This positive sounding description of an actual plan. I don’t pretend to understand much of it. But what it shows me, contrary to what I’d assume from the news, is that someone in the Brexit campaign has been thinking about the plan and the mechanics for leaving since 2014 and thinking quite seriously about the details.
And this mildly apocalyptical prediction from the Guardian it might be just conjecture or it might just be realism. Either way it is quite imaginatively presented.
Naïve questions I’d ask:
- Regarding trade negotiations. Are the WTO rules (the worst case scenario) really that bad?
- Do we need to bottom out negotiations on all this right now; can’t we just start with a simple default and let market forces evolve the trade agreements over time? It may be quicker and more likely to model the real strengths of each position than artificial negotiations where everyone thinks they got a bad deal.
- Regarding law. We have our existing UK Law and the existing supreme EU law. Do we really have to wade through a million pages of law and decide which we want and which we don’t right now? Could we not simply start with taking a snapshot of the EU law into our own branch and develop our diverging version over time? So going forward we change what we want as and when we see fit. Simples.