The Summer 2016 UK Political and Constitutional Crisis

[Zanza]

They're not in charge.

Not yet.

They'd be overruled by the courts.

Maybe.

[Sheilbh]

I don't think they'll be in charge or that they'd do it. And there's no way in he'll the courts would go against thirty years of precedent to endorse a government behaving in an unlawful way.

[viper37]

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.

Stuff to be done on June 24th:
- immediate plans to restore confidence by reassuring speeches.
- buy pounds from the market to stabilize currency
- immediate injection of liquidities in the banking system, either via increased loans or buying major bank stocks
- efforts to stabilize markets, buying stocks from large corporations most susceptible to take a beating on the stock exchanges
- annoucement of a time table for negotiations with Europe
- having a team ready to negotiate with Europe
- announce plans for an orderly transition, with a designated Prime Minister until the party can convene and vote for permanent leadership in October.  It can't be Cameron, he lost, he was disavowed.
- announce clearly to the public what the vote meant, precisely.  No bullshit.  How much time do we live under Europe's laws, what are the exact areas where there will be eventual change, etc, etc.

All of that had to be done on June 24th, by Cameron and by the winners of the leave option.

But there was no plan, there still aren't, and now it's chaos everywhere and my retirement funds are again taking a beating.

[Berkut]

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.

They should have a referendum to determine what should be done.

[Sheilbh]

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.

Roughly what he did today. Lay out the timetable for his resignation, make some reassuring noises, condemn any of the racism that's happened since - and invite Leave figures to do the same - and reassure Europeans already here that there they will keep all of their rights.

Personally I'd also have liked to see a commitment to the Baltic nations in terms of security with some actual goodies if they wanted them and actually change our refugee policy so we don't shove them in already poor Northern towns but disperse them more evenly through the UK too.

The Chancellor should have been doing what his job is at times like this which is reassuring the markets. That they didn't over the weekend is surprising and, in my view, a dereliction of duty. Aside from that (and the absolute shitstorm that is the Labour Party) everything else has gone roughly as I'd expect and is how our system works.

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.

The Tories need to choose a new leader. I don't think I'd expect Article 50 to be activated this year. No-one has a mandate to negotiate terms yet we just know that people want out. I'd expect an election probably after the party conferences. I suspect the Tories will be campaigning for Norway, the Lib Dems to re-enter the EU, UKIP for Leave means Leave and Labour for the collectivisation of agriculture and membership of the Bolivarian Association for the Peoples of Our America.

In the meantime we'll appoint a new EU Commissioner and, to the palpable shock of Germans everywhere, politicians at political events will informally talk over the biggest political issue in the UK and arguably the EU. At some point after that we'll activate Article 50, probably.

The European Union has expressed its expectations regarding the start of negotiations, named a chief negotiator, convened a summit of the heads of governments to discuss the strategy and there have also been informal meetings of the "Carolingian" core-EU foreign ministers and head of governments to discuss the strategy ahead of the summit. So it's not like there is nothing you can do as a reaction...

That Carolingian summit was an interesting idea. It seemed like Steinmeier was pushing a different line than Merkel. And led to leaders in Finland and the Balts saying they don't think there's any need to rush into things and the Poles to try and organise an informal summit of the other 20 member states.

They should either enforce the people's will or double down and say they won't do it. What they shouldn't do is run around like chicken's with their head's cut off until October.

This is the system working. It's been a while because we've had coronations or elections but the way of changing the leadership outside of elections and coronations is just raw politics without any real formal procedures. For comparison Thatcher was first attacked while she was attending an EU summit, then in the House of Commons and all the while the Gulf War crisis was picking up and Germany was about to reunify.

If Cameron hadn't resigned he'd have been forced out. The only other real surprise is the implosion of the Labour Party which I didn't expect and is worse than I'd have ever imagined. The Tories are just doing what Tories always do, in the way they always do.

[OttoVonBismarck]

FWIW my opinion on Cameron's handling is in the last 12-16 hours they've started to do what they need to; my issue is they did nothing Friday/Sat/Sun and that's not super acceptable to me. This is leadership of a major world power, I don't think it's cool to take a 3 day breather because you're upset.

