Predictions - what will end up happening

[Arabdownunder]

Yeah and what about all the Leave voters? The idea that a majority of them, or even a significant minority, are unhappy with the result is bollocks IMO. Sure there are some who are going 'Christ what have I/we done' but they're a fairly small minority who are being given disproportionate publicity at present.

They too would be seething but what could they do? Johnson isn't going to give a shit about a bit of social unrest (he is a tory after all).

A proportion of brexit voters would buy the "renegotiated " spin. The rest will split between UKIP, other protest parties and a hopelessly dysfunctional labour party.

[Jute]

From the back pedaling being shown by most of the Leave Tories over the last few days I full expect option 3 with Boris getting a deal that opts UK out of directives on workers rights and anything else he and Gove consider bad for business. White van man will feel betrayed smash up some town centres but change nothing.

Edited June 27, 2016 by Jute

[dogmc]

From the back pedaling being shown by most of the Leave Tories over the last few days I full expect option 3 with Boris getting a deal that opts UK out of directives on workers rights and anything else he and Gove consider bad for business. White van man will feel betrayed smash up some town centres but change nothing.

Tories would be terrified about picking up the white van man votes especially with labour in utter free fall. It's gonna be very difficult to avoid the article 50 because of the spectre of ukip becoming a significant electoral threat. Boris looking very much like a man who bet everything on black and would rather have stuck with the puggies.

[cyderspaceman]

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/people-are-really-really-hoping-this-theory-about-david-cameron-and-brexit-is-true--bJhqBql0VZ?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100                                                             

 

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-manoeuvred 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.

Edited June 27, 2016 by cyderspaceman

[dogmc]

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/people-are-really-really-hoping-this-theory-about-david-cameron-and-brexit-is-true--bJhqBql0VZ?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100 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-manoeuvred 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.

Spot on.

[zidane's child]

 

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/people-are-really-really-hoping-this-theory-about-david-cameron-and-brexit-is-true--bJhqBql0VZ?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100                                                             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-manoeuvred 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.

 

 

If something like this were to happen then it could be the best thing Cameron has done since he took over in 2010!

[williemillersmoustache]

From the FT's Gideon Rachmann:

 

 

I do not believe that Brexit will happen

 

There will be howls of rage, but why should extremists on both sides dictate how the story ends?

 

All good dramas involve the suspension of disbelief. So it was with Brexit. I went to bed at 4am on Friday depressed that Britain had voted to leave the EU. The following day my gloom only deepened. But then, belatedly, I realised that I have seen this film before. I know how it ends. And it does not end with the UK leaving Europe.

 

Any long-term observer of the EU should be familiar with the shock referendum result. In 1992 the Danes voted to reject the Maastricht treaty. The Irish voted to reject both the Nice treaty in 2001 and the Lisbon treaty in 2008.

 

And what happened in each case? The EU rolled ever onwards. The Danes and the Irish were granted some concessions by their EU partners. They staged a second referendum. And the second time around they voted to accept the treaty. So why, knowing this history, should anyone believe that Britain’s referendum decision is definitive?

 

It is true that the British case has some novel elements. The UK has voted to leave the EU altogether. It is also a bigger economy than Ireland or Denmark, which changes the psychology of the relationship. And it is certainly true that the main actors in the drama seem to think it is for real. David Cameron, the UK prime minister, announced his resignation following the vote; and Jonathan Hill, Britain’s EU commissioner for financial services, has followed suit.

 

Yet there are already signs that Britain might be heading towards a second referendum rather than the door marked exit. Boris Johnson, a leader of the Leave campaign and Britain’s probable next prime minister, hinted at his real thinking back in February, when he said: “There is only one way to get the change we need — and that is to vote to go; because all EU history shows that they only really listen to a population when it says No.â€

 

Having been a journalist in Brussels at the time of the Danish referendum on Maastricht, Mr Johnson is very familiar with the history of second referendums. It is also well known that he was never a diehard Leaver, and hesitated until the last moment before deciding which side to back.

 

His main goal was almost certainly to become prime minister; campaigning to leave the EU was merely the means to that end. Once Mr Johnson has entered 10 Downing Street, he can reverse his position on the EU.

 

But would our European partners really be willing to play along? Quite possibly. You can already see it in the talk by Wolfgang Schäuble’s finance ministry in Germany of negotiating an “associate†membership status for Britain. In reality, the UK already enjoys a form of associate membership since it is not a participant in the EU’s single currency or the Schengen passport-free zone. Negotiating some further ways in which the country could distance itself from the hard core of the bloc, while keeping its access to the single market, would merely elaborate on a model that already exists.

 

And what kind of new concession should be offered? That is easy. What Mr Johnson would need to win a second referendum is an emergency brake on free movement of people, allowing the UK to limit the number of EU nationals moving to Britain if it has surged beyond a certain level.

