Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
It is, I'm afraid, not over yet. Not even close. Last weekend, Britain barely looked like it had a government. Or an opposition. Certainly not a strategy.
Over the last few days, many - if not most - of Britain's leading political figures appeared to be in hiding. They included most of those deemed possible successors to Prime Minister David Cameron or equally embattled opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn. A handful have since reappeared, but their statements have inspired little confidence.
Last week, in the aftermath of the close but still decisive verdict, it looked plausible that Britain might act swiftly on the result. That now looks much less likely. It is, bizarrely, no longer clear if or even when it might trigger the Lisbon Treaty's Article 50 to leave the EU.
This will all be resolved eventually - and probably in a suitably sensible way. In the short term, though, it's going to be messy and uncertain.
British voters are the first to outright reject EU membership in a referendum. Ireland and Denmark also initially voted against elements of major EU treaties, only to ultimately reverse that decision in a second ballot. A popular vote in Greece to reject the terms of its international bailout last year was simply ignored. This, however, looks different - if only because of the much broader groundswell of discontent on a host of issues across the continent.
A lot is Cameron's fault. He pledged repeatedly that if Britain voted out, he would immediately trigger Article 50, but he has now gone back on that promise, leaving whoever follows him to work out what to do next.
The irony is that there are a number of potential immediate paths forward - but none of them look likely to be taken. And the longer the economic certainty, the worse the economic and political pain may be.
The vote was narrow. If European leaders could come up with even a cosmetic offer of further concessions, particularly a renegotiation on open borders and access to benefits, a second referendum might yet see Britain agreeing to stay.
That's still not impossible. After last year's refugee crisis, many Europeans countries see the need for some kind of reform. If German Chancellor Angela Merkel, for example, took the lead by arranging a major summit to hammer out the issue in six months time it wouldn't be unreasonable for Britain to hold fire on Article 50 and then have a second referendum afterwards.
The results of that would have to be binding and implemented fast.
For now, most European leaders are pushing for a rapid exit for Britain so they can get on with their other priorities. That's not unreasonable, although Merkel was rather more nuanced in her weekend comments, saying there was no need to be "nasty" or overly hasty.
Even if Britain doesn't activate Article 50 immediately - or at all - it is already going to find itself increasingly frozen out of key European decision-making and meetings. It may well want to remain part of the European Economic Area - the larger free-trade and movement bloc that also includes non-EU members Norway and Switzerland - but that also is not a foregone conclusion.
Europe has plenty of its own problems, not least the ongoing troubles in the euro zone, and would like to move on. Under the Lisbon Treaty, however, it's difficult for Europe to force the UK out unilaterally. The British prime minister has to trigger it before EU nations can have the final say on whether Britain can stay.
For now, the assumption remains that the most likely replacement for Cameron is pro-"leave" former London mayor Boris Johnson, a charismatic but controversial figure.
In a newspaper column on Sunday night, Johnson attempted to be reassuring. Little would change, he said - free trade and most of the other benefits of EU membership would continue. All that would happen was that Britain would begin to extricate itself from EU regulations and bureaucracy.
The problem, as both Johnson and most British voters know, is that there is no real path within EU systems to that outcome. Nor is it really what "leave" voters wanted - although, of course, much of what they were promised was always dubious.
Through ducking out on Article 50, Cameron has handed his longtime rival a clearly poisoned chalice. Johnson already risks being blamed for the referendum outcome by those who resent it. By leaving him to activate the EU exit process - likely to usher in another round of the market falls that accompanied the "leave" result - he is putting Johnson in an almost impossible position.
Alternatively, the Conservatives could choose a leader from the more eurosceptic edge of the "remain" campaign. Home Secretary Theresa May is increasingly touted as the obvious choice. (Chancellor George Osborne had been seen as Cameron's likely successor, but he was tied perhaps too closely to the "remain" campaign. He also failed to appear in public until this morning, and his statement then was not seen as reassuring as he had hoped.)
A pro-remain Conservative leader like May would face the same nightmare. She could trigger Article 50 immediately on the ground that there is no choice but to follow the clear democratic choice of the British people. The longer that process is delayed, the easier it becomes to claim that the electorate might have changed its minds. Which risks restarting the whole process all over again.
