[wraymond]

It’s probably always best to take official figures with a substantial fistful of salt. Most of my working life has been governed by the phrase ‘Past performance is no guarantee of future growth’ and it’s very true.

I’ve always tried to get a balanced view and then modify according to the sources from which the information comes. In the case of the OP figure, so long ago now it tends to fade, it was unemployment falling to 3.8%, the lowest for generations. Some doubt was expressed as to the validity of that figure and to a general rejection of the facts as presented.

Given the figures were all issued by the Treasury with the approval of the Bank of England, and received no argument that I could find from the ‘business community’, you then think about the historic (well, the last three years anyway) opinions of the individuals involved.

Those individuals were Chancellor of the Exchequer Hammond, Bank of England manager Carney and any number of grade A establishment figures. It is therefore only possible to assume that the figure is the worst projection possible, even if true.

Every one of those sources have consistently offered as black a picture as could remotely be credited and with widespread doubt about their interpretation. Therefore to accept the figures at face value is doing them a favour and a rather large one at that.

For the supporters of the ‘side’ that produced the figures to charge them with overstating the good news is a bit shot-in-foot with unerring aim. I’d say the figures are entirely credible. At the very least.