This is a good article from George Eaton, political editor at the New Statesman. He maintains that the political imperative of controlling immigration is clashing with the economic imperative of maintaining growth.
Financial speculators will be focused on the economic imperatives rather than the political imperatives of controlling immigration. After all Theresa May failed to deliver on immigration whilst she was at the Home Office. So far the government has been light on evidence and big on rhetoric. Expert evidence suggests that worst case Brexit outcomes could see household incomes fall between ten to twenty percent. Very few people who voted for Brexit would underwrite a 10-20% reduction in their incomes. Philip Hammond is right people did not sign up for the economic consequences.
Theresa May must know that in the final analysis economic well-being will trump immigration controls. Let’s hope that May is posturing, so that she can make concessions. There are massive trade-offs with all the Brexit options – in final analysis everybody in the UK will be poorer following the Brexit decision. But how much poorer will the British people accept, 5%, 10% or 20%?