Cameron's Conservative government won reelection barely a year ago because many voters saw it as a safe economic pair of hands. That reputation for competence is now gone.
For the moment, the only truly credible political bloc and leader in the game remains Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish nationalists. They want to keep Scotland - and perhaps Britain - in the EU. That could see Scotland attempting to block the rest of the UK from issuing its Article 50 declaration - or it could mean a repeat of the 2014 independence referendum.
The main opposition Labour Party, meanwhile, faces its own crisis. It had assumed, like the rest of the country, that it would not face a general election until 2020. Now, it is waking up to the prospect of a more imminent vote. A new Conservative leader might well seek a new electoral mandate - or the government could collapse outright.
That helps explain the current highly visible plotting against Corbyn, a genial leftist popular amongst grassroots supporters, but whose national poll numbers are terrible.
If anything, the referendum result is a greater challenge to Labour than the Tories. Most of its members of Parliament - along with voters in London and a handful of other metropolitan cities - are among the most committed to the EU. To win an election, however, it also needs its traditional industrial heartland further north, now heavily pro-"leave".
In both local and national elections, Labour is also menaced by UKIP, the UK Independence Party that helped deliver the win for Brexit. If Britain does leave the EU, UKIP might struggle to justify its existence. But as long as this crisis teeters on, it remains a potent force in disaffected swathes of the country.
If Article 50 has been triggered by the next election, the Labour Party can just accept that and move on. But that might not happen.
Labour could campaign to keep Britain in the European Union if it wins the election without a further referendum. Or it could pledge an immediate second binding referendum, perhaps without taking a strong position on either side.
Some of the pro-"leave" supporters have spent the days since the vote behaving disgracefully, with what appears to be racially motivated attacks and slander against migrants reported to be rising sharply. That doesn't mean that the honestly-held views of the 52 percent who wanted "leave", however, cannot simply be ignored.
© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2016.
37 Comments
Login to comment
SenseNotSoCommon
Nigel Farage's cringeworthy performance in the European Parliament?
Sensato
In the meantime, Donald Trump is singing praises of the Brexit move in order to win more U.S. voters, and high-profile "Leave" proponent Nigel Farage is singing praises of Donald Trump, a practical endorsement.
Here is Richard Quest's interview of Farage on Brexit and Donald Trump (8'31"): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYOqSW7VAsk
dcog9065
What a joke Britain has become. A majority voted for leave, yet it's looking almost certain this won't even happen in the end and the UK will end up staying in the EU, a majority of Brits having been disenfranchised essentially, no voice in the EU parliament, taking a permanent hit to their economy and international credibility, a return of xenophobia and outright racism, and an irreparable split within the union. You couldn't have asked for a worse outcome
Moonraker
It would be just about the only good thing Cameron has done. And nobody deserves it more than Johnson. But he would probably laugh it off like some jolly jape and get in his clown car and drive off with clown car noises filling the air behind him.
SenseNotSoCommon
One with the complexion of a raspberry fool: a similar dessert - appropriately enough - to an Eton mess.
rainyday
One thing worth mentioning is just how weak the UK`s bargaining position will be when it does invoke Art. 50, which is probably why nobody wants to do it. Invoking it begins a 2 year countdown to automatic Brexit unless the UK and EU reach an agreement on terms in the interim. If the two years runs out without agreement, the UK is kicked out of the EU and loses all access to the single market, while the rest of the EU would likewise lose free access to the UK market.
That outcome wouldnt be beneficial for anyone, but would be much more destructive to the UK than it would be to the EU since the latter would be losing access to a much smaller market. This fact puts the UK at a huge disadvantage in negotiations once Art. 50 is triggered since the EU will have the ability to threaten to stonewall any UK proposals they dont like and just wait out the two year clock to UK economic Armageddon. The UK wont have the same threat to leverage against the EU. While this doesnt put the UK completely at the mercy of the EU in negotiations since other member states will want them finished up quicker rather than later and would only be willing to wait the two years as a means of last resort, it does suggest that the UK will not get much out of negotiations.
