EU referendum...THE RESULT...and aftermath...

There is no plan because they didn't expect to lose more like it. Preparation work should have been done by the different ministries and it wasn't. They are doing it now.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

There is no plan because they didn't expect to lose more like it. Preparation work should have been done by the different ministries and it wasn't. They are doing it now.

What preparation work? All I hear is "Brexit means Brexit" which means the square root of bugger all. The Government are terrified of pushing the button because the market will go haywire, like it did when the result was announced, calming down only when Cameron backed out of his promise by resigning.

As for the hugely complex and wide ranging trade negotiations that follow, we have no experience whatsoever in this what with being part of the EU for the last 40 odd years.

What I suspect we will get is a fudge unsatisfactory to either remain or leave far worse than the deal obtained by David Cameron back in February. None of which will kick off until safely after the next election.

Triggering Article 50 will see economic carnage follow as sure as eggs is eggs.

And as Rollo so accurately says no government wants to commit political suicide.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Triggering Article 50 will see economic carnage follow as sure as eggs is eggs.

And as Rollo so accurately says no government wants to commit political suicide.

The one sure fire way that May will commit suicide is to renege on "Brexit means Brexit". Just remember that UKIP are still in existence and with a catchment vote of 17 million people to draw on at the next election.

Greenskin wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Triggering Article 50 will see economic carnage follow as sure as eggs is eggs.

And as Rollo so accurately says no government wants to commit political suicide.

The one sure fire way that May will commit suicide is to renege on "Brexit means Brexit". Just remember that UKIP are still in existence and with a catchment vote of 17 million people to draw on at the next election.

UKIP, that's the party whose hand picked candidate for leadership has been barred from standing. Whose chief donor has already said he wants to create a new party. The party who despite 4 million votes managed a paltry 1 MP?

The only reason anyone gives a toss about Europe is because the issue has been utterly mismanaged by Cameron. It'll be allowed to wither on the vine and in time people will wonder what they were bothered about in the first place.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Triggering Article 50 will see economic carnage follow as sure as eggs is eggs.

And as Rollo so accurately says no government wants to commit political suicide.

The one sure fire way that May will commit suicide is to renege on "Brexit means Brexit". Just remember that UKIP are still in existence and with a catchment vote of 17 million people to draw on at the next election.

UKIP, that's the party whose hand picked candidate for leadership has been barred from standing. Whose chief donor has already said he wants to create a new party. The party who despite 4 million votes managed a paltry 1 MP?

The only reason anyone gives a toss about Europe is because the issue has been utterly mismanaged by Cameron. It'll be allowed to wither on the vine and in time people will wonder what they were bothered about in the first place.

That's a bit naughty Saint Francis. The political suicide I spoke of was about MPs ignoring the wishes of their constituents. Not as you suggest triggering Article 50.

And Hugh, you are being foolish if you think the "leavers" will let it wither on the vine. That's just wishful thinking on your part.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Clutching at straws springs to mind.

If there's one thing that unites all MPs it's that they do not intentionally commit political suicide.

Asking them or in your case pleading with them to go against the majority would be exactly that.

There is no rush. Why do you feel there needs to be?

No why should there be any delay? The longer the delay the more obstacles get put in the way.

This is what Cameron said when setting out the terms of the referendum in February

“If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away."

Then he conveniently buggered off so as to avoid having to do what he promised.

In time the whole thing will become chip paper and the vast majority won't really give a toss, which appears to be the plan.

Where is Cameron's "promise" that you mention so often?

"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away." DC Feb 2016

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hugh Watt wrote:

"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away." DC Feb 2016

"Begin the process".........the process has begun. LM Aug 2016.

Hugh Watt wrote:

"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away." DC Feb 2016

I have news for you.  That isn't a promise.  It's a statement about what he thinks should happen.  Nothing more.

No wonder the Remainers feel they were lied to...

Les Miserable wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away." DC Feb 2016

"Begin the process".........the process has begun.  LM Aug 2016.

No it hasn't, nor will it till 2017 at least, the Governemtn have already said that.

Rickler wrote:

I have news for you.  That isn't a promise.  It's a statement about what he thinks should happen.  Nothing more.

No wonder the Remainers feel they were lied to...  

He was the prime minister, he has some say don't you think.

Meanwhile I see we are still part of the EU.

Whatever... It is still not a promise.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away." DC Feb 2016

"Begin the process".........the process has begun.  LM Aug 2016.

No it hasn't, nor will it till 2017 at least, the Governemtn have already said that.

The process has begun, ministers have been appointed to prepare for Brexit, deal with it.

Hugh Watt wrote:

All I hear is "Brexit means Brexit" which means the square root of bugger all.

Exactly....

What is "Brexit"????

Les Miserable wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

"If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away." DC Feb 2016

"Begin the process".........the process has begun.  LM Aug 2016.

No it hasn't, nor will it till 2017 at least, the Governemtn have already said that.

The process has begun, ministers have been appointed to prepare for Brexit, deal with it.

Rubbish they've given Has Beens like Liam Fox and Oliver Letwin token jobs. And guess what happened when Liam Fox actually tried to "prepare for Brexit". He got slapped down.

Can't happen without parliament assent. The referendum has no constitution legimacy.

Deal with it

Hugh, do you seriously think that there isn't masses of prep work to be undertaken prior to triggering A 50 ?

Cameron, along with a large majority of the country didn't expect the referendum to go the way it did. No shocks there. Did you honestly expect everything to have been done barring to dotting of i's and crossing of t's in prep for the withdrawal, just prior to the vote?

