[Boothroid]

The UK is not Greece - it is, still, one of the most advanced and powerful countries in the world, of global importance culturally, economically, scientifically, militarily, and in myriad other ways. For its own sake the EU better hope the UK does not go tits up.

[pjc50]

> the EU better hope the UK does not go tits up

Well, so do we all, so why are we doing this Brexit thing again?

Many of the really bad potential outcomes are truly within British control, such as refusing to guarantee residency to current EU residents.

[ptaipale]

>Many of the really bad potential outcomes are truly within British control, such as refusing to guarantee residency to current EU residents.

Hasn't the British leadership been saying all the time that they want a mutual agreement to guarantee residency? Of course they cannot give a unilateral guarantee, such an agreement is needed. It's the EU that's acting stupid here.

It's absolutely clear that a deal between EU and Britain will involve mutual agreement to allow current resident to stay, both ways. Handling future residencies may then be different.

I trust this so much that I'll support my kid to start in a university in UK this fall, and the Brexit outcome will likely be seen during his studies. I'm certain that his studies won't be interrupted because of residency issues.

[Symbiote]

Of course the UK could give a unilateral guarantee. Why shouldn't they be able to?

The EU has already offered an agreement to May, but she refused -- it guaranteed more rights (existing rights) than she wanted.

It's also not at all clear who will be able to stay. Students? Pensioners? Unemployed people? Family members? Seasonal workers?

My colleague's daughter will be studying elsewhere this autumn. She was interested in a British university, but her parents didn't want the risk of international fees in the future.

[Boothroid]

A very leading question on your part there! Obviously the UK doing well outside the EU is Brussels' worst nightmare, but unless you have a crystal ball I don't think anything can be assumed either way at this point.

[pjc50]

> the UK doing well outside the EU is Brussels' worst nightmare

So .. how, specifically, plausibly, is this going to work? What would be the main industries involved here? To whom are we going to export that we don't currently? Does this extra-EU UK include Northern Ireland? Scotland What does the border with the Republic of Ireland look like? What happens to the EU nationals already here? What happens to the British nationals in the EU?

I'm not asking for a crystal ball, I'm asking for a plan, which has been conspicuously missing. It really ought to be in the Conservative manifesto, but isn't yet.

[Boothroid]

Economists have been saying for years that the UK economy is too heavily weighted towards finance. We now have an opportunity to resolve that. On the question of what our main industries should be - how is the UK unique in facing this dilemma?

Plenty of countries seem to find other countries to export to without being in the EU.

I would expect NI to remain in the UK for a while yet. Given that we managed to bring a terrible hundreds of years long conflict to peace, surely we have the capacity to find a solution to this issue also.

If Scotland chooses independence I wish them good luck. I think it will be a shame, but Scotland is beautiful and I will still visit, and I hope Scots will still feel welcome in whatever remains of the UK. I don't understand why the break up of the UK should be thought of as so terrifying. It's not like Hadrian's wall would be going back up.

I'd expect some kind of arrangement to be reached on expats because forced repatriation would be terrible PR on both sides. That said, the EU has more to lose on this issue as there are far more EU citizens in the UK than the reverse, and these EU citizens in the UK are mainly of working age, and the EU cannot provide enough employment as it is (hence these EU citizens coming to the UK for work).

I agree it would have been better for the government to have a plan. There was a considerable degree of complacency that there would be a victory for Remain. Clearly there are many issues to be resolved, but I think it's a little premature to write off the UK.

[slashdotdash]

> Economists have been saying for years that the UK economy is too heavily weighted towards finance. We now have an opportunity to resolve that.

But the cause of this issue is not due to being a member of the EU; other member states have more balanced economies. Can you explain what has prevented successive UK governments from addressing this imbalance, yet will now be resolved by Brexit?

[mike-cardwell]

What level of detail should this plan contain? Too much detail and you give away our negotiating position and tie the negotiators hands; too little and people will complain about lack of detail. Would you accept a plan which comes with the caveat that compromise and negotiation means that none of the plan may work out the way it is described? What about a plan that changes on a weekly basis due to circumstances and negotiation?

I don't believe it is possible to provide a plan that will satisfy people who want to remain in the EU, and I believe that people who want to remain in the EU and are asking for a plan know this well.

You're not going to get the plan you want. A vague overview of goals is the best you can hope for, and exactly what you've been given.

[pjc50]

The EU has a plan in public: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/31/full-eus-draft-gu...

[mike-cardwell]

So does the UK:

https://www.planforbritain.gov.uk/information-leaving-eu/ https://www.planforbritain.gov.uk/12-negotiating-objectives/

Let me guess. Not enough detail?