The Dirty Independence Question

[windy_miller]

I am really not sure on what is best for Scotland or the rest of the UK. However, whenever Cameron or Osborne open their mouth on the subject I think to myself, "If I was scottish I would definitely be voting yes". If Cameron wants to keep Scotland part of the UK, the best thing he can do is to keep his mouth shut for the next 6 months.

[eFestivals]

Its scary to think people might give something so important such little thought....

yep. It's that sort of thing which has me posting in this thread.

The best decisions are ones that are made on substance and not out of spite.

[windy_miller]

I don't get to vote though.

[metallimuse]

I only found out last week that I dinnae get to vote either seeing as I live in the big smoke.

[eFestivals]

I see Salmond has been at it again....

Saying that not only does Scotland have the right to have its own sovereignty if it chooses (which it does, no argument from me about that), but that it also has a right as a part of that choice to forever-have some of the sovereignty of rUK via a currency union that rUK has no right to refuse despite currency being the policy instrument of a sovereign state.

And, it's fantastic democracy in action for Scotland to make its own choice about its sovereignty (and it is), but for the people of rUK to do the same would be anti-democratic.

I could say the guy is a fruitcake. But actually, he's a really only very smart politician, who is playing to people's prejudices for his own power grab as politicians inevitably do.

Vote for independence if you want it Scotland, but don't be so daft as to believe that you'll get everything that Salmond promises.

----

Meanwhile, today the fiscal deficit of an independent Scotland would have around doubled, because of the need for part of its banking sector to have another bail-out - bail-outs that the financial markets know iScotland could not underwrite, and bail-outs that Salmond admits iScotland could not underwrite (which is one of the main reasons for him wanting currency union).

There's no big issue that is beyond being resolved by an iScotland in some manner, but to think that every issue gets resolved with Scotland smelling of roses while everyone else gets sprayed with Scotland's shit is one for those who like cake made with fruit.

[eFestivals]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26362321

And you can expect more of this I feel....

And Salmond will be along in a minute to tell Scotland that Standard Life are only doing that because they're part of the 'no' campaign, that really they're run by English tories in London, that they're anti-democratic, and they hate Scotland and want it to fail and will try and make it fail.

Edited February 27, 2014 by eFestivals

[WS_Jack_III]

Mr EFestivals. I've been trying to send you a personal message for days but it won't work. Why not?

Edited February 28, 2014 by III

[eFestivals]

it was cos my PM inbox was full. I've just deleted some, so feel free to try again.

[Buff124]

Bit of Barroso backlash going on.

Speaking in the French Senate, Senator Mme Garriaud-Maylam said: "The threats formulated by Mr Barroso are inappropriate and the result of Spanish and English pressure. London is increasingly worried. They (the threats) are not credible. If Scotland votes for independence, it will stay in the European Union. It would be in England's interest." The French Conservative is secretary of the Senate's Foreign Affairs, Defence And Armed Forces commission and was delivering a special statement to parliament on Scotland and the EU.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/independence-would-not-bar-scotland-from-eu-membership.23570382

and against the ruling out a currency union thing

"Nothing in international law requires Scotland to pay one sterling pound of UK debt if the rUK is deemed the continuator state. Nonetheless, the Scottish government has already offered to accept the liability of an estimated £100-£130bn as an independent Scotland’s share of the overall UK debt, but only as the end point of post-referendum negotiations.

Dire warnings that Scotland’s credibility in the markets would somehow nosedive if this transfer of debt were to happen overlook two simple facts. First, the UK Treasury already has agreed to cover all UK gilts in the event of independence, a point Osborne made in his speech. So there is no default on the horizon to panic investors. Second, Scotland would start fresh as a debt-free nation with the apparent agreement, indeed blessing, of the rUK.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/flaw-osbornes-pre-emptive-strike-against-currency-union

and some of the Old Labour establishment have had enough

Bob Thomson, a party member for more than half a century and former Chairman of the Scottish Labour Party,has declared his support for Yes in direct response to Chancellor George Osborne’s anti-currency union speech.

Mr Thonson said “I am no SNP supporter. They’ve done some socially progressive things but they’ve also been centralising and sometimes authoritarian. But this referendum is not about the future of the SNP - it is about the future of Scotland. I will be joining with many old comrades in Labour for Independence to encourage the 800,000 plus Scots who voted Labour in the 2010 General Election to vote Yes on 18 September.”

Mr Thomson is the latest is a growing line of Labour stalwarts who have declared their support for Yes. They include Sir Charles Gray, former leader of Strathclyde Region; Alex Mosson, former Lord Provost of Glasgow; and John Mulvey, former leader of Lothian Region."

http://www.yesscotland.net/news/another-labour-stalwart-declares-support-yes

[eFestivals]

Bit of Barroso backlash going on.

