In all the excitement it seems to have been widely overlooked that the UK hasn't yet decided to leave the EU.

Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty says "Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements". The British constitution is flexible, but I don't see how a non-binding referendum can be considered to meet this requirement, especially where the result has been so narrow. It seems to me that the only way this could be met is by a decision made in Parliament. Parliamentary sovereignty is after all what the Leavers were campaigning for.

MPs would have to take into account the result of the referendum, both nationally and in their constituencies, but they should also reflect on the fact that the margin is only a few percent and the country is bitterly divided (and actual public opinion may now be even narrower, as a number of Leavers are having second thoughts, having realised that the promises they were made were nothing of the sort, that the warnings dismissed as Project Fear were justified, or that you can't make a protest vote in a referendum). They should also consider the implications for Scotland and Northern Ireland and on the unity of the UK as a whole. They must make a decision based on what they believe is in the long-term interests of the country. We elect MPs to use their own judgement, not to automatically do what their constituents tell them to.

If Parliament were to agree to leave, we would have satisfied the first requirement of Article 50 and can go on to give formal notification to the EU of our intention to leave, although the timing of that is entirely a matter for the British Government. If it votes to stay, against the wishes expressed in the referendum, this would surely trigger a general election. With EU membership the main, perhaps only, issue, who knows what that might bring? Nigel Farage as Prime Minister? This is the genie we have unleashed.