The post you are reporting:
The Times Online has just reported - extract:
...""""Britain today emerged from the longest recession in modern history but the economy grew by just 0.1 per cent between October and December, far below expectations of a 0.4 per cent rebound.......
......In 2009 as a whole, the economy fell by more than 4.8 per cent, the fastest pace of decline in a single year for 88 years, and more than in any 12 month period since the Great Depression.
Britain is the last major economy to emerge from a full-blown downturn after the United States, Japan, China, Germany and France all climbed out of recession in the third quarter between July and September last year. America will reveal whether it has sustained its recovery when it releases fourth-quarter GDP figures this week.""""""
Well there it is, what Brown has been waiting for.
I suppose any news of improvement has to be welcome but this 0.1% is a great disappointment when something like 0.4% was expected. Bear in mind that this is in a period that ends with Christmas and the last minute sales before the VAT was increased. I have predicted that Q1 in 2010 will see a negative growth figure again and now this is much more likely.
I believe that a March election date (maybe even earlier) now more likely as a result.
What is interesting is that we have an official definition of a recession, two consecutive quarters of negative growth, but there is no definition of recovery. It would be logical to me for a recovery to be defined as two consecutive quarters of growth. But no, this tiny improvement will enable Brown to boast a recovery knowing full well it is not likely to be sustained into Q1.
There is nothing for Brown to boast about with these figures.