You may remember the BBC almost totally ignored the remarkable recent PMI figures which suggested industry was on the up when previously, as the PMI dipped below the magic figure of 50, it loudly and repeatedly broadcast that fact and how terrible it was for the economy throughout the day. Similarly the BBC has been gleefully trumpeting the ‘fact’ that December’s retail sales have been less than November’s this year…
UK retail sales fall sharply in December
Retail sales in December dropped 1.9% from the previous month, according to official figures.
Sales across all main retail sectors declined, with the heaviest falls coming at non-food stores, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.
It was the biggest monthly fall for more than four and a half years.
This was at first reported as possibly having something to do with Black Friday but another possible cause was Brexit and the falling pound. Literally five minutes after I heard that assessment we had a news bulletin from the same BBC economics expert telling us that it was almost definitely due to Brexit because that is the ‘mainstream’ feeling.
Really? Surely the ONS is ‘mainstream’ and indeed is the source of the figures…it says….
Average store prices have risen in recent months for all retailing, primarily as a result of price rises at petrol stations.
But what is the ONS’ headline?
Main points
-
Estimates of the quantity bought in retail sales increased by 4.3% compared with December 2015 and fell by 1.9% compared with November 2016.
-
The underlying trend remains one of growth with the 3 month on 3 month movement in the quantity bought increasing by 1.2%.
Hang on….retail sales December to December increased by 4.3%…and yet I didn’t hear that figure given at all by the BBC on their news bulletins…the only figure they gave was the November to December 2016 figure which showed a fall…nor did I hear them tell us that the underlying trend was one of growth.
The BBC pushes hard the ‘disaster’ that is the falling pound…
‘Tough 2017’
Retailers had a “disastrous December… much worse than expected,” said Alan Clarke of Scotiabank.
Inflation figures earlier this week showed prices rose more than expected in December, “and now we also know that sales volumes fell”, Mr Clarke said.
“This is likely to be the theme for the rest of the year – higher prices will reduce disposable income and hurt consumer spending growth,” he added.
Martin Beck, senior economic adviser to the EY Item Club, said “the squeeze on households’ real incomes is gradually tightening, implying a tough 2017 for retailers”.
Only way down the page in a single line does the BBC mention this…
However, when compared with a year ago, retail sales were up 4.3% in December.
Why is that not the headline figure? Surely a rise of 4.3% is of more significance than a fall of 1.9%, a fall due to high sales on Black Friday?
The BBC is telling us lies, hiding the truth and presenting a distorted reality in order to keep up the anti-Brexit narrative that Brexit is leading to economic armageddon.
When will the politicians start to notice that the national broadcaster is so corrupt and dishonest?
“When will the politicians start to notice that the national broadcaster is so corrupt and dishonest?”
When we have politicians who do not have their snouts in the same trough as AlBeeb.
Vote UKIP, drain all the swamps.
This distortion of economic statistics by the Beebyanka is very similar to its approach to climate statistics. With economic statistics, the taxpayer does pay for an organisation to assemble the relevant numbers. When it comes to the warming scam, the numbers come in from a string of discredited, politicized agencies, all steadfastly avoiding the most dependable sources and “adjusting” the surviving numbers to suit their argument (in other words: making them up). Many of these are outside British jurisdiction.
In both cases, however, there is the same Beeboids determination to exclude any inconvenient numbers, as exposed here by Alan’s article, and selectively to trumpet, instead, those that selectively fit the “narrative”. I can’t think any responsible economist (and there are many irresponsible ones) thinks an economic trend is truly discernible between November and December. Comparing fractions of degrees of temperature makes no sense, either, especially where the methodology is so outrageously suspect and where even the margin of error cancels out the purported increases. The fact is that the Beebyanka routinely indulges this practice, of playing games with very dubious numbers, in two completely different areas: the economy and climate alarmism.
One could almost detect a pattern.