so ....... are we leaving or not????

axisus

An intriguing read from the Guardians Comments section:

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

quarky

Why can't we do it the old-fashioned way, and fund political instability in other EU nations. That might be a lot easier and cheaper in the long run

Garthy

There is some serious plagiarism going on in the media, that article has appeared in several papers word for word.

PolarityMan

Interesting idea I think having to enact the referendum result is far more damaging a Tory leader than a Labour one.

Myranda

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36637037

According to Boris, after leaving we will "intensify" our ties to Europe... freedom of movement wont be affected (presumably either way...), we'll continue the same trade agreements (including the ones that might mean spending money on the EU)... about the only thing that he seems to see being different is the European Court of Human Rights... that's it. Well, glad we didn't all waste a shit-ton of time with a referendum for no benefit to anyone, and wiping out billions from the world's stock markets (and, last I checked, we're in the world).

Perhaps the next referendum should be to bang heads against a wall, or have walls banged against heads.

Chalky

The top priority on Tory MP minds is "Who is going to be the new PM", not Article50.

Myranda

While my views are clear on which side I was on for the referendum, I think this whole "will they wont they" thing makes our nation look like it's run by morons... No one benefits from juggling the decision forever... 

Either enact Article 50, or confirm you're not going to... but DO something

paulk

Myranda said:

...this whole "will they wont they" thing makes our nation look like it's run by morons...

There's no 'look like' about it.

Modulus_Amps

Rushing into it would just be silly, you want to look silly, then rush into it.

May not even go ahead if you believe this article

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-loophole-eu-referendum-mps-law-legal-legislation-constitution-a7105181.html

hobbio

Why do we have to do something right away? There is no way something this important should be rushed. It's been a few days since the result came in, and politicians can't even organise a lunch run without forming 5 committees on the bread choices and a further 7 sub-committees on the effects of pickle vs mayo.

This needs to be done right, not quick.

hugbot

Garthy said:

There is some serious plagiarism going on in the media, that article has appeared in several papers word for word.

Its because it was a user comment, not a columnist so its free content.

Bucket

Well, we can be sure Boris didn't actually want it and is shitting a brick now. Gove has knifed him in the back by endorsing him as a candidate, and as the post quoted in the OP says, he has a few options left and all of them are game over for him.

We might end up with Theresa May, who at the very least isn't a bumbling, backstabbing, unstatesmanlike walking disaster like Boris. Given that she was pro-Remain, what would she end up doing re. Article 50? Go with the result of the referendum or go with what she and most of Parliament (as well as a rising number of the British people and even Leave campaigners) actually want?

Bucket

hugbot said:

Garthy said:

There is some serious plagiarism going on in the media, that article has appeared in several papers word for word.

Its because it was a user comment, not a columnist so its free content.

And to be fair, every time I've seen it it's been introduced as someone else's words and the original source credited.

TTony

Myranda said:

I think this whole "will they wont they" thing makes our nation look like it's run by morons... 

Which is one of the few unequivocal conclusions to emerge from the whole debacle.

Unfortunately, I hold out little hope that the people lining themselves up to replace the batch of morons who were (and/or are in the process of being) sacrificed as a result of their involvement in the referendum will be any more deserving of the term "leader" of our country.

Indeed, given that the likely replacement set have demonstrated that self-interest appears way more important to them than any national interest, I fear things will only get worse.

Still, it's stopped raining, so that's nice.

crunchman

The same arguments apply that applied before Thursday.  I voted out knowing that the markets would have kittens short term.  It's the long term that counts.  What will the EU look like in 10 or 15 years time?  Not the same as now.  Do we want to be part of what it will be like then?  No.  That's the timeframe I'm looking at not a few short term over reactions by the markets.

Ironically, Brexit might actually trigger some changes for the better in the EU but if we had voted to remain then it would have been business as usual.

Papers like the Guardian and Independent are ridiculous at the moment.  Normally I read their websites to give a counter view to the Torygraph.  Now I've completely given up reading the euro-drivel they spout.

If any government goes back on the referendum result then there will be riots in the street.  Much more likely is what Boris seems to be angling for with a deal that gives us some kind of associate membership (although maybe not by that name) - which is what a lot of people would have wanted all along.

eSully

I wasn't sure whether to post this here or the "A Realisation" thread about Facebook but overall this thread seems more appropriate. This graphic came up on my Facebook wall shared by a very vocal Remainer acquaintance suggesting that there was a precedent for another referendum and that not all hope was lost.... How you could look at this and see it as positive I don't know.

dtr

hobbio said:

Why do we have to do something right away? There is no way something this important should be rushed. It's been a few days since the result came in, and politicians can't even organise a lunch run without forming 5 committees on the bread choices and a further 7 sub-committees on the effects of pickle vs mayo.

This needs to be done right, not quick.

The uncertainty is damaging.  The hurt will be worse the longer this drags out.  Businesses won't know where they want to employ staff or expand offices, so will either hold off from investing (and employing) or take the 'safe' option and expand somewhere they know will be inside the single market.

The damage will be worst for us but it will hurt the EU too, so if the aim is to negotiate with as much goodwill on both sides as possible, we should probably look to stop fucking up their economy by our indecision sooner rather than later.

No-one knows yet how the negotiations will go, but until they kick off with Article 50 it's all just fannying about.  For sure the leaders of leave are a bunch of morons for getting this far without any kind of plan, but we need someone to behave like a grown-up sometime soon and sit down at a negotiating table.

I thought the vote to leave was because we were convinced that we could run things more competently, show more initiative, and just plain do better than the EU.  The longer we leave it before we show the dimmest sign of political competence, the more that looks like unrealistic fantasy bullshit.

TheBigDipper

I voted "Remain", but I always felt this was about Conservative party (and current government) regime change and not really about the EU or making any of the changes the country (from both sides) is looking for. 

On that basis, I think we'll see the "Leave" side take over the government (150,000 Conservative party members picking our next PM until 2020). The Sun has already openly started promoting BoJo (as they like to call him). They'll dilly-dally for as long as possible regarding invoking Article 50. If they're lucky, the EU will act in its own interest and find a way to invoke it on us, because they'll say our referendum result plus the dilly-dallying is undermining it all. That allows the new regime to have clean hands and say "The EU did it, not good old BoJo". 

crunchman

The leave camp was a very disparate group of people.  What Farage wants is not the same as what Boris wants, which is not the same as whay the likes of Kate Hoey want.

The people who will actually conduct the negotiations are the people in the Tory party who are in power after Cameron steps down.  They will want a couple of months to set out the details of what they want in the exit negotiations.  I would imagine that they will try to have some off the record conversations with other EU countries to gauge what the responses will likely be.

From that point of view, waiting two or three months to invoke article 50 would make sense.

From a British point of view waiting will also bring the Dutch elections a bit closer.  If the Dutch elections happen before the process, or early on in the process, and Geert Wilders wins (he's ahead in the polls) then the Dutch will be having a referendum and we might have an ally, and a better bargaining position.

quarky

Easiest thing is to invoke Article 50, but just say that things will pretty much remain as they are (freedom of movement, etc.) until we are ready to change things on our side. That puts an end to the uncertainly, but allows us to unravel ourselves from the EU mess slowly and democratically, at a pace people are comfortable with.

Basically, get out the same way we were sucked in.

Fretwired

Myranda said:

Either enact Article 50, or confirm you're not going to... but DO something

I'd do nothing. We need a leader and a government. French elections this year, German elections next year. We bide our time and make the UK an election issue in these countries. The markets will settle down when they see nothing is happening. They like certainty. They'll go haywire when we start negotiating. Schulz and Junker can go boil their heads.