So Leavers what happens Friday if you win? What's the plan Stan?

[Showmethewaytogohome]

Hello...My name is Showme..and I am a remainer

But I am also pragmatic, and a planner. My concern is the Leave campaign has no Plan. At all. Nadda

For me with objectives you have assumption oh and plans. I see an awful lot of we will be x better off, there will be x less of blah blah. But how?

So they win. And on Friday what? Day zero?

winter you said "near future" - what did you mean by that? Of that list, not a single one could be achieved in less than two years, and many of them would take much longer than that.

I for one certainly do not welcome the chance to be taken over by our London masters. Their track record speaks for itself. Do you really think the EU is responsible for all the crap local decisions against local democracy, against manufacturing, against housing, against free education, against redistributionand investment at the lower ends of the social chain; pro existing wealthy interests, pro-south, pro-landlords, pro-sexism, pro-intolerance, pro-inequality levels not seen for a hundred years?

The existence of other more socialist and egalitarian countries in the EU block kind of proves that the destruction of British socio-economic fabric is not due to the EU.

That is a pretty clear and reasonable idea of what you would want to negotiate timetobackout. It just doesn't seem to be in line with what the leave campaign wants or is promising to it's supporters.

You have to be in the EU to negotiate its terms. Outside the EU we will be at their mercy: the fact that they supply us with necessities means that we are on the weak end of the table. They will tell us their terms and we will have to accept them. By contrast the strength of the Brexit campaign ( cheers, now please let Remain win) gives us considerable strength to negotiate within the EU. They cannot continue with a one-size-fits-all approach and are beginning to admit it.

I don't know if other countries will all leap out just because Britain has. If they do yes we could form a new bloc: but that will take years, years of regional destabilisation with a migrant crisis at the eastern gates. Most of Britain, thanks to the Tories, are not in any kind of state to ride that kind of storm out.

Migrant and religious crisis with a very destabilised region to the east. This really isn't the time for the EU to split up.

The leave campaign is just that though , a collection of individuals ranging through the parties, is in no position to make any promises .
And to be perfectly frank elections are won on slogans and leave would have no chance of winning if it were not for the anti immigration vote, so to admit there could be a deal that did not limit immigration or only slightly would be a gift to the remainers.
However after the referendum there is no time limit on invoking Article 50,no more public involvement and power returns to the politicians.
I think it perfectly feasible a norway style deal could be done in good faith
on both sides

A Norway style agreement probably could be done between the politicians.

However from the remainer's point of view that would just result in a similar agreement without the advantage of being involved in any decision making processes.

From the leaver's point of view, they still need votes at the next election and it's difficult to see how they could sell a Norway style agreement to the substantial number of people who are voting for Brexit to reduce immigration.

But wouldn't a Norway style deal be exactly not what the leave campaign want? Freedom of movement, contributions etc are all inculded, with less say.

Surely an out vote would lead to being out entirely.

We have a party

Then leave all the negotiations and details to the people whose job it is to sort it all out (government).

As far as I can see they've just asked our opinion, it's up to them what to do with it.

Though I am a bit concerned about mumblings saying that they may not honour a leave win. That would be disastrous for democracy.

Except, given the campaign, the opinion isn't really coherent. It's not even clear that voters understand the arguments or what the EU is.

Yet somehow the government would have to make sense of it all.

Nevertheless they asked our opinion, now they have to listen to it.

Actually they don't, the referendum result is not legally binding.

Not legally binding but I don't see any politician or party - with any desire for a political future - announcing they're not going to set it aside. That's the point of DC's statement and what's behind it.

I still think there should have been a "majority" clause put into this, taking action on something, either way, on what 51% of the voting electorate want and 49% of the voting electorate don't is going to cause trouble.

However from the remainer's point of view that would just result in a similar agreement without the advantage of being involved in any decision making processes.

Unknown to a lot of people there are a lot of international bodies on which we are or would be represented who set these standards which are then adopted by the EU.