I read the first para, saw how worthless it is because it completely ignores the reality of the EU treaties, and gave up.

I'm pretty sure that efforts will be made so that Scotland spends no time or little time outside of the EU, but nothing of those efforts can ignore the treaties.

Scotland's only route of EU entry is via the treaty rules. Any other view is worthless and outside what is legal and possible.

[Buff124]

oh, and happy St David's Day to all

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/happy-saint-davids-day-google-doodle-marks-the-patron-saint-of-wales-9161776.html

[Buff124]

...and good morning Neil !

[Buff124]

maybe also worth flagging up that for a sizeable number of people, the currency union stuff doesn't appear to be the biggest issue

"The Scottish independence debate needs to go beyond issues like how much better off Scots will be financially, a Church of Scotland report has said. The report was based on the views of more than 900 people who went to 32 community events run by the Kirk.

Rt Rev Lorna Hood, moderator of the general assembly of the Church of Scotland, told BBC radio's Good Morning Scotland programme: "The top 10 values turned out to be equality, fairness, justice, education, respect, honesty, community, opportunity, compassion and tolerance."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26342619

[Buff124]

The whole Treaties thing still seems a bit foggy ?

From 30 January 2014 : An independent Scotland could expect to become a member of the European Union within 18 months of a yes vote, according to Graham Avery, the European Commission's honorary director general.

Mr Avery negotiated the UK's entry into the European Community in the 1970s and wrote the membership applications of 14 countries. He added: "I consider, along with [former European Court judge] Sir David Edward, that Article 48 would be applicable" .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25965703


Back in December 2013, the President of the European Council said in response to Catalonia's decision to hold an unsanctioned referendum later this year, that "a new independent state would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the Union and the treaties would, from the day of its independence, not apply any more on its territory."

Bear in mind that in the event of a Yes vote in the sanctioned referendum to be held on 18 September Scotland would remain part of the UK, and therefore the EU, for over 18 months after the date of the referendum, not least in order to negotiate stuff like the above.


Think this is the relevant bit of Article 48 of the Treaty of Lisbon ?


"Where the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides for legislative acts to be adopted by the Council in accordance with a special legislative procedure, the European Council may adopt a decision allowing for the adoption of such acts in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.

Any initiative taken by the European Council on the basis of the first or the second subparagraph shall be notified to the national Parliaments. If a national Parliament makes known its opposition within six months of the date of such notification, the decision referred to in the first or the second subparagraph shall not be adopted. In the absence of opposition, the European Council may adopt the decision."

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/135-article-48.html

[kk1977]

I don't think Spain would want to miss out on income from fishing in Scottish waters if it was no longer part of the EU and the loss of the benefits of the common fisheries policy.

[Buff124]

This is still just a very hypothetical situation. Today's YouGov poll put Yes at 35%. Nice kicking it around though.

The No campaign is currently ratcheting up the excluded-middle strategy , trying to keep the focus on all-or-nothing. No devo max option, no middle way,and independence characterised as being cast into the void. Banks, businesses and the BBC will pack up and join the caravan heading southwards. No aid or assistance offered by rUK in the journey towards self determination.

Its a risky strategy according to Alan Trench, one of the few commentators who doesn't seem to be on anyone's payroll.

http://devolutionmatters.wordpress.com/2014/02/27/the-uk-governments-increasingly-clear-referendum-position/

[kk1977]

Oh come on... As if Scotland and other countries couldn't come to an arrangement regardless of EU membership. Scotland get like £600 million already from the EU and they have always lorded up how they could make more as an independent country.

The point is that Spain has nothing to gain from not agreeing to an independent Scotland joining the EU. The Catalan situation is different. The UK government has agreed to a referendum on Scottish independence.

I completely agree that rUK may not agree to a currency union as that carries financial risk if the BoE has to underwrite debt of a foreign nation.

All these decisions, if Scotland votes for independence in September (highly unlikely) will come down to money. What benefit would excluding Scotland from joining the EU have? As far as I can see, there are only negatives for other EU countries.

Edited March 2, 2014 by kk1977

[kaosmark2]

What benefit would excluding Scotland from joining the EU have? As far as I can see, there are only negatives for other EU countries.

If Scotland's plan for their economy is "low corporation tax so we can steal business from other European countries" then I can think of why other nations might not be impressed with that.

[kk1977]

That might be a factor. However, most of the newer EU member countries have far lower corporation tax rates than the longer established countries.

[Buff124]

Just a brief mention of 'Project Fear' and who invented the term. The head of the No campaign team from a recent interview.

"No interview with McDougall would be complete without mention of "Project Fear", the in-house joke that got out - via the Sunday Herald - and came back to bite the campaign.

An ironic name for Better Together among its own staff, it was seized on by the Yes side as the perfect summation of the Unionist campaign.

He no longer denies