulings of the EU. Having disastrously allowed untrammelled and uncountable access by "asylum seekers" into Europe, and only belatedly aware of the crisis facing the "union", obscene amounts of money iwas thrown at Turkey in an attempt to stop the outpouring. The pot was sweetened by offering Turkey visa-free access to the EU for its citizens, previously an absolute no-no. (I am aware that this has been the subject of a caveat, but my observation remains the same). So much for the "immutable" rules of the European Union. Political expediency always reigns supreme!

Lastly, the question of the European Union shutting its doors on Britain following a Brexit - some even suggesting that they will want to make an "example" of us "pour encourager les autres", perhaps! This is drivel. We are an enormous, and growing, market for European Union producers of every kind. Does

anyone want to imagine the consequences of redundancies or lay-offs at Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Volkswagen/ Audi of Germany, or the same severe effects on the workers at Peugeot/Citroen and Renault plants in France? Francois Hollande for one, would also be out of work, in short shrift!

Peter Mandelssohn, as an ex-European Commissioner, did not bring to bear any comments of substance in his discussion on the FT video. I, for one, would have expected much more, because he should be "in the know". It was the usual woolly, airy-fairy fear-mongering kind of stuff trotted out by the "Remain" contingent. One telling comment which came out of the debate and does have substance though, is the actual fact that the EU has had static growth since 2008/9, whilst essentially the rest of the world has grown.

What price membership of the EU?

[Thaiwine]

For those intrested in reading what some of the pro Brexit economists think

http://www.economistsforbrexit.co.uk/

[chiang mai]

A good find, thanks, it beats anything else I was ever going to read on the subject in these threads! I'll get busy reading and come back with my views.

[Mudcrab]

Whatever the result, Cameron, Osborne and perhaps a couple other stalwarts who, firstly, erroneously combined to bring

about this referendum as a means to neutralise UKIP support, and, secondly, so firmly nailed their colours to the "remain"

mast, should start dusting off their cv's. It is very possible that their political careers are about to come to a sudden end.

Ozzy has a say in this?

What about his missus Sharon?

Might be the only persons who make sense.

[Mudcrab]

I've read through this thread, all the way as I usually do, and I've come to a conclusion - albeit based on the assumption that the posters are actually living in Thailand by choice.

That conclusion is...there is about as much point to this 'debate' as there is two fleas arguing about the dog they live on.

Surely one of the motivations of moving to Thailand is to put this crap behind you?

Or have you never actually left....but are here anyway.

The insightful reader will know what I mean by this comment

[Thaiwine]

I like this guy,

Jacob Rees Mogg

[Cook my sock]

A Brexit vote is a countrywide upright finger to London. Everyone in London is convinced it won't happen. They may well be in a panic in a few weeks.

[Caps]

A Brexit vote is a countrywide upright finger to London. Everyone in London is convinced it won't happen. They may well be in a panic in a few weeks.

Even though I will vote out I don't think it will happen. I think the people don't have the b@lls to vote to leave because they are scared of a bit of uncertainty before we find our feet again. They would rather stay puppets (or is that muppets) to an increasingly growing, power grabing EU

[chiang mai]

The economics rebuttal by Brexit economists posted earlier is very good but it's slow reading, mostly because of its broad scope and the language used, it's definitely worth reading however. One thing that becomes very clear at this early stage is that there is a lot of common ground between Remain and Brexit on the economy, the scenario set out by Brexit is not that far removed in some areas from the best case Treasury Remain report, a five year horizon, 3% inflation/interest rates, 6% drop in the value of Sterling - my guess is that whilst Treasury tried to discuss only the worst economics case Brexit only wants to talk about the best one. The other aspect that is clear is that neither side wants to talk about PSBR although Remain hints that the deficit will be reduced to -1.5% of GDP, exactly how they will achieve that remains unclear but I'll continue reading and comment later. Just to be clear, both groups seem to be saying that a drop in the value of Sterling is certain and also an increase in the lending rate, the former impacting on expats and the latter of UK mortgage holders and the banking system and the cost of servicing the UK's massive level of debt.

The one thing is that is abundantly clear is that the next few months (at a minimum) have the potential to be tumultuous on the economics front, regardless of what happens to Brexit. A major risk is that those events will be seen as being capable of having been avoided by which ever group wins the referendum - global deflation, oil price, USD interest rates, debt and deficit, as well as political risk in some areas all overlay a myriad of natural and socio-economic risks making for a potentially nasty cocktail of events.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/what-are-the-top-global-risks-for-2016/

Edited June 5, 2016 by chiang mai

[chiang mai]

EDIT above should read: "neither side wants to talk about PSBR although Remain Brexit hints that the deficit will be reduced to -1.5% of GDP,".

[sandyf]

I've read through this thread, all the way as I usually do, and I've come to a conclusion - albeit based on the assumption that the posters are actually living in Thailand by choice.

That conclusion is...there is about as much point to this 'debate' as there is two fleas arguing about the dog they live on.

Surely one of the motivations of moving to Thailand is to put this crap behind you?

Or have you never actually left....but are here anyway.

The insightful reader will know what I mean by this comment

That is a bit narrow minded. The outcome may not affect you but could be quite significant for many. My wife has had 3 Schengen visas in the last 3 years but I suppose losing the inherited right of free movement is of little interest. Why would anyone want to go on holiday from Thailand?

[SheungWan]

A Brexit vote is a countrywide upright finger to London. Everyone in London is convinced it won't happen. They may well be in a panic in a few weeks.

London is considering exiting the UK and putting up borders around the M25 to keep out the Northerners, not that they can afford to come nowadays so no hurry really. Once London stands alone and cuts the subsidies to the provinces they can stew in their own juices and London can put its fingers, feet, ears and whatever up to the rest. Its only a matter of time. LONEXIT, you know it makes sense.

[SheungWan]

I like this guy,

Jacob Rees Mogg

The first time Jacob Rees Mogg ran for election as MP, he canvassed with his nanny. Memorable quote: 'I gradually realised that whatever I happened to be speaking about, the number of voters in my favour dropped as soon as I opened my mouth.' Rees Mogg is known as 'the honourable member for the early 20th century'. Latest heroic figure paraded by the forum BREXIT team.

[billd766]

I like this guy,

Jacob Rees Mogg

Thank you for that interesting link.

I found it informative, enjoyable and disgusting at the same time.

Why disgusting? I didn't even need to take my shoes and socks of to count the number of MPs present.

All of the MPs receive more than 8 times my state pension and it seems to me that more than 600 of them couldn't even be bothered to drag their highly over paid asses to where they work.

When I used to work we were given 2 verbal and 1 written warnings with a final verbal and written warning before being dragged into the office and fired.

http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/pay-mps/

The basic annual salary for an MP from 1 April 2016 is £74,962. MPs also receive expenses to cover the costs of running an office, employing staff, having somewhere to live in London and in their constituency, and travelling between Parliament and their constituency.

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) confirmed on 26 February 2016, that MPs' pay would increase by 1.3%, in line with the rate of annual change in average earnings.

Edited June 5, 2016 by billd766