Jay of The Inbetweeners would have been so proud of David Davis

My favourite character in The Inbetweeners – Channel 4’s sitcom about male adolescence – is Jay: the boy who is forever issuing blithe, if not wholly convincing, boasts about how manly he is. “On holiday in Spain,” he declares casually, “me and my mate took a pedalo out and went to Africa.”

Nothing can shake Jay’s selfconfidence. When his date fails to show up to a party, he tells his friends that she’s had to fly to Paris for a modelling job. Asked why he isn’t preparing for his exams, he explains that his teachers have banned him from revising, because it “wouldn’t be fair on the other kids”.

I was reminded of Jay yesterday, as I watched David Davis being interrogated over Brexit. Ever since his appointment as Brexit Secretary, Mr Davis has been giving airy assurances about the fanatical diligence of his efforts. Last December, he told MPS that he was “in the midst of carrying out about 57 sets of analysis” on the impact of Brexit on sectors of the economy. In June, he bragged that “nearly 60” were “already done”. In October, he boasted that the analyses were written “in excruciating detail”.

Yet last month, after MPS voted to see these excruciatingly detailed analyses, Mr Davis calmly announced that they’d misunderstood, no such analyses existed, and he’d never said they did. Yesterday, he was summoned by the Brexit select committee to explain himself.

“So,” said Hilary Benn, the committee’s chairman, “the Government hasn’t undertaken any impact assessments on the implications of leaving the EU on different sectors of the economy?” Patiently Mr Davis shook his head. “So there isn’t one,” said Mr Benn, “on, for example, the automotive sector?”

“Not that I’m aware of,” replied Mr Davis, thoughtfully allowing for the possibility that an intern or rogue civil servant might have compiled one without his knowledge. “Is there one on aerospace?” “Not that I’m aware of.” “Financial services?”

“I think the answer’s going to be no to all of them!” said Mr Davis with a chuckle, as if he couldn’t believe he was having to deal with someone so slow on the uptake.

“No to all of them,” repeated Mr Benn thinly. “Right.”

It was all very simple, explained Mr Davis. He hadn’t done impact assessments because there was no point: after all, “economic models” were “always wrong”. Anyway, he’d never said “impact assessments”; he’d said “sectoral analyses”, which was quite different.

Admittedly in the past when MPS had asked him about his “impact assessments”, he’d neglected to correct them; he may, he acknowledged graciously, “be at fault” for that.

But, said Mr Benn, Lord Bridges – a former Brexit minister – had expressly told Parliament that he was analysing the economic “impact” of Brexit.

Mr Davis waved him away. “Do not draw the conclusion that because you use the word ‘impact’, you’ve written an impact assessment!” he chortled.

Jay would have been proud.