The Summer 2016 UK Political and Constitutional Crisis

[Jacob]

Nicola Sturgeon of the SNP has done a credible job in the aftermath, as has the Bank of England, it seems.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Yes, the Canadian BoE President has been behaving admirably.

Nicola Sturgeon has been doing a good job for Scotland, which is 10% of Britain, the rest of the country has been left adrift on a stormy sea, And plus, Sturgeon doesn't have a lot of real power on this business, she has power over calling for a new referendum, trying her ploy to "veto" Brexit and etc, but global businesses and markets need some sign that Britain isn't literally in a state of high-level political anarchy.

[Richard Hakluyt]

They have spent the weekend holed up and plotting their leadership bids 

[Monoriu]

Yeah, the silence from the British government is a bit surprising.  Pre-referendum polls showed that the vote would be close, so they must have contingency plans in place to deal with the fallout.  Is there a possibility that Cameron and others are busy engaging in emergency and behind the scenes discussions with the EU? 

[Admiral Yi]

I'm not sure what Cameron is supposed to be doing.  Should he give a big speech on how dumb the Brexit voters were, and how much leaving the EU will suck?

[celedhring]

I don't know why is he stepping down in October instead of now. Why the needless impasse? Even more uncertainty is the least thing we need right now.

[OttoVonBismarck]

All evidence suggests they literally had no contingency plans.

Labour is out of power and likely to remain so for some time, so had no real reason to engage in contingency planning.

Cameron planned to resign if Brexit happened, so he (quite clearly) gives no fucks about dealing with the contingency.

Many of the Leave campaigners have said they didn't have a contingency plan if they won "because that's the job of whomever is in No. 10", which considering it's been known 100% Cameron would resign if he lost the Brexit vote it's frankly shocking and an embarrassment none of the leaders of the Leave movement have any plan at all for how to proceed. Johnson clearly was only concerned with his ability to win control of the Tories and become Prime Minister in this eventuality.

[Richard Hakluyt]

I don't know why is he stepping down in October instead of now. Why the needless impasse? Even more uncertainty is the least thing we need right now.

Tory party rules for choosing a new leader................feel free to get cross.

[OttoVonBismarck]

I'm not sure what Cameron is supposed to be doing.  Should he give a big speech on how dumb the Brexit voters were, and how much leaving the EU will suck?

To be honest he should be executing on a contingency plan that had already been drawn up. This is like asking "What's Obama supposed to do if a giant Katrina-level hurricane slams into New Orleans tomorrow?" Well, aside from declaring a national emergency, releasing funding and managing things with top level Coast Guard and National Guard Officials, his main job will have been to not be a complete kind and sensitive person like Bush was on this issue and have reasonable disaster planning in place.

Cameron knew the polls were tight, he obviously was only ever going to be a caretaker if he lost but there should've been some sort of plan in place. I haven't been Prime Minister of the United Kingdom recently so I frankly don't know what the plan would be, but political leaders are usually expected to plan for generally reasonably possible crises or other events. Look at Presidential candidates, they typically start working on "pre-transition" stuff 1-1.5 months before election day, because otherwise there isn't time to do it right between election day and inauguration day. This means some effort gets wasted (Romney was noted for having a really good transition team and plan in place, and of course it was for naught.) That's essentially what we'd be talking about here, a plan for transitional government but particularly for one during a known before hand potential period of intentional crisis.

Cameron should be speaking to the public and to the world, saying here is what we're going to do and when. He may not be able to be specific but he should be giving some indication of what's going on.

[citizen k]

Osborne: "UK in a position of strength, We are equipped for whatever happens."

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36637732

[Monoriu]

Osborne: "UK in a position of strength, We are equipped for whatever happens."

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36637732

That's better than nothing but it isn't saying much. 

[OttoVonBismarck]

Osborne's statement actually has some meat. Notably he pointed out that only Britain can invoke Article 50, a not-so-subtle response to the Euros demand that Britain get on with it. I read the text of Article 50 a couple days ago and that does appear to be the case, there is no mechanism I don't think for the EU to force a state to invoke article 50.

[Zanza]

If Britain violates the treaty obligations by e.g. no longer applying ECJ rulings or limiting freedom of movement like some of the Brexiteers suggested, the EU could use the nuclear option in Article 7 and basically suspend British membership.

[Zanza]

Is there a possibility that Cameron and others are busy engaging in emergency and behind the scenes discussions with the EU?

Certainly no behind the scenes discussions with the EU. The Tories have been atrocious in their EU diplomacy in the last five years, I expect this to only get worse now. And who would speak to the EU now? Cameron is the lamest of all ducks now.

[Admiral Yi]

To be honest he should be executing on a contingency plan that had already been drawn up. This is like asking "What's Obama supposed to do if a giant Katrina-level hurricane slams into New Orleans tomorrow?" Well, aside from declaring a national emergency, releasing funding and managing things with top level Coast Guard and National Guard Officials, his main job will have been to not be a complete kind and sensitive person like Bush was on this issue and have reasonable disaster planning in place.

Cameron knew the polls were tight, he obviously was only ever going to be a caretaker if he lost but there should've been some sort of plan in place. I haven't been Prime Minister of the United Kingdom recently so I frankly don't know what the plan would be, but political leaders are usually expected to plan for generally reasonably possible crises or other events. Look at Presidential candidates, they typically start working on "pre-transition" stuff 1-1.5 months before election day, because otherwise there isn't time to do it right between election day and inauguration day. This means some effort gets wasted (Romney was noted for having a really good transition team and plan in place, and of course it was for naught.) That's essentially what we'd be talking about here, a plan for transitional government but particularly for one during a known before hand potential period of intentional crisis.

Cameron should be speaking to the public and to the world, saying here is what we're going to do and when. He may not be able to be specific but he should be giving some indication of what's going on.

I know what the US federal government is supposed to do when a hurricane hits the US.  I don't know what you expect the UK government to do after a referendum.