“Why do you experts always think you are right?” I enquired coldly.

“Why do you think,” countered Sir Wally emotionally, “that the more inexpert you are, the more likely you are to be right?”

Yes Minister, ‘The Greasy Pole’, J. Lynn & A. Jay

(Really long tedious article ahead. Don’t worry – normal service resumes this weekend with some great photos of big developments in the garden)

I tried so hard. I kept out of all of the public rantings on both sides of the referendum campaign apart from one quick incursion into a local Facebook message stream, when the inaccuracy and lies got too much for me, with the only effect being that I unsubscribed from the group… I was repelled from engaging by the negativity and hatred that infused most of those shouting loudly in the build up to last week’s momentous vote. I was saddened by that and the seeming inability of people to understand and most importantly accept nuance and conflicting viewpoints, the almost playground atmosphere of seeing the world in black and white when almost every aspect of our lives is writ in shades of grey. But I have been playing ideas and thoughts back and forth in my head trying to understand what is likely to happen next and any possible ways of mending the divisions so evident across the UK. I don’t have any pretensions of changing anybody’s mind, or informing anybody. And on this platform my readership is in single figures anyway – this is more about self-reflection.

Why should I have anything useful to say? I worked for over ten years in the central government civil service and now work in a team analysing and forecasting global political risk. I don’t think that even comes close to making me an expert – but it shouldn’t be a problem; Michael Gove is highly unlikely to ever read this. (Incidentally that soundbite of his was up there with the most ridiculous claims of a vitriolic, pessimistic and bad-tempered pair of mainstream campaigns and should preclude him from holding any sort of public office for all time – may he just return alongside his wife to writing pieces of drivel in our national press). So here are a few thoughts. There isn’t any great vision of what the future holds. This really is a random stream of consciousness. I’d stop reading now…

So is it really going to happen? Probably yes. Almost certainly in fact. “But what about the second referendum?” Or the proposal to have a second referendum on the terms of any deal? There is no reason for a second referendum now, multi-million strong petition notwithstanding – you can’t change the rules after the effect. And there is no point in a second referendum on the terms of any deal. We are only going to get that deal after we enact Article 50 (an Article included in EU processes at the UK’s behest incidentally) giving two years notice to quit. And while that notice is not irreversible (despite much speculation to the contrary) it would require the unanimous approval of the remaining 27 countries to do so. So we could put a deal to the country in another referendum. But if the country turns it down – so what? The process would continue anyway.

And while it is probably true that any Prime Minister requires parliamentary approval to implement Article 50 (there is still some legal argument about whether the PM already has the authority to do this under prerogative powers – but the uncertainty means any PM worth their salt will ask parliament to avoid the unsavoury prospect of being dragged through the courts) and the vast majority of MPs were and are pro-EU membership, the vast, vast majority will respect the result of the referendum and vote to implement article 50 (SNP MPs will vote against – claiming, legitimately I think, they too are respecting the wishes of the voters who put them in parliament).

The only possible scenario that may derail this path is if there are pre-Article 50 negotiations (I know the EU have said no – but they are politicians and their public utterances are pretty meaningless) and that allows a proto-agreement to be declared that gives a clearer indication about what any settlement for the UK would look like before Article 50 implementation. The UK government could then arguably put that before the population. There are two problems with that though – one is that the question would probably have to be whether the UK thinks that forms an acceptable basis to enact Article 50 or not. It wouldn’t offer “staying in the EU” as an option. Voting against the proposal would only send the government back to the negotiating table to refine the offer.

Secondly, the difference here compared to previously re-run referendums in Holland and Ireland is that those were on proposals for a continued integration and enhancement of the EU. If any country had voted against them, the development of the EU project would have stopped. So there was an incentive in each case for the EU to make concessions. While the EU would have preferred a Remain vote, the UK leaving doesn’t jeopardise the EU project, as long as the EU doesn’t make the leaving process too smooth and advantageous for the UK. And to be honest there will be a lot of EU officials and members who will probably be glad to see the back of the UK as a generally negative and blocking force in the EU corridors of power. (And wouldn’t you do welcome any sort of course of action which saw the back of Nigel Farrage [I think we have to pronounce it ‘Farridge’ now we are leaving the EU] for good). So I do think a change of course is highly unlikely.

But why is there no certainty?  Why is there no “Plan”? Well the major problem is that no-one who voted leave knew what they were voting for. “Leave the EU” obviously. But that is just a corporate mission statement and like all such mission statements completely meaningless without anything to back it up. Now before anyone gets irate and in my face – I don’t mean that individuals didn’t know what they were voting for. Everyone who put their cross in leave had their own reason or reasons: stop immigration; reduce immigration; take control of our borders; take control of our laws; repeal EU laws; strike better trade deals; stick two fingers up at ‘the establishment’; some combination of the above; or a myriad other reasons. But there wasn’t and isn’t a vision on the part of those who have to deliver the new future – because they too didn’t have a unified reason for being in the “Leave” campaign – oh and for that group throw in personal ambition right up front as a core reason for voting as they did. That was always my biggest problem (and I had others) with the Leave option – I just didn’t know what it meant.

So the uncertainty I am afraid is here to stay – through at least 2017 and 2018 and very probably longer. There has been lots made of the fact that negotiating trade deals in the EU will be ok for the UK as they have more to lose than we do. In its crudest, most basic form this argument is true, but we have to remember that the EU has to deter other countries from following the UK. They have to make it hard for us even at the cost of affecting their own trade figures. And we have to find the resources to negotiate those trade deals (and ones with other nations too). And we probably don’t have the experience available in the civil service. We have to find that expertise from elsewhere and quickly.

So we have a few tricky years now. But ultimately the world won’t end. The UK won’t disappear beneath the waves. Trade deals will be hammered out. Stock markets will rise and fall as will currency rates. Some companies will prosper and others will not do as well. I was on the losing side of last week’s referendum and I am still coming to terms with what I think was a wrong decision. But it was a decision and we have to move forward now. My fervent hope now is that we can move on and heal the wounds that have been caused by this bitter campaign. We have to be better than we have been for the last few months. We have to respect and honour each other. We have to dream of possibilities, not promote fears of doom and gloom. We have to remember how to look at multiple sides and views of an issue and debate and disagree logically, calmly, using facts and evidence with respect and receiving the same in return.

Let’s decide to do things better. Let’s choose respect and love over hatred and anger. It is up to us all.

Finally what now for Boris – once the knife wound between his shoulder blades heals? Oh – he is toast. I imagine his future involves him sitting between Messrs Hislop and Merton… Jeremy too is a goner – in the parliamentary system you can’t lead in the long term without your MPs and I cant imagine how personally demoralising it must be for him at the moment.