 

In retrospect, it was a big mistake on the part of the EU not to give Mr Cameron exactly this concession in his renegotiation of the UK’s terms of membership early this year. It was the prime minister’s inability to promise that Britain could set an upper limit on immigration that probably ultimately lost him the vote.

 

Even so, with 48 per cent of voters opting to stay in the union, the result was extremely close. If the Remain campaign could fight a second referendum with a proper answer to the question of immigration it should be able to win fairly easily.

 

But why should Europe grant Britain any such a concession on free movement? Because, despite all the current irritations, the British are valuable members of the EU. The UK is a big contributor to the budget and it is a serious military and diplomatic power.

 

Just as it will be painful for the UK to lose access to the EU’s internal market, so it will be painful for the EU to lose access to the British labour market. More than 3m EU nationals live and work in Britain, with more than 800,000 from Poland alone.

 

Agreeing to an emergency brake on free movement of people might mean some modest limits to future migration. But that would surely be better than the much harsher restrictions that could follow a complete British withdrawal from the EU.

 

Of course, there would be howls of anger on both sides of the Channel if any such deal is struck. The diehard Leavers in Britain would cry betrayal, while the diehard federalists in the European Parliament — who want to punish the UK and press on with “political union†in Europe — will also resist any new offer.

 

But there is no reason to let the extremists on both sides of the debate dictate how this story has to end. There is a moderate middle in both Britain and Europe that should be capable of finding a deal that keeps the UK inside the EU.

 

Like all good dramas, the Brexit story has been shocking, dramatic and upsetting. But its ending is not yet written.

 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

^{Option 3 I think is Borisconi's ideal option - however, unlike previous rejections by the electorate, this might not be as likely as one would think.  I think there will be a substantial number within the EU who will be glad to see the most reluctant member gone.}

 

^{My feeling is that Option 2 will be the end result - a deal along the line of the Swiss or Norwegians relationship.}

Edited June 27, 2016 by DeeTillEhDeh

[LongTimeLurker]

Merkel and co saying no informal talks until you invoke Article 50:

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36637232

 

means either you do a complete U-turn and stay as is or you leave.

[dogmc]

Merkel and co saying no informal talks until you invoke Article 50:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36637232

means either you do a complete U-turn and stay as is or you leave.

Boris & Co really have hibsed this spectacularly. Genuinely don't think they have a clue what to do. Any kind of u turn on brexit is gold dust for ukip who will hoover up both labour and tory voters. Send in article 50 and loses Scotland whilst eu uses negotiations kick ruk in the baw. There's no obvious compromise for bj & gove.

[welshbairn]

Merkel and co saying no informal talks until you invoke Article 50:

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36637232

 

means either you do a complete U-turn and stay as is or you leave.

 

Depends on whether other countries do what she says. I bet there will loads of chat going on through Ambassadors and the like.

[Anonapersona]

If the UK does a u-turn and decides to stay after all, it would make any future referendums - on anything - pointless.

[Granny Danger]

If the UK does a u-turn and decides to stay after all, it would make any future referendums - on anything - pointless.

Thank you.

I was beginning to think I was the only person on here concerned about the implications of undermining the result of a referendum because 'we' didn't like the result.

[Cerberus]

If the UK does a u-turn and decides to stay after all, it would make any future referendums - on anything - pointless.

 

Just make sure the next one is binding.

[Granny Danger]

Just make sure the next one is binding.

Nothing in this country is 'binding'. Holyrood could be voted out of existence tomorrow by Westminster.

[dogmc]

If the UK does a u-turn and decides to stay after all, it would make any future referendums - on anything - pointless.

True and on this particular one it would be electoral suicide for the tories.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Thank you.

I was beginning to think I was the only person on here concerned about the implications of undermining the result of a referendum because 'we' didn't like the result.

 

The only way the EU result could be overturned is if a new EU deal were negotiated and a second referendum took place - I cannot  see it happening myself.

[welshbairn]

If the UK does a u-turn and decides to stay after all, it would make any future referendums - on anything - pointless.

 

What if the EU turns round and offers what we're asking for if we stay in? Unlikely I know, but I don't see why referendum decisions should last for ever in changing circumstances.

[Granny Danger]

The only way the EU result could be overturned is if a new EU deal were negotiated and a second referendum took place - I cannot  see it happening myself.

There have been suggestions elsewhere on here that a GE calling for another Referendum could happen that would negate the result of this one.

I thought you were one of those agreeing with that view; apologies if not.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

There have been suggestions elsewhere on here that a GE calling for another Referendum could happen that would negate the result of this one.

I thought you were one of those agreeing with that view; apologies if not.

 

There should still be a General Election imho - irrespective of what happens with Brexit. 

 

Any new referendum would have to be on a new deal ie you just can't have a second referendum because you didn't like the answer to the first.

 

In some ways it is akin to the SNP's position on a second referendum.

 

 

The UK Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that EU membership has become the preferred option of a majority of the British people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2016, such as there being a renegotiation of the terms of Britain's EU membership.

Edited June 27, 2016 by DeeTillEhDeh