For example when trying to illustrate this point on the Marr show a week last sunday Cameron used the example of the development of regulations surrounding electric cars. He obviously did not know that the regulations were adopted from UNECE(United Nation Economic Commission for Europe, one of five over different geographical areas who formulate world wide standards). A body on which we would be represented on leaving the EU

www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2012/wp29grsp/EVS-1-05e.

Similarily the EU has taken the credit for the abolishing roaming charges,
the truth is somewhat different.

The EU was first asked to abolish roaming charges by a global body called the International Telephone Users Group (INTUG) way back in 1999. But it so dragged its feet that eventually INTUG approached another global body, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The OECD then involved a third global body, the International Telecommunications Union, which used the rules of a fourth, the World Trade Organisation, to ensure that by 2013 roaming charges were being abolished right across the world, with the EU right at the back of the queue.

Globalization means exactly what it says, we would be represented on
host of acronymically challenged organisations who set the standards and rules for International trade adopted on a subsidiary level by the EU.

But the EU has also brought in lots of beneficial legislation from its own. It has cooperated with other groups yes or been influenced by the, however it is by no way a guarantee that this legislation would have been enacted by British government anyway.

I also thought one of the points of Brexit was to "be free to make our own laws".

But wouldn't a Norway style deal be exactly not what the leave campaign want? Freedom of movement, contributions etc are all inculded, with less say.

What the leavers want and what we get are two different things.

What we get is a start in process covering the next decade and longer, giving us a chance to make our own bilateral trade deals rather than icluding the concerns of another 27 nations.

What the leavers want and what we get are two different things.

I'm not sure that the Kippers (whose votes pushed Cameron to have the referendum in the first place ) share your pragmatic point of view.

I keep saying this: a lot of people voting 'Leave' are going to get quite a surprise about the difference between what they want and what they get with the renegotiated trade deals.

They won't get the curb on immigration so many of them seem to want.

They will get a period of massive uncertainty and a recession.

They won't go back to some pre-globalisation idyll (whatever that was).

Totally agree Cat, what they will get is one of the most aggressively neo liberal governments of modern times.

The economic shock of leaving will be used as an excuse to do lots of things that people never would have accepted previously.

No I'm sure the don't Merry but considering they only got one MP( and a Tory defector at that)on 12.7% of the vote whilst the SNP got 56 on 4.7% they are used to being ignored.

They aren't very good at getting their MP's elected, but they (and the more kippery parts of the Tory party)
represent enough of the vote that Boris and Gove won't be able to ignore them. More so because post referendum whatever happens the Tory party will be in a bit if a mess.

Right so as far as I can work out thus far the Leave objectives are:

• Not part of a manifesto

• Not part therefore of a mandate - so the with a leave the government does not have to achieve the specific objectives (such as the immigration one so commonly sited)

• Created by a band of people who come Friday have no accountability for the statements they have made regarding what is achievable

• Have no plans in place to be met as they have no mandate and no one in leave has had the inclination to even hint at how they could be met(and yes there are contingency plans in every department and plans to get to a plan)

• Have no measurability
• Have no timescales
• Have no estimate of resources to achieve them

• There are no plans for any of the objectives to come back to us in any form before during or after renegotiation with the EU

AND the solution to my concerns about all the above seem to be

• Don't worry the government will sort it - it's their job
• No one wants to lose us as a trading partner - all will be OK

These are the only answers I can find, alongside 'it will be much better'. This is tantamount to finger crossing for me. I like a parachute when I'm about to jump out of a plane.......don't you?

If leave wins we take back control - albeit momentarily - and give it to the currency hedge funds. I'm not sure they will notice or care that a referendum is only an expression of 'public opinion'.

showme, that would imply that you had clearly decided where you wanted to jump out of the plane or even that you wanted to jump out out of a plane. The leave campaign are yet to achieve that level of agreement.