*My main point on this thread has been incredulity that there appears to be no significant plan for Brexit.*

Poirot, at your age you should at least have learned that life is what happens, whilst you are making other plans, as the law of unintended consequences is never far away.

Any plan can be ruined by circumstances beyond our control, so much better to have an approximate plan which can be altered as those circumstances change. So flexibility is the key. That is the case in Europe. It is time that they Eurocrats stopped being so dictatorial and gave the people what they want, not trying to blackmail them.
Perhaps they should let Nigel Farage negotiate with the EU Eurocrats, at least he tells them the truth as it is.

Sounds like the young who are googling what the EU is, are not much different to many of our voters.

I think that Farage made some great points. It is not up to him to decide where every cent saved on EU costs is spent, he does not run the Govt. Esssentially however, it will be a net saving to Britain of 10 billion a year and the Govt is free to spend that where people want it to be spent.

Some times integrity matters more than money and one has to take a stand. People are sick of having lost their democratic rights to Brussels and most want their countries back, along with free trade amongst countries, and some kind of control of the movement of people, which is yet to be negotiated and agreed on. If the EU has any kind of integrity, they will let the people decide, not try to use economic blackmail to force and scare the population into submission.

Yabby,

"Any plan can be ruined by circumstances beyond our control, so much better to have an approximate plan which can be altered as those circumstances change..."

Which is positively spiffing advice if one has planned a picnic by the seaside and the weather is looking a bit dodgy. However, removing one's country from a economic trading bloc should at east require a modicum of forethought...I'm sure you'd agree.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/faisal-islam-brexit-no-plan_uk_576fe22ee4b0d2571149cffd

"“I said to him, so where’s the plan? Can we see the Brexit plan now?” Islam told Botting, without naming the MP specifically.

He said the pro-Leave Tory replied: “There is no plan. The Leave campaign don’t have a post-Brexit plan.”

According to Islam, the MP then pointed toward the Houses of Parliament and said: “Number 10 should have had a plan”.

Gawd!

"Perhaps they should let Nigel Farage negotiate with the EU Eurocrats, at least he tells them the truth as it is."

Lol!...Farage is the biggest con-artist of the lot.

Here's what he had daubed on the side of "leave" campaign buses:

"We send the EU £350 million each week....Let's fund our NHS instead...Vote Leave"

Here's what he says after the result:

""Nigel Farage told Good Morning Britain it was a "mistake" for the Leave campaign to claim there'd be £350m a week extra for the NHS after Brexit .

Asked to guarantee that money would go to the NHS he said: "No, and I would never have made that claim. That was one of the mistakes that the Leave campaign made."

Just as a matter of interest, since the UK is not planning a picnic at the seaside, but trying to figure which way to go next - here are some universities apparently dependent on EU funding:

Southhampton - 91.35%

Bedfordshire - 91.06 %

Coventry - 71.83%

Middlesex - 68.83%

To name a few - but you get the picture.

When an economy is so fundamentally tied to a prior arrangement, holding a referendum that facilitates "leave" and having "no plan" is insanity.

Hi Poirot,

As usual, I agree with you. I suppose it's easy to be wise after the event, but it's as if Britain sleep-walked into this debacle. Even the question seemed poorly thought-out: why such an all-or-nothing question - IN or OUT ? Why not something like 'Do you think that all the nation-states within the EU should have more power to control their borders, and Brussels less ?' Or 'Should the European Union focus more on economic co-ordination and, for the time being, leave political integration on the back-burner ?'

Of course, it's likely that the Brexit camp never really though that they could carry the vote, so they could make all sorts of claims. A bit like the Greens here ironically: they had no Plan B.

So a ham-fisted Question was put to the British people and to everyone's surprise, it got up, just. As you say, like a dog chasing a truck and catching it: 'What do we do now' ?

So will Britain fragment, back to its composition roughly in 1600 ? Will some regions, like Cornwall or Wales, want another vote, now that they realise that EU subsidies will dry up ? And most ironically of all, will London ('Bremain') save the financial skins of the rest of England and Wales ('Brexit') ?

Fukuyama said it was the 'End of History ?', with the question mark. He might have got that bit right.

Cheers,

Joe

Poirot I remind you that the British Govt has not triggered Article 50, simply gave the chance for the public to express their opinion, which is indeed a good thing. There is plenty of time to now work out a detailed plan. As long as they don't trigger Article 50, they can take as long as they like. The broad plan is there. It is just a question to see how reasonable the Eurocrats will be, or if indeed they are a bunch of blackmailers.

University funding. Gee whizz. So the EU takes billions from Britain and gives a bit back to universities and others. There is no reason that cannot be done directly. At the end of the day there will still be 10 billion left, to spend on the NHS if they wish. It is indeed not for Farage to decide, as he is unfortunately not part of the Govt, so is correct, it will not be his decision. He did however highlight the possibility.

Yabby,

"Poirot I remind you that the British Govt has not triggered Article 50, simply gave the chance for the public to express their opinion, which is indeed a good thing. There is plenty of time to now work out a detailed plan. As long as they don't trigger Article 50, they can take as long as they like...."

You are right...it's up to the British Govt to invoke Article 50.

"...The broad plan is there..."

No it's not.

It's hastily being cobbled together as we speak.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/lagarde-brexit/488852/

"Lagarde spoke at the opening session of the annual Aspen Ideas Festival, which is co-hosted by the Aspen Institute and The Atlantic. She said that the IMF’s internal simulations did not forecast a happy future. Although Lagarde was careful and cautious in her remarks, they formed a stark contrast to her warnings ahead of the vote. Back then, she described the range of potential outcomes from “pretty bad” to “very, very bad.”

A great deal, she stressed, now hinges on the degree of uncertainty, and the speed with which unknowns are resolved. “We are hearing at the moment different statements going in different directions,” she said, adding that the IMF has “very strongly encouraged” the parties to “proceed with the transition with the most efficient, predictable way in order to reduce the level of uncertainty which will itself produce the level of risk that we are facing.”

But the U.K. is “the only country that can trigger the mechanism,” she noted. She expressed skepticism that it would want to reverse the outcome of the non-binding referendum, but stressed that the decision as to the next steps—and the obligation to provide resolution—lie with Britain."

My take is that if there was any way that the UK could wriggle out of invoking it - they would.

I don't see a way that could happen as things stand.

......

Yes, Loudmouth, I agree with your post.

Interesting times....

Poirot, essentially what we now have, is a game of chicken. The Hawks within the EU want to punish those evil Brits for not accepting the complete power of Brussels. They don't want other nations having the same ideas, as that would ruin their domination plans completely.

If Britain triggers Article 50, they would essentially be stuffed. 2 years later, they would have to accept any terms presented by Brussels. So that would be a foolish thing to do. If Lagarde wants certainty, then perhaps she should convince the Eurocrats to forget their punishing ideas and give Britain a fair deal, where everyone wins. Britain would then be happy, certainty would return and there you have it. So really it is up to the Eurocrats to see reason, but the squabbling amongst them is sure to not make it that easy, even if it could be. The ball is really in their court.