Britain is doomed!! (How is that going to affect you)

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Just as I suspected, the assumption that the EU would start informal discussions because the UK wanted them appears wrong. And arrogant.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...brexit-fallout

You seen this:

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent-bus...it-kent-98028/

[scaryjim]

Just as I suspected, the assumption that the EU would start informal discussions because the UK wanted them appears wrong. ...

I don't think anyone really expected the EU to start that process before Article 50 was invoked, did they?

All this really reveals is that the Leave campaign had no plan for what the deal would look like before they started campaigning. They shouldn't need "informal" negotiations. They should know exactly what they want, they should know who's going to do the negotiation, they should know where their flex points are, what their baseline for acceptability is: there shouldn't be any NEED for informal anything. Instead what we get is "Oh, there's no rush" and, from Osborne this morning:

... in my judgement, we should only do that when there is a clear view about what new arrangements we are seeking with our European neighbours.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36637732

In other words - no-one in government, and no-one on the whole Leave campaign, knows what UK outside the EU is meant to look like. There is no plan. And it's this, more than anything, that I'm angry about. A bunch of career politicians have taken a punt on making a name for themselves, with no actual plan for what to do if their side of the argument actually won. It's like they've treated the whole process as a university society debate - it's like they assumed once it was over everyone would pat each other on the back, say "good debate old boy" and head off to the bar for a drink, with nothing actually changing. Well, tough. You're responsible to the British public, and they've asked you to do something. Get on with it.

[TooNice]

By the looks of things, this could drag on for a while (first we have to wait for a new PM, a formal declaration on intent of leaving, negotiations etc.) with even the possibility of everything amounting to nothing except for the uncertainty we are seeing now. And right now, the market is just reacting to those uncertainties. The real short term consequences haven't started yet.

[opel80uk]

You seen this:

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent-bus...it-kent-98028/

It's ok – the Farmers just haven't had a chance to work out that they will soon get any shaped Bananas they please. Once they see that, and accept this is a small price so that Britain 'Takes back control' (whatever that means), they''ll be fine!

I don't think anyone really expected the EU to start that process before Article 50 was invoked, did they?

I'm genuinely not sure if you are being sarcastic or not?! I think lots of people thought that would be the case - in fact I think a lot of people just assumed it.

All this really reveals is that the Leave campaign had no plan for what the deal would look like before they started campaigning. They shouldn't need "informal" negotiations. They should know exactly what they want, they should know who's going to do the negotiation, they should know where their flex points are, what their baseline for acceptability is: there shouldn't be any NEED for informal anything.

In other words - no-one in government, and no-one on the whole Leave campaign, knows what UK outside the EU is meant to look like. There is no plan. And it's this, more than anything, that I'm angry about. A bunch of career politicians have taken a punt on making a name for themselves, with no actual plan for what to do if their side of the argument actually won. It's like they've treated the whole process as a university society debate - it's like they assumed once it was over everyone would pat each other on the back, say "good debate old boy" and head off to the bar for a drink, with nothing actually changing. Well, tough. You're responsible to the British public, and they've asked you to do something. Get on with it.

All of which makes voting to leave, IMO, astounding. Yes the politicians are responsible, but so are those who voted to leave, knowing that there was no solid plan in place as to what happened next. If it all goes wrong, it will be a fudge for anyone who voted leave to simply say, 'Well those in charge of leave have failed us', when a huge part of the other side was saying that there was no plan in place if we left.

[Domestic_Ginger]

I heard Yorkshire farmers want reassurances their subsidies will be covered too.

The science budget post is really bad; EU grants are the milk and honey of uni PhD funding. The European medicine licensng body (name?) is in London and will quickly be relocating to Milan; it has historically worked closely with the HMRA.

We all know who is ready to swoop in and save the day.

[scaryjim]

... I'm genuinely not sure if you are being sarcastic or not?! I think lots of people thought that would be the case - in fact I think a lot of people just assumed it. ...

