Brexit, of course...

Don’t lose heart, Vić. The thought that has sustained me through most of this is that the situation would be too much for a competent government, let alone Theresa Not-Very-Smart’s Circus.
We can’t crash out because that would break Ireland, which has been the one big domestic success in my adult life.
We can’t leave the customs union or the Single Market because that would destroy manufacturing and break what’s left of the North for ever.
And we won’t stay semi-detached, because that would subject us to rules we can’t help to define and leave us less independent than we are today - which is, incidentally, more than adequately independent.

There will be much noise from those whose only purpose is to make noise. But it will eventually die down and life will gradually return to pre-2016 normality. It may take another (political) generation to restore the trust and influence in Europe that we once enjoyed, but we really should have thought of that before.

Calls from all sides for a government of national unity today. Maybe that's some hope. How would that come about? Vote of no confidence in the government, but then no general election? Could parliament propose a motion to appoint a particular person as PM in the existing Parliament, Dominic Grieve for example?

I've thought (dreamed?) for a while that such a solution might emerge in order to stop the Tories' inability to govern sending us all over a cliff.

AIUI this would be possible without an election. Under fixed term Parliament legislation a vote of no confidence with a majority of two thirds is required to trigger an election. OTOH if there is only a simple majority then dissolution only occurs if no new government is formed within 14 days. That would give the breathing space to form say a National Government under leadership of a nominated individual who should be somebody without further ambition. Grieve is one possibility. Vince Cable has the background and gravitas but may be too closely identified with Remain.

Difficult bit might be to secure the no-confidence motion without risking 2/3 majority and triggering an election.

Could such a government stop the Article 50 clock?

..off in a short while for our habitual late summer bimble around Europe.

Odd to think that the next such (which will be post-March next year, may/will be under very different circumstances if indeed it happens).

Will this be the last Visa-less trip? Will I need an IDP next time? Will the £/€ rate be below parity?

It's not long to wait to find out.

B@st@rds!

I think by next March we’ll be in the first of several extensions to the negotiating period. That will probably have been agreed at the EU Summit in December, which is the last opportunity to agree a framework agreement under which the UK can leave without running out of food, medicine, aviation rights and just about everything else. That agreement won’t happen, of course, so ‘more time’ will be the next step.

Of course, more time won’t help either, so the period will be extended again. By this time, May will be losing control of the Toxic Tebbits and with them her shaky grip on Parliament. Meanwhile, Labour will be getting the message that there are more votes in opposing leaving than in lamely going through with it. So, if it doesn’t all collapse into another referendum — which would be better than the status quo but could produce some perverse outcomes — we’ll have a general election in the winter of 2019-20 where the only real issue will be Out (vote Tory — or one last ride for whoever’s left in ukip) or In (vote for whichever non-Tory has the best chance in your constituency.) After which, there will be an entirely democratic mandate for stopping the whole ghastly business.

The real stupidity was to offer an illusory choice to a nation with much to be aggrieved about, very little of it caused by the EU.
Most of us have learned what we know about the Single Market and the customs union since the referendum. Most of the nation still doesn’t know or understand. We have a representative democracy for the same reason we have pilots and surgeons: some things are best left to the experts.

I was listening to a Labour MP on the radio a few weeks ago and she said that Parliament should be a reflection of society and that therefore it should contain similar proportions of genders, religions, sexualities, intelligences etc etc. 

I profoundly disagree with this; in terms of intelligence.  If people are going to run the country on my behalf I want them honest, ultra intelligent, lots of common sense and no weird political beliefs that if they got into power would destroy society.  Just people you could trust to see their way through the minefield of government.  I want people with brains the size of planets to be in parliament; not single issue grandstanders who talk a good game, but couldn't argue their way out of a paper bag.

That does not mean to say they have to be left or right.  But intelligent enough to seriously consider the long term implications of their policies and have enough honesty to decide and state publicly if those implications are worth it.  I think we have very few politicians like that now.  Probably a few old school MPs from both major parties who no longer have any influence.