SenseNotSoCommon
Footage has just emerged of the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote in the Leave campaign HQ:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a6HNXtdvVQ&feature=youtu.be
Thunderbird2
To be honest it was more than a referendum on leaving the EU - I rather suspect that a large number of LEAVE voters did so to kick the Tories in the nuts. There was also the Corbyn factor - the man is anti-EU, so his lack of support was hardly a surprise.
Basically the Leave leaders had no plan for what would happen if they won... they constantly skirted that little detail all the time. "Take back control" they crowed... yes... how?
SenseNotSoCommon
The wheels have just come off the clown car:
slow learner Michael Gove has declared Boris "cannot provide the leadership required," announcing his own candidacy for the job of Tory head.
itsonlyrocknroll
Little doubt free movement will be negotiated, along with access to benefit systems of all member states. France’s finance minister, has confirmed “everything is on the table”. UK will evoke article 50 when the Westminster parliament time allows and not before.
The Governing party and opposition will have to regroup with their chosen leadership, but rest assured , Martin Schulz and Jean-Claude Juncker will play little or no part in the negotiation, in public they will be able to throw some toys off the table, even spit their dummies out. In reality Germany, France, Italy, and Holland will ultimately be pulling the strings measured on growing political discontent across the continent. ......
Italy Explores Bank-Rescue Options With EU on Brexit Losses....
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-28/eu-italy-in-talks-on-aid-options-for-banks-dombrovskis-says
albaleo
To extend Reckless' analogy above, that sounds like someone declaring their intention to divorce, but expecting Friday night specials and spousal fidelity until it's formalized.
itsonlyrocknroll
Well albaleo, a marriage of convenience at best, after all German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche insists It is not a lack of love, but a lack of friendship that makes unhappy marriages,.
SenseNotSoCommon
Boris the Not-So-Bold-After-All won't be standing as Tory leader.
Wither BoJo? Film rights for sure, but dare we imagine the sequel?
Wc626
Huh? If a majority have been "disenfranchised" why didn't they go out and vote against leaving the EU? No. The majority chose Brexit. . . the ones who really matter at least. Not the ones who just got there a year ago and are snapping their fingers just because there's an islamic mayor somewhere in country-
mukashiyokatta
No, you are quite wrong. There will be no "nightmare." The transition will be smooth and uneventful. All this brouhaha will in future be remembered as nothing more than a media campaign.
M3M3M3
@itsonlyrocknroll
I think reading too much into the comment by Mr Sapin is just wishful thinking. It seemed like nothing more than the verbal equivalent of a Gallic shrug. The answer he gave was 'tout sera mis sur la table parce que la Grande-Bretagne fera des propositions'. Everything will be put on the table because the UK will make proposals. It seems like more of an invitation for Britain to invoke article 50 rather than any declaration on the negotiability of free movement. It's worth noting that his comments haven't made the news outside of the UK. It's also impossible to parse his words so finely because we only heard the English question, not the French translation that he would have recieved.
I think the better view is that there will be no concessions on freedom of movement. The 4 freedoms of the single market are enshrined in the treaties and go to the heart of what the European Union is about. The Commission as well as Francois Hollande (Mr Sapin's boss), Angela Merkel and today the Swedish PM have all come out to say freedom of movement is not negotiable. The EU parliament would need to approve any deal and they will never accept any restrictions, wouldn't you agree?
Here is the interview for anyone who is interested:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZJGNP5Z0Dc
The Swedish PM today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XpeSIvHWgg
coskuri
No doubt : zero chance.
End of free lunches. Seriously, what did the Leavers expected ?
He confirmed what Merkel said before : First the Brits will be body-searched by the security staff and they'll leave the house with only their underwear on. And the line quoted comes after ;
= "everything will be on the counter, as UK will certainly come back with financial offers " (and money doesn't stink). If that makes you feel better, you can say he's optimistic for UK. He doesn't see the UK totally ruined within 2 years.