Sarcastic? I wasn't trying to be. Did people really think that was going to happen? I can just see the conversation:

"Hi Europe. Look, our country just voted to leave, but, before we commit to anything, I was wondering if we could have a quick chat, informally, you understand, about what kind of deal you might be willinhg to offer us if we do actually leave? Just, you know, for reference ... not that we'd consider using it as a tool to try to persuade the country, which has voted in a fair and democratic referendum, to change its mind, you understand. We just don't want to rush things..."

"Erm ... are you leaving, or not?"

"Well, a lot of people want us to leave, but, you know, I'm not sure fully understand the implications, so if you could just give us some idea of what you might agree to, informally, you know, not binding at all, we could have another chat with them, perhaps? I mean, you've been really kind with all these concessions you've given us so far, and it'd be a shame for us to turn our backs on that, right?"

*sigh* I really don't get how people thought that be a possibility...

Yes the politicians are responsible, but so are those who voted to leave, knowing that there was no solid plan in place as to what happened next.

I'm going to generous to leave voters here - I don't believe that most of them knew there was no plan. Let's be honest, I didn't really *know* there was no plan until after the vote (although I strongly suspected there wasn't). The Leave campaign put up enough bluster about being able to maintain trade deals etc. that they probably had a lot of people convinced that they knew what they wanted post-Brexit. After all, plenty of them believed that the public coffers would be £350m a week better off out of the EU.

Heh, talking of which, something occurred to me earlier today. The EU contributions are designated in Euros. Anyone worked out how much more the Leave vote has cost us in EU contributions just due to the devalued pound?

[opel80uk]

Sarcastic? I wasn't trying to be. Did people really think that was going to happen? I can just see the conversation:

"Hi Europe. Look, our country just voted to leave, but, before we commit to anything, I was wondering if we could have a quick chat, informally, you understand, about what kind of deal you might be willinhg to offer us if we do actually leave? Just, you know, for reference ... not that we'd consider using it as a tool to try to persuade the country, which has voted in a fair and democratic referendum, to change its mind, you understand. We just don't want to rush things..."

"Erm ... are you leaving, or not?"

"Well, a lot of people want us to leave, but, you know, I'm not sure fully understand the implications, so if you could just give us some idea of what you might agree to, informally, you know, not binding at all, we could have another chat with them, perhaps? I mean, you've been really kind with all these concessions you've given us so far, and it'd be a shame for us to turn our backs on that, right?"

*sigh* I really don't get how people thought that be a possibility...

I honestly do think that people thought there would be informal talks first. In fact, I'm pretty sure my original post was in direct response to someone stating that informal talks could just start straight away. And they were far from the only person to say it. The night after Brexit, the news channels were full of reports about the timetable, and all the ones I saw started with the assumption that informal talks would take place first.

I'm going to generous to leave voters here - I don't believe that most of them knew there was no plan. Let's be honest, I didn't really *know* there was no plan until after the vote (although I strongly suspected there wasn't). The Leave campaign put up enough bluster about being able to maintain trade deals etc. that they probably had a lot of people convinced that they knew what they wanted post-Brexit. After all, plenty of them believed that the public coffers would be £350m a week better off out of the EU.

Let's be generous, and assume most leave voters didn't know there was no plan - they certainly didn't know that there was one or what is was, which in my book amounts to the same thing if you vote for it. If this does become a balls up, I for one won't buy any leave voter claiming they were hoodwinked because If they were, it was willfully. Although no matter how bad it gets, I imagine most leave voters will simply say 'lets see in the long run', so there won't actually be anyway of proving it was a mistake, bar complete financial and social meltdown.

Heh, talking of which, something occurred to me earlier today. The EU contributions are designated in Euros. Anyone worked out how much more the Leave vote has cost us in EU contributions just due to the devalued pound?

I haven't, but I'll tell you what I have worked out - all this has made my next trip home a damn sight cheaper...... every cloud and all that!

[scaryjim]

.... every cloud and all that!

As I said in my first post here, some of my household income comes in other currencies than Sterling (mostly dollars), so my family are actually slightly better off in the short term. Then again, if the exchange rate doesn't improve over the next couple of months we'll end up spending more on our holiday this year, so swings and roundabouts!

[excalibur2]

You seen this:

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent-bus...it-kent-98028/

Politicians on any subject:- maybe what some EU politicians say in public (to show toughness) can be different in closed doors...some guy in the future would reveal the truth in his memoirs.

