UK Leaves the EU - What happens next?

[spiderspider]

Farage sticks it to the EU MEPs. Well worth a watch, 6 minutes long.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36650014

In other news :

 

[monaghanmonaghan is verified member.]

BTW, Osborne clarified two things this morning.

1. It was't the responsibility of Remain to have a plan for post brexit, but Leave

Surely it is the responsibility of the government to manage our future (that's what the few who bothered to vote in the previous elections voted them in to do). The government asked us our view on the EU and we told them, they would have known it was a cross party outcome before they even printed the ballot papers.

If the government let the country fail as it is someone else's job then that impacts us all whether we voted in or out.

 

[AlistairM]

Farage sticks it to the EU MEPs. Well worth a watch, 6 minutes long.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36650014

In other news :

Yes saw that on the Parliament Channel. I can't work out what Charlotte Church was doing there sitting behind him though?

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Whether you believe any of these would actually happen, this was a comprehensive summary of the ways Brexit might not come about or not...
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/world/europe/brexit-bregret-european-union-the-interpreter.html

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Surely it is the responsibility of the government to manage our future (that's what the few who bothered to vote in the previous elections voted them in to do). The government asked us our view on the EU and we told them, they would have known it was a cross party outcome before they even printed the ballot papers.

If the government let the country fail as it is someone else's job then that impacts us all whether we voted in or out.

It may or may not be its responsibility - that's a philosophical question - but the practical fact of the matter is that they have explicitly made it clear they are not going to take on that responsibility. Cameron deflected over 50 questions yesterday as being "up to the next government".

 

[monaghanmonaghan is verified member.]

It may or may not be its responsibility - that's a philosophical question - but the practical fact of the matter is that they have explicitly made it clear they are not going to take on that responsibility. Cameron deflected over 50 questions yesterday as being "up to the next government".

If they are not going to do anything, then they should step aside now and let someone make a decision whether we are leaving or not, but we can't sit on our hands for the next few months thinking all will be fine.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

If they are not going to do anything, then they should step aside now and let someone make a decision whether we are leaving or not, but we can't sit on our hands for the next few months thinking all will be fine.

They are stepping aside, just as quickly as the Conservative Party's process for choosing a new leader allows. The candidature opens tomorrow and closes Thursday, and a new leader will be in place on or before 2 September 2016.

Consequently it's pretty clear that nothing much is going to be able to happen before then (though that won't stop markets and businesses reacting to the uncertainty).

 

[monaghanmonaghan is verified member.]

I get the feeling that Edwin may be banging on about this "mistake" long after everyone else has moved on

We may not all agree with Edwin (or other members), but please let's not turn this thread into a personal attack on any member, surely we're all bigger than that?

 

[monaghanmonaghan is verified member.]

They are stepping aside, just as quickly as the Conservative Party's process for choosing a new leader allows. The candidature opens tomorrow and closes Thursday, and a new leader will be in place on or before 2 September 2016.

Consequently it's pretty clear that nothing much is going to be able to happen before then (though that won't stop markets and businesses reacting to the uncertainty).

Surely that should have been made clear before the vote, yes we knew Cameron had threatened to go, but we didn't know he would take the ball home and we'd have to negotiate the return of the ball for a few months before the outcome of the vote could be decided.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

I get the feeling that Edwin may be banging on about this "mistake" long after everyone else has moved on

Article 50 guarantees we'll be "banging on" about the issue for at least 2 years, once it's activated, since every aspect of the deal on offer is going to be scrutinised and dissected. And until it's activated, well there's still the slim hope that it won't be...

 

[BREWSTERS]

It may or may not be its responsibility - that's a philosophical question

No no no no no - it's not a philosophical question...this is what's wrong with politics!

It is the governments job to work for the will of the people. End of.

They've (both parties) have been getting away with it for decades...possibly centuries.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Surely that should have been made clear before the vote, yes we knew Cameron had threatened to go, but we didn't know he would take the ball home and we'd have to negotiate the return of the ball for a few months before the outcome of the vote could be decided.

It was clear before the vote. David Cameron warned back in January 2016 that the Civil Service was NOT working on a specific Brexit plan.

The media tried very, very hard to get the Leave camp to talk through the specifics of their Brexit plan during the campaign, but it became clear fairly quickly that they didn't have one either.

The "surprise" that those in the Leave camp are now expressing towards the lack of plan is a "politician's surprise" i.e. designed to boost their own position as seen from outside. In reality, there's nothing for them to be surprised about because they've known for 5 months at least that the Government wasn't planning for Brexit.

