Expectation Setting: The Key To Winning The Referendum

What is the key to opening that D.O.R (Debunk, Offer, Reassure)?

The winning condition for the referendum is a >51% of the vote verdict for either Remain or Leave.

 The most visible argument against firstly holding a referendum as well as against the Leave choice has been determined as "Uncertainty". When this term is employed we should appreciate it's meaning more specifically:-

High Uncertainty = High number of uncontrolled outcomes leads to a decision to avoid increased risks occurring

• Probably = A High Chance of an event happening.
• Improbable = A Low Chance of an event happening.
• Increasing the number of possible outcomes = Increase Uncertainty concerning the specific or intended or desired event
• Decreasing the number of possible outcomes = Decreasing Uncertainty concerning the specific or intended or desired event.

Uncertainty has a lot of derivatives:-

• X "Could" Happen where X is usually considered unplanned and/or unwanted.
• "A Leap Into The Dark"
• The EU has problems but it's not worth the risk.
• No one knows what Brexit/Leave would look like.
• Econometric/economic modelling outputs "Bad for the economy" results
• Lack of focus on the rules of withdrawal (Article 50) lead to multiples of "order of intentionality" involving retribution or moral blackmail

And the list goes on and on.

If we use this simple principle of reducing and minimizing uncertainty and removing economic issues from political issues then any Brexit plan which does not meet this condition is a non-starter from two perspectives:-

1. Ad Hoc: Perception of High Uncertainty = Very low probability = Bad Decision
2. Post Hoc: Practical Proof that such a decision would be highly risky and highly damaging to the economy is a risk not worth taking
3. Together the decision is very clear: Hence all of WTO, FTA, Customs Deal, Bi-Laterals as Brexit categories are unworkable on EU Withdrawal.

Whereas minimizing the number of outcomes towards:-

BREXIT (British Exit) = "Withdrawal from EU Treaties (via Article 50) - only."

Here the definition of LEAVE is a political status transition only which minimizes outcomes from the day before to the day after the Referendum. This is the genesis for the iterative method of withdrawal that The Market Solution adopts:-

The Market Solution is making the actual alternative much clearer. Aligned with reducing uncertainty through the increase in probability of possible implementation by reducing the number of outcomes from withdrawing from EU Treaties in the short-term.

Here with high certainty interesting repercussions on perception occur:-

• Ad Hoc: People are more confident of what Leave looks like and it tackles the question and problem of Political Union directly focused; reassuring many variable voices of specific interest over their own particular area of outcome interest.
• Post Hoc: It is bona fide do-able because Norway and other EFTA/EEA nations already do it including Lichtenstein and Iceland. There is no argument that it is not possible: It is Possible and Probable.

At EU Referendum: Leave Alliance launch, one of the speakers, the director of the Futurus think tank Anthony Scolefield made a very interesting comment; and background to the subject of this blog at Will It Be A Fudged Referendum? :-

"I have pointed out repeatedly reference the Scottish referendum that even if that referendum had won a majority ,that would not mean that Scotland would become independent and certainly not on the Nationalist prospectus."
 
"We also; Blair nearly had a referendum on the EURO where Robert Worcester of MORI and Ken Clarke advised Blair to go for an enabling referendum as a detailed referendum question would be hard to win."
 
Now Michael Portillo said last week that:-

''by the way a majority for Leave (which is what he expects) does not mean the UK leaves'.

He expects Johnson to come in and say he is 'the most brilliant negotiator and try to renegotiate things.'

In the above link we see that when Switzerland held it's own Referendum on whether or not to join the EEA, the government was very responsible to its people and provided a lot of facts and set out the categorical problems comprehensively allowing the people a free hand in how they chose to vote; which contrasts with the above so demonstrably in quality or lack of it from our own UK Government for decades.

What we can compare between the two is:-

EXPECTATION SETTING:-

If we have a very very clear Brexit plan chosen by the Leave side, effectively The Market Solution, we have a very clear basis for expectation setting for our own government's actions should the result in a fair and informative Referendum declare a Leave result >51% of the vote. It would be clear that with such a well-thought out plan that reduces number of outcomes from a singular Referendum decision as much as possible and focuses on a Political transition of status from:-

• EU/EEA or EZ/EEA = Remain.
• EFTA/EEA = Leave.

Where the EU has been by it's won rules, set our membership expectations of "Ever Closer Union" from the EU to the EZ (see above) compared to our expectations not to follow this route but to build a genuine single market via EFTA, then we give our clear expectation of what we want our government to achieve for us: The People manage their own government instead of the reverse which has become the norm:-

"Managing your manager": The Key To Setting S.M.A.R.T.E.R. Expectations!

The argument to put to the Leave supporters is simple: You support the Brexit plan that sets the most confident Expectation Setting which is The Market Solution (see probability scale diagram above).

The alternatives are also quite simple to define, effectively. For Leave Voters who want to "Control Our Borders" above all else:-

GO/UKIP/Leave.EU: Delayed Gratification: You have one marshmallow now or two if you can wait a few minutes.

Except in this Referendum, The Market Solution: Stage Two - Free movement, immigration and asylum, you won't even get "1" marshmallow if you cannot "delay gratification". I sympathise, but above all I believe that Migration Policy should have a very strong democratic input into it to arbitrate management of this policy closer to the people's choices. It's about democracy for me and that means withdrawing from EU Treaties first! Then implementing the effects of that decision over time.

As for the "EU Reform" position of Vote Leave: We've already seen that unless we set clear expectations, The Market Solution: Stage 1 - Leaving the EU for how we demand our government acts and does not break it's "oaths of office" then we leave room for them to deceive us for them to make election pledges that they never had any intention of keeping, as per:-

 Vote Leave: Same old politicians, same old con-artists

The Key is intellligent and honest EXPECTATION SETTING if we are to demand more democracy and open that DOR (more choice) we must ensure it is SMARTER and then it become a simple choice of trusting the people over the politicians in how we self-govern the UK towards stronger decision-making and indeed such political foundations reduce/remove "uncertainty" most effectively:-