[The Hand]

It was No.10's job to have a contingency plan in place in the event of a leave vote to be honest. The BoE had one lined up.

[opel80uk]

It was No.10's job to have a contingency plan in place in the event of a leave vote to be honest. The BoE had one lined up.

How can No.10 come up with a contingency plan that would've effectively relied on the cooperation of the other EU members that we're now beholden to to offer us some sort of deal? Cooperation that wouldn't be forthcoming without official notification? The only practical thing I can think of was putting in place the diplomats needed to negotiate all the deals that will be needed, and how could they do that without knowing they'd lose?

No.10 warned us what mess was awaiting a Brexit vote, and the majority chose to ignore that and vote leave anyway, dismissing their claims as simply fearmongering. The Brexit-Tory camp always knew they'd be in charge come action time, so blame them, and the people who voted for it.

[scaryjim]

It was No.10's job to have a contingency plan in place in the event of a leave vote to be honest ...

If No, 10 had been neutral I might have agreed, but No. 10 wasn't neutral - No. 10 was campaigning for Remain, and I see no reason to expect Remain campaigners to plan and carry out an Exit. Why was it not the job of the official Leave campaign to make that plan? Surely they should've been offering a Leave plan as part of the campaign?

The absolute lack of any proper organisation and plan for implementing the result of the referendum smacks of how little the Westminster politicians think of their electorate (as I've said before this week). Everyone just assumed the result could be phoned in, close but Remain, we don't need to bother making plans for a Leave vote. No cross-party committees preparing to implement the result, no plans submitted from either side, no real idea of what happens next.

Anyway, No. 10 clearly had a contingency plan in the event of a Leave vote - resign and let the Leave campaign deal with the mess.

EDIT for crosspost:

How can No.10 come up with a contingency plan that would've effectively relied on the cooperation of the other EU members that we're now beholden to to offer us some sort of deal? ...

At the very least someone could've put together the outline of what we actually wanted to get out of a Leave negotiation - what kind of trading terms, what kind of contribution to the EU budget, what controls on immigration from EU, etc. The things that we want from the outcome dont' require anything from the EU. But where we're at is that no-one's apparently even thought about what we might want from that relationship.

Seriously, if I prompted a major strategic decision at work with no idea of why I did it or what I wanted to get out of it, I'd get sacked...

[opel80uk]

At the very least someone could've put together the outline of what we actually wanted to get out of a Leave negotiation - what kind of trading terms, what kind of contribution to the EU budget, what controls on immigration from EU, etc. The things that we want from the outcome dont' require anything from the EU. But where we're at is that no-one's apparently even thought about what we might want from that relationship.

But there was no chance the Leave campaign would be able to do that, because they simply do not know themselves. I suspect what they want is a deal that gives all the benefits of being an EU member, without any costs or obligations. Could've hardly pitched that as a reaslistic plan, although I've no doubt some still would've voted for it.

[directhex]

Ugghh:

http://news.sky.com/story/1717499/ta...et-over-brexit

That was unexpected!! Thought a lower pound would help steel making look a better prospect in the country.

Trade tariffs. Nobody knows how expensive British steel will be to import, post-EU

[scaryjim]

But there was no chance the Leave campaign would be able to do that, because they simply do not know themselves. ...

Then they shouldn't have been campaigning for Leave, frankly. It's somewhat irresponsible to vote for an option in a referendum without really understanding the consequences of that, but it's frankly criminal to campaign for an option in a referendum without understanding the consequences. There should've been some kind of plan. Are we going to aim for EEA membership? Are we going to leave "Europe" altogether and aim for a bilateral trade agreement with the EU? Somewhere in between? What are our priorities? Which services do we care about? Where are we willing to give ground?

All these things *should* have been thought about by any serious leave campaign before they even started campaigning. That didn't happen, but it should have. We've had a national referendum on a serious, country-changing, issue, and the people who called the referendum and campaigned on either side appear to have assumed that the result would require no action. As I said before, it's like they thought it was just some sort of intellectual exercise. Utterly disrespectful. And I thought my opinion of politicians couldn't go down any further...

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

At least this is all a very British shambles ATM!!