[Sheilbh]

FWIW my opinion on Cameron's handling is in the last 12-16 hours they've started to do what they need to; my issue is they did nothing Friday/Sat/Sun and that's not super acceptable to me. This is leadership of a major world power, I don't think it's cool to take a 3 day breather because you're upset.

Agreed. That three day vacuum let Sturgeon step in. I'd also say the same from Boris and Gove, they should not have let Farage be the face of Leave over the weekend.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Party before country 

[garbon]

Did Farage get much press over the weekend? I didn't see much about him.

[Zanza]

to the palpable shock of Germans everywhere, politicians at political events will informally talk over the biggest political issue in the UK and arguably the EU.

Talking about it doesn't mean shit and it wasn't just Germans who said that they would not negotiate (Hollande and Renzi said so today as well). Britain has a poor negotiation position once Article 50 is activated. That's why Britain will try to clarify as much as possible beforehand, while the other countries will try to get Britain under time pressure. Negotiations aren't nice.

That Carolingian summit was an interesting idea. It seemed like Steinmeier was pushing a different line than Merkel.

The summit had long been planned, they just changed the topic. It was planned to be about longer term strategy, not short term reactions to current affairs. Steinmeier and the SPD in general are pushing a few different ideas than Merkel. Elections coming up in Germany in a bit more than a year and the SPD needs to win profile.

Poles to try and organise an informal summit of the other 20 member states.

Don't they have their Visegrad group? That's a bit similar to the Carolingians.

[Sheilbh]

Talking about it doesn't mean shit and it wasn't just Germans who said that they would not negotiate (Hollande and Renzi said so today as well). Britain has a poor negotiation position once Article 50 is activated. That's why Britain will try to clarify as much as possible beforehand, while the other countries will try to get Britain under time pressure. Negotiations aren't nice.

Quite. But aside from Europeans, we're under no time pressure until we choose to put ourselves under it, until then we're full members of the EU. I would only expect us to activate Article 50 if we were reasonably comfortable with our position going in. If it happens this year it's because the informal chats have gone well. If we don't, we can wait and consult interested groups in the UK - this has been the political lodestar for many Eurosceptics for forty years, they can hold on.

In the meantime, while civil servants talk to their European counterparts, we have two leadership elections, party conference season, an election and potentially an indy ref to get through which are all worth postponing the negotiations for.

Don't they have their Visegrad group? That's a bit similar to the Carolingians.

Visegrad is more of a Central European pressure group though. I think the Carolingian group looks a bit like a 'real/core' Europe taking a pre-position I think that's why the Poles haven't tried to get a summit of the Visegrad but of all other EU members together.

[jimmy olsen]

The Tories need to choose a new leader. I don't think I'd expect Article 50 to be activated this year. No-one has a mandate to negotiate terms yet we just know that people want out. I'd expect an election probably after the party conferences. I suspect the Tories will be campaigning for Norway, the Lib Dems to re-enter the EU, UKIP for Leave means Leave and Labour for the collectivisation of agriculture and membership of the Bolivarian Association for the Peoples of Our America.

Norway options means the UK keeps everything the Leavers hate with no of the power. Who is going to vote for that?

[Zoupa]

Sheilbh, I think you are being way too optimistic about that article 50 timetable.

Not only does delaying absolutely hurt the UK on the economic side, but every day it is not triggered you're pissing off Brussels and Paris and Berlin and Rome and Madrid and and and.

The longer you guys wait the worst deal you're going to get.

[Razgovory]

The Tories need to choose a new leader. I don't think I'd expect Article 50 to be activated this year. No-one has a mandate to negotiate terms yet we just know that people want out. I'd expect an election probably after the party conferences. I suspect the Tories will be campaigning for Norway, the Lib Dems to re-enter the EU, UKIP for Leave means Leave and Labour for the collectivisation of agriculture and membership of the Bolivarian Association for the Peoples of Our America.

Norway options means the UK keeps everything the Leavers hate with no of the power. Who is going to vote for that?

The British?

[jimmy olsen]

Sheilbh, I think you are being way too optimistic about that article 50 timetable.

Not only does delaying absolutely hurt the UK on the economic side, but every day it is not triggered you're pissing off Brussels and Paris and Berlin and Rome and Madrid and and and.

The longer you guys wait the worst deal you're going to get.

After a gruelling half year of political warfare, the Lib Dems pull of the greatest electorl upset of all time and win the election on a platform of staying in the EU.