Czarcasm wrote:

Hugh, do you seriously think that there isn't masses of prep work to be undertaken prior to triggering A 50 ?

Cameron, along with a large majority of the country didn't expect the referendum to go the way it did. No shocks there. Did you honestly expect everything to have been done barring to dotting of i's and crossing of t's in prep for the withdrawal, just prior to the vote?

No! Article 50 is all about preparing to leave, why should we need to prepare to prepare? there should at least be a parliamentary debate but it's not even on the table, nor will there be until at least 2017.

With a binary choice of leave/stay I would absolutely expect there to be some sort of plan either way. but neither side offered one up and even the 'winners' Gove, Farage and Johnson ultimately lost.

Hugh Watt wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

There is no plan because they didn't expect to lose more like it. Preparation work should have been done by the different ministries and it wasn't. They are doing it now.

What preparation work? All I hear is "Brexit means Brexit" which means the square root of bugger all. The Government are terrified of pushing the button because the market will go haywire, like it did when the result was announced, calming down only when Cameron backed out of his promise by resigning.

As for the hugely complex and wide ranging trade negotiations that follow, we have no experience whatsoever in this what with being part of the EU for the last 40 odd years.

What I suspect we will get is a fudge unsatisfactory to either remain or leave far worse than the deal obtained by David Cameron back in February. None of which will kick off until safely after the next election.

Hugh, exactly!

There was none because Cameron and the remainers were arrogant enough and cock sure of themselves that they would win that they didn't bother to prepare for an exit vote.

They lost.

It is now down to May and her government to sort it and it will take time.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

There is no plan because they didn't expect to lose more like it. Preparation work should have been done by the different ministries and it wasn't. They are doing it now.

What preparation work? All I hear is "Brexit means Brexit" which means the square root of bugger all. The Government are terrified of pushing the button because the market will go haywire, like it did when the result was announced, calming down only when Cameron backed out of his promise by resigning.

As for the hugely complex and wide ranging trade negotiations that follow, we have no experience whatsoever in this what with being part of the EU for the last 40 odd years.

What I suspect we will get is a fudge unsatisfactory to either remain or leave far worse than the deal obtained by David Cameron back in February. None of which will kick off until safely after the next election.

Hugh, exactly!

There was none because Cameron and the remainers were arrogant enough and cock sure of themselves that they would win that they didn't bother to prepare for an exit vote.

They lost.

It is now down to May and her government to sort it and it will take time.

Why will it take time? If the country voted as it did, there should be an immediate action to invoke article 50.

Article 50 isn't the act of leaving itself, it's the act of negotiating to leave. So what's the delay.

Because it's a bit like calling for a taxi when you haven't yet packed your suitcase.

Rome wasn't built in day, etc etc....

Rickler wrote:

Because it's a bit like calling for a taxi when you haven't yet packed your suitcase.

Rome wasn't built in day, etc etc....

Sure but we've known we might have a holiday booked for a year and we've known it's going ahead for a couple of months. Surely we must have ironed shirts and clean undies.

Rickler wrote:

Because it's a bit like calling for a taxi when you haven't yet packed your suitcase.

Rome wasn't built in day, etc etc....

Bingo.

FWIW. I'm far from a fan of the EU myself. Its bloated, Undemocratic (Like our own House of Lords) and allows mediocre bureaucrats from nations such as Latvia an equal say to the likes of u, France and Germany, that's ridiculous . Like Rickler said earlier, the fact that Nigel Farage can earn £80,000 as MEP highlights its absurdity.

However, leaving would cause utter chaos, we can't negotiate new trade deals until we are free of it which would take a minimum of 2 years. Then we've got years and years of painstaking trade negotiations. Whilst we are negotiating these complex and wide ranging deals, something no one in Government has any experience of due to being part of Europe for the last 30 odd years, we revert to basic WTO status. That means huge tariffs threatening exporting businesses.

The economy went into a flat spin when the result was known, calming only when it was clear that we weren't going any where for the foreseeable future. This idea of activating article 50 slowly wasn't part of the deal at all, not from Camerons lips or Leave campaign slogans such as "Take back control of our borders" or "“Let's give our NHS the £350m the EU takes every week." Taking an unspecified time to start even talking about leaving isn't taking back control at all.

Where that leaves us now is unclear, I believe there was no plan for Brexit because there is no plan to Brexit. Like it or not the referendum result is not constitutionally binding, it would be very easy to bog down in parliament. The Lords feasibly could then block any new legislation or attempt to repeal existing law.

The idea to hold referendum itself was a political decision made by David Cameron to pacify his party and try and head off the threat of UKIP, as soon as DC resigned the result lost its legitimacy. The Coronation of Theresa May and efforts to prevent the pro-brexit leader candidate Andrea Leadsom from being allowed to face a ballot of the party membership are also striking.

At best I would imagine the Government doing what they normally do with things like this. Leave it for someone else to deal with, such as the Heathrow third runway where faced with an acceptance that it was the only realistic option for increased airport capacity in the South East, they commissioned an investigation to report back after an election they expected to lose. In time something else will come along, it always does.

In short I don't think we are going to leave any time soon, there's no appetite for it .

In short, I've not heard anything from anyone in a position to make it (Brexit) happen, to suggest it (Brexit) won't happen. What I have heard from those very same people is that there is no desperate haste trigger Article 50, and that it will happen once we are best placed to do so.

If at the end of next year it still hasn't happened, I may revise that view. But taking the view that because it hasn't happened straight away or won't happen next week or next month means it will never happen, is at best wishful thinking.