It’s as if somebody has hit the pause button on the economy. After going backwards in August and September, the UK failed to register any increase in activity in October either. The economy has flatlined since the summer and over the course of 2019 will have averaged around 0.2% growth per quarter.

Unlike in the spring, there was no artificial boost to activity caused by businesses stocking up on goods ahead of the end of October deadline for leaving the European Union, which meant the October GDP estimate was even worse than the 0.1% the City had been expecting. Any modest build-up in inventories was negated by the bleakest month for the construction sector in more than two years. Even higher energy output in response to the cold snap in October failed to turn growth positive.

Drill down a bit and the picture becomes even bleaker. Consumers are spending a bit more because wages are rising faster than prices, but investment is falling, UK factories are producing less than they were a year ago and the trade deficit is widening.

There was a time when such downbeat data – the last before the general election – would have been seen as having an impact on the financial markets and the public mood. Not this time, though. Zero growth engendered zero interest.

For the past decade, periods of good economic news have been the exception not the norm so it is possible voters have become inured to the latest bulletins from the Office for National Statistics.

But another reason why the GDP, trade and production figures failed to catch fire politically is that they slot neatly into the narratives of the main parties. Labour and the Conservatives agree that the economy has been performing poorly; where they differ is in their explanation for the torpor. Jeremy Corbyn says austerity has killed growth; Boris Johnson says getting Brexit done will unleash pent-up investment. Both say all will be well come Friday. History suggests that that is the triumph of hope over experience.

Bad audits need to be held to account

The Financial Reporting Council – Britain’s accountancy watchdog – has fined Grant Thornton £650,000 for messing up the audit of a stock market-listed company. That’s fine. It’s what the FRC is there to do in cases when auditors get it wrong.

What’s not fine is the failure to disclose the name of the company involved. The FRC boasts on its website of its transparency and how it works on behalf of investors. Funny way of showing it.

Ted Baker needs to restore its street cred and its share price

There has been another flash sale at Ted Baker with the fashion brand offering up to 35% off on Tuesday. The deal wasn’t available on its clothes though … it was on the company’s already bombed-out share price, writes Zoe Wood.

Things are going from bad to worse at the former stock market darling. It has been in freefall since its founder Ray Kelvin was forced out last year after being accused of presiding over a regime of “forced hugs” and harassment. Its shares, which were changing hands for £21 in January, have since lost 83% of their value after four profit alerts. Now the company has warned profits could be just £5m this year – 10% of last year’s haul.

So the chairman and chief executive are out. Rachel Osborne, who only arrived as its finance chief last month, and is now the acting chief executive.

The big question though is can Ted Baker recover? It has an “action plan” that includes a cost-cutting drive and probably a sale and leaseback of its head office. The retailer might be able to patch up its finances but what about its appeal to shoppers? The company’s claim that it is still “well supported by customers” is laughable; they are practically giving their clothes away.

With its quirky style Ted Baker used to defy gravity in a sea of fashion mediocrity but it has come down to earth with a bang. The shares recovered a little later in the day, showing there are still believers. But is that faith linked to hope of a Kelvin rescue bid? If so there are big hurdles to overcome. The fashion entrepreneur would need to find a thick-skinned backer and dig into his own pockets, which are not as deep as they used to be; his 35% stake was worth £567m four years ago but today is worth just over £50m.