Moonraker
It's like a school of piranhas. Few other creatures would tangle with it. But if a weakness is detected in one the others will attack it. Britain is the ailing piranha. And its ailment is partly the result of a miserable diet of inept leadership and poking itself in the eye with its own bony tail.
dcog9065
@Wc626: I don't think you understood my point, I'm saying that the Leavers have been essentially disenfranchised as their vote will end up not even counting as Brexit doesn't even look like it's happening anymore
Spanki
This is the biggest UK political cock-up since, well I don't know when.
Why have a Scottish referendum BEFORE an EU referendum?
Why call an EU referendum and not make it clear the result could actually be taken as advisory only? (Although i'm sure Brexit will proceed to some degree, at least on the face of it or social unrest will be devastating)
Why did NEITHER side have any sort of plan for the possibility of a LEAVE result?
It is just so incompetent it's beyond words and this will be David Cameron's legacy, a country in tatters. It will sort itself out for sure but it's just thrown a generation back several years of growth.
Cameron"s arrogance was his own undoing in the end.
SenseNotSoCommon
plus ça change...
Precisely. If something sounds too good to be true (a political elite wrenching power from a political elite, anyone?), it normally is.
Boris promised the undeliverable in a mendacious campaign to gain power over his Tory pals. Nothing more.
Having overshot the runway, he duly soiled his pants and jumped ship, but not before destroying the Britain of all our affections.
itsonlyrocknroll
Hi M3, coskuri, The result was far to close to exercise a mandate to invoke article 50. Both the elected Government and Opposition must get a grip and debate a compromise. It is inconceivable in a democracy that 48% of the eligible vote can just be ignored.
It is time to negotiate a compromise with our 27 partner states. If there is a political and economic solution and the will to find one there is a way forward.
The country is certainly is divided but I would go as far as in tatters.
nath
I think the Remain side's plan was to resign and let the Leave side take care of it... which they are doing.
cleo
Weirdest way of 'taking care of it' I've ever seen. The Leave chief jester says the things Leave claimed before the vote was 'a mistake' (350 million for the NHS? Wot 350 million? Wot NHS?) while the jolly, tousle-haired leader of the Leavers has up and left. And barefaced racism shows its ugly, ugly head on the streets.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/30/boris-johnson-rules-himself-out-of-tory-leadership-race-brexit-eu-referendum
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/manchester-tram-racist-attack-abuse-video-footage-get-back-to-africa-teenage-boys-abuse-suspects-a7107466.html
M3M3M3
@itsonlyrocknroll
I agree but what can we do now? There will be a riot if Brexit isn't implemented and the EU can't afford to be seen overturning another referendum. I think we are locked in for Brexit and the best case scenario is to have the UK rejoin in 10 years. I'm not sure if you fall into this camp, but I'm sensing alot of regret coming from former Brexit supporters. I think they've coined a new term for it: Regrexit.
Did you see the BBC interview with Cecilia Malmstrom? I'd say she's probably one of the most sensible, pragmatic and well respected people in Brussels as the top trade negotiator but what she said was really stunning. She takes the view that the exit negotiations will be completely separate from any discussion of future trade terms. The UK would have to fully exit before the EU even begins discussions on whether it will be a Canada or Norway option etc.
Also, it completely slipped my mind but it's true that Art. 3(2) TFEU will prevent the UK from starting its own international trade negotiations with third countries until they fully exit the EU. Unless some compromise is agreed with the Commission, the UK will be in breach of its treaty obligations if it picks up the phone to start preliminary trade talks with India or China etc. It's starting to look like stretching out the notification under Art. 50 might be entirely pointless.
I'm not even going to start on Gove and BoJo. What a farce.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36678222
sangetsu03
The opposite is rather the case, the EU is drifting into an unending nightmare. And that drift started long before the UK pulled out.
dharmadan
The EU punishes the poor of Africa and Asia, especially farmers. But I guess that's okay for all the oh-so-concerned libs round here.
itsonlyrocknroll
Hi M3 A general election, the next scheduled for May 2020 in accordance with the fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, etc , will afford the electorate the ability to make change.
What makes this referendum an exception to that rule is the finality on the back of a wafer thin democratic mandate and to invoke a decision that is irreversible. I am sorry but in this instance article 50 should not, must not be invoked until the UK has had had time to realize, and be fully aware of the implications of that course of action. I want to see reform for the sake of Southern Europe, I was unable to vote.