 

[monaghanmonaghan is verified member.]

It was clear before the vote. David Cameron warned back in January 2016 that the Civil Service was NOT working on a specific Brexit plan

The exit process has to be a government led process, is it democratic to hand over the mechanism to a minority of MP's who want to leave, we'd not hand over any other issues in this way. We need both sides views represented in the way the country is going to move forward. We can't just wash our hands with the decision unless all the remain voters jump ship and move to the EU (which we know they can't and won't do).

Is that not irresponsible of the elected government (non party or issue specific) to do nothing given the potential risks to the future of the country (that they kept telling us about) We were asked to decide "in or out", not "agree with us or we'll shaft everyone and resign."

 

[ian]

We may not all agree with Edwin (or other members), but please let's not turn this thread into a personal attack on any member, surely we're all bigger than that?

Was just messing, hence the smiley; Edwin's opinion is just as valid and I welcome it.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

There was a huge volume of warnings in the run-up to the referendum (maybe dismissed with the hand-waving moniker "Project Fear") that a pro-Brexit result would leave a vacuum in Government that would quickly be filled by Boris and his fellow Brexiteers. Again, it's not remotely surprising, but it may be "surprising" i.e. there are politicians and pundits who may be seeking to advance their positions by pretending to be surprised.

On the other hand, I have seen commentators on some blogs expressing seemingly genuine surprise that other members of the Vote Leave group (e.g. the UKIP MP, or the Labour MPs who campaigned for Leave) won't have a say in the decision-making process. That, I'm afraid, just reflects their lack of understanding as to how the political process in this country works: the party in power has ALL the say*.

(*They may seek input and opinion from other groups but that's not the same as giving them any power over the outcome.)

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

No matter how everything else plays out in the next weeks and months (trade, freedom of movement, etc.) we are almost certain to end up with a significantly more right-wing government making the decisions than we have at the moment.

 

[martin-s]

I'm personally a big fan of the approach to take our time and not be forced into rushing things. Once we've triggered article 50, we have a finite deadline for negotiating our exit. We also have an irreversible exit.

This is a window of opportunity to get our ducks in a row. The short term volatility doesn't actually matter that much. What matters is that we secure the right long term deal.

Cameron falling on his sword has bought the UK time to get things right.

 

[ian]

I'm interested to know in the context of "what happens next", if any of you are taking a revised position financially, be that moving funds abroad, buying assets rather than money in the bank, shoving it under the mattress?

 

[VSC]

No matter how everything else plays out in the next weeks and months (trade, freedom of movement, etc.) we are almost certain to end up with a significantly more right-wing government making the decisions than we have at the moment.

... which has always been one of MY greatest concerns, and how a post leave government would deal with the hundreds of EU regulations embedded in to UK law.

They won't just disappear after we exit. They have to be unpicked with new legislation which could take years. So even after we have left, the EU will still be in UK law.

Found this interesting article on how leaving the EU could effect UK worker rights:
https://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/voice/04/real-impact-eu-uk-employment.aspx

What I hadn't realised was that the UK was looking at getting an opt-out in December 2015 from EU employment law which would affect things such as the working time directive; holiday entitlements, maternity and paternity rights; etc.

Also, Norway and Switzerland, in their deals with the EU, have trade agreements with the EU which involve adherence to substantial amounts of EU-derived employment law.

This is one reason that I strongly believe that we should have another general election soon (I personally hope so), and that hopefully the make up of that new government should be representative of the UK electorate - so, a mix of both leave and remain MPs ... and NOT as some people are wanting, exclusively leave.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

What I hadn't realised was that the UK was looking at getting an opt-out in December 2015 from EU employment law which would affect things such as the working time directive; holiday entitlements, maternity and paternity rights; etc.

Again, I'm afraid it comes down to how closely people were watching the campaigns. The point was made a number of times that the UK was actively trying to block a lot of the pro-worker reforms introduced or guaranteed by the EU - and that was down to the actions of the current government - but it obviously got lost in the maelstrom of mud-slinging back and forth.

Put it like this: nothing that has happened so far (apart from the Labour meltdown) has been a real, honest-to-goodness surprise if one kept on top of every twist and turn and every expert prognostication going into the referendum...

However:
A) Most people (99%? 99.9%? 99.99%?) won't have been following that closely, so these things will appear to be a surprise to them
and
B) Knowing that something's possible does little to negate the shock when it actually happens (believe me!) In fact, it's probably worse, almost, since that abstract low-pitch feeling of dread gets replaced by a chilling, concrete certainty.