Interesting point you raise there as 'poove' can also be used as a singular form.

I'm guessing there's no right answer. It's sure to be something that'll be hotly debated in the years to come.

I think she'll kick the can a long way down the road.

She's already said she will not trigger article 50 this year. So we'll get into next year and negotiations (formal or informal) will continue. And we'll get to the stage where we agree an EEA model allowing free movement of goods, services, capital, and people plus a slightly reduced contribution.

Then finally we'll leave and people will barely notice the difference.

Businesses will be materially unaffected. And the only people "worse off" will be the electorate who will have to deal with all of the rules and regulations and freedoms of the EU, but with none of the say at the negotiating table.

When did she say she will not trigger article 50 this year? Did she say it in her presentation yesterday or last night or today? If this is true then she's going to infuriate a lot of people after being elected PM by the Tory party membership.

Stalling till after a General Election may satisfy some but it's unlikely to help our aims, especially when the Tories will win whatever. Does she want the mandate and less blame rather than no mandate and a better hand and conditions by any chance?

The moment we leave, we're back to WTO rules which will instantly be very damaging to many of our industries. The WTO tarrifs are also likely to be worse than they are already and require renegotiation because they too are connected to our EU membership. If she has said this, it's very sensible as there is an awful lot to unpick and work out to the point where just starting the countdown ASAP and 'seeing what happens' isn't a responsible or intelligent plan.

Let a new leader of a new government find their feet because it's a momumental task that is likely to be damaging economically at least however it pans out. We don't even have a team together to try to negotiate the deal. The sensible move you could argue is to wait and wait and wait until the EU offers some assurances. Legally that is difficult as we can't form a new agreement while in this one, but one of the few strengths we have is that we haven't left yet. They don't want us to 'leave now' for our own health.

Edited by blackpalacefan (01 Jul 2016 6.13pm)

When we leave the EU we will be leaving the banking passporting system. We'd then be unable to trade with the whole of the EU from London, a huge and damaging change from currently being a world hub and the gateway into Europe. Things like this and the implications of the WTO situation will need to be figured out before we leave.

When negotiating a new deal I suspect that we'll either not get the freedom of movement changes we're looking for, or we will get them but in exchange for giving up our access to the passporting system, the EU will see that as an opportunity to move the banking hub to Frankfurt or somewhere else in the EU resulting in tens of billions lost and hundreds of thousands of jobs. Once we're out of the EU the deal we get is out of our control to a large extent. It's whatever us and 27 EU countries 'all' agree on. Until something is agreed we are at the greatest disadvantage by far. Even if we get our way on everything, much damage would be done in the years previous as by default we're WTO and lose the passporting system. The city depends on it and will be forced to move to areas with single market access hugely setting back our economy. All kinds of businesses other than that wil be impacted too by the WTO scenario and general fallout. If that is a fair exchange for people who want freedom of movement stopped then that's fine, but since nobody has even talked about the worrying WTO and passporting it really just seems that 99% of people both don't know exactly what they have voted for and the implications of it.

There is little chance of getting out of this without financially being seriously reduced as a nation and in turn our clout too. Our primary strength right now is that we haven't left. We should be wanting to stall on that for as long as possible because until we leave damage is spread more uniformly. That creates space for forcing the EUs hand into giving us certain reassurances being we do leave. It's one of our useful bargaining chips. If we leave now it will be a complete disaster. I wouldn't care if immigration was zero per year but it's how workable something is, the consequences of it and the best way of going about it. If we're worried about employment, wages and so on then this action is not about to make any of those situations better. We are in for a grim decade unless we can manage to salvage something out of a situation that people have been too busy cheering about to entertain the realities of.

Edited by blackpalacefan (01 Jul 2016 7.43pm)

When we leave the EU we will be leaving the banking passporting system. We'd then be unable to trade with the whole of the EU from London, a huge and damaging change from currently being a world hub and the gateway into Europe. Things like this and the implications of the WTO situation will need to be figured out before we leave.

When negotiating a new deal I suspect that we'll either not get the freedom of movement changes we're looking for, or we will get them but in exchange for giving up our access to the passporting system, the EU will see that as an opportunity to move the banking hub to Frankfurt or somewhere else in the EU resulting in tens of billions lost and hundreds of thousands of jobs. Once we're out of the EU the deal we get is out of our control to a large extent. It's whatever us and 27 EU countries 'all' agree on. Until something is agreed we are at the greatest disadvantage by far. Even if we get our way on everything, much damage would be done in the years previous as by default we're WTO and lose the passporting system. The city depends on it and will be forced to move to areas with single market access hugely setting back our economy. All kinds of businesses other than that wil be impacted too by the WTO scenario and general fallout. If that is a fair exchange for people who want freedom of movement stopped then that's fine, but since nobody has even talked about the worrying WTO and passporting it really just seems that 99% of people both don't know exactly what they have voted for and the implications of it.

There is little chance of getting out of this without financially being seriously reduced as a nation and in turn our clout too. Our primary strength right now is that we haven't left. We should be wanting to stall on that for as long as possible because until we leave damage is spread more uniformly. That creates space for forcing the EUs hand into giving us certain reassurances being we do leave. It's one of our useful bargaining chips. If we leave now it will be a complete disaster. I wouldn't care if immigration was zero per year but it's how workable something is, the consequences of it and the best way of going about it. If we're worried about employment, wages and so on then this action is not about to make any of those situations better. We are in for a grim decade unless we can manage to salvage something out of a situation that people have been too busy cheering about to entertain the realities of.

Edited by blackpalacefan (01 Jul 2016 7.43pm)

‘All my political career I’ve been driven by conviction not ambition, by a belief in doing what’s right not what’s expedient, by wanting to pull levers that make things better not steer to the sound of applause.’ (Michael Gove, Midday today)

It's starting to look a little more hopeful that no party or party leader would be stupid enough to initiate the Article 50 process.

It is also looking a little more likely that Parliament will assert, quite rightly, its sovereignty and block Brexit.

There are many lessons to learn from the referendum and politicians should take note about the dissatisfaction it expressed, but any sensible representative democracy should not simply count heads.

I hope common sense will ultimately prevail and we will remain within the EU, but with a much stronger negotiating position which we need to push through more fundamental reforms.

We should then start to address the issues which the referendum raised at a domestic level, rather than blame others for them.