There is no opinion on the table to rejoin, so why hurry the process to leave on a conclusion that is best described indeterminate. there is always time to summarize regret, all the usual suspects in this shambles of Government and Opposition has quoted Churchill......
So to add ...Politics is the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen......So M3 it is time to step back and negotiate.
nath
The UK can rejoin the EU after leaving, but their application will be processed and evaluated like any other new country wanting to join the EU.
That is if they decide to exit after all, remember the referendum was not binding and the UK government can decide to ignore it.
itsonlyrocknroll
Sorry my sausages for fingers bashed out ... The country is certainly is divided but I would go as far as in tatters.... Correction..... The country certainly is divided but I would not go as far as in tatters...Kochi trams and a lapse in concentration. that my excuse...x
M3M3M3
I honestly can't see any scenario where the UK can remain. There is no appetite in the EU for being seen as overturning another referendum. The UK political elite all stand to gain more power from Brexit. The media moguls like Murdoch and Dacre are fully behind Brexit and will destroy anyone who tries to stand in their way. Only a general election called asap followed by a massive win for a party promising to remain in the EU would be enough to save the UK. I don't think it will happen.
To add another overused Churchill quote: "The trouble with committing political suicide is that you live to regret it."
coskuri
So you are telling that after bringing the chaos into EU during a few years, after messing lives of hundreds of thousands, the UK can come and say : "Uh no, forget it all, let's do as if nothing happened...".
itsonlyrocknroll
It would be unwise to simply ignore, or overrule the referendum result. It is vital to stress also previous referendums in member states, off the top of my head, Ireland twice, Denmark once were confronted with the question afresh concluding circumstances had changed since the question proposed to the electorates concerns were met with concessions.
M3 pragmatism, what is irreversible and irrevocable, from a political perspective is neither expedient or practicable. Hence Cameron passing any Article 50 decision making notification process to a future prime minster. The difference is subtle, essentially reflecting the referendum a non-binding advisory vote, and the reality of the consequences in proceeding with the outcome, all leading to a final decision by parliament, sighting the referendum inconclusive result. A classic bridge play, negative inference, when holders don't position there play it invariably means they don't process certain cards. In this case a outright mandate.
M3M3M3
@itsonlyrocknroll
I agree, but who do you see as the person who will take the necessary steps to save us from this mess? I don't see any viable scenario. Will Theresa May stop Brexit? She has spent her entire time at the Home Office railing against the European Convention on Human Rights so she is not exactly a friend of European cooperation. Will she call an immediate general election where Labour win on a platorm of ignoring or re-running the referendum? Will we just sit tight until 2020 while the country falls apart and foreign investment dries up? Can we wait that long for an uncertain result?
There is simply no way to stick the cork back in the bottle as I see it. The sensible, democratic and honourable thing to do is to fully Brexit with all the pain that this involves and then re-enter the EU on new (and less generous) terms in the future. Cameron's irresponsibility will go down in history as one of the biggest political blunders in history. It's a painful lesson that reminds us of why we abandoned ancient Greek style direct democracy almost immediately after it was invented. But maybe I'm being too pessimistic.
itsonlyrocknroll
Yes it is wise to question if our political elite are up to the task, especially considering the complexity of the negotiations facing a civil service ill equipped for the task.
Government faces worldwide hunt for trade negotiators, experts warn.....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/03/government-faces-worldwide-hunt-for-trade-negotiators-experts-wa/
With the pending conservative party leadership election, Theresa May will struggle if elected to avoid pressure to democratically substantiate her mandate to govern.
Crucially will opposition parties be able to provide or a mount blocking motion?. The leader of the opposition at least appears to be incapable of providing any responsible policy or counter argument for the decisions of the government. All compounding the Labour parties failure and incompetence.
Worst of all is Brexit has afforded the SNP an escape route to blame Westminster for cuts it is about to impose on health and education which flies in the face of the fact that the Scottish Government controls finances through its own spending, in all policy areas.
I really don't believe article 50 will see the light of day. There will be fudge and sludge, but a compromise will be found. Had the Referendum heralded a conclusive mandate well we would be have a very different conversation.