The former cabinet secretary Gus O’Donnell has compared Brexiter ministers and MPs to snake oil sellers after sustained attacks upon senior civil servants for lacking impartiality.

Lord O’Donnell, who served under Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron, said attacks on Whitehall officials were “completely crazy” and “ridiculous”.

His comments follow claims by the Brexit minister Steve Baker, who rubbished government forecasts, and the prominent Tory Brexiter Jacob Rees-Mogg, who accused the Treasury of “fiddling the figures” to show Britain would be worse off outside the EU, whatever the outcome of the negotiations.

Quick Guide What are Brexit options now? Four scenarios Show Staying in the single market and customs union The UK could sign up to all the EU’s rules and regulations, staying in the single market – which provides free movement of goods, services and people – and the customs union, in which EU members agree tariffs on external states. Freedom of movement would continue and the UK would keep paying into the Brussels pot. We would continue to have unfettered access to EU trade, but the pledge to “take back control” of laws, borders and money would not have been fulfilled. This is an unlikely outcome and one that may be possible only by reversing the Brexit decision, after a second referendum or election. The Norway model Britain could follow Norway, which is in the single market, is subject to freedom of movement rules and pays a fee to Brussels – but is outside the customs union. That combination would tie Britain to EU regulations but allow it to sign trade deals of its own. A “Norway-minus” deal is more likely. That would see the UK leave the single market and customs union and end free movement of people. But Britain would align its rules and regulations with Brussels, hoping this would allow a greater degree of market access. The UK would still be subject to EU rules. The Canada deal A comprehensive trade deal like the one handed to Canada would help British traders, as it would lower or eliminate tariffs. But there would be little on offer for the UK services industry. It is a bad outcome for financial services. Such a deal would leave Britain free to diverge from EU rules and regulations but that in turn would lead to border checks and the rise of other “non-tariff barriers” to trade. It would leave Britain free to forge new trade deals with other nations. Many in Brussels see this as a likely outcome, based on Theresa May’s direction so far. No deal Britain leaves with no trade deal, meaning that all trade is governed by World Trade Organization rules. Tariffs would be high, queues at the border long and the Irish border issue severe. In the short term, British aircraft might be unable to fly to some European destinations. The UK would quickly need to establish bilateral agreements to deal with the consequences, but the country would be free to take whatever future direction it wishes. It may need to deregulate to attract international business – a very different future and a lot of disruption.

O’Donnell said honesty and objectivity ran through the core of civil servants “like a stick of rock”, and the forecasts which came from Whitehall would have been made in good faith.

Civil servants “look at the evidence and we go where it is”, he said. “Of course if you are selling snake oil, you don’t like the idea of experts testing your products.

“And I think that’s what we’ve got, this backlash against evidence and experts is because they know where the experts will go.”

Responding to claims officials distorted their analysis, the former civil servant told ITV’s Peston on Sunday show: “I think that’s completely crazy. The truth is, civil servants operate by the civil service code. The values are honesty, objectivity, integrity, impartiality.



“Their job is to look at the evidence and present it as best they can, analyse the uncertainties … but that’s what they do, they’re objective and impartial.



“And I think what you find is that tends to get accepted very nicely when it agrees with someone’s prior beliefs, but actually, when someone doesn’t like the answer, quite often they decide to shoot the messenger.”



Nigel Lawson, who was chancellor under Margaret Thatcher, also recently claimed that officials would attempt to frustrate Brexit because they were opposed to “radical change”.

On Saturday, a predecessor of O’Donnell accused Brexiters who blame civil servants for trying to sabotage Britain’s withdrawal from the EU of using tactics similar to those of rightwing German nationalists during the the two world wars.



“‘Dolchstoss’ means ‘stab in the back’,” Lord Turnbull told the Observer. “After the first world war there was an armistice, but the German army was then treated as the losers. Then, at the start of the Nazi era, the ‘stab in the back’ theme developed.

“It argued that ‘our great army was never defeated, but it was stabbed in the back by the civilians, liberals, communists, socialists and Jews’. This is what I think these critics are trying to do. They are losing the argument in the sense that they are unable to make their extravagant promises stack up, and so they turn and say: ‘Things would be OK if the civil service weren’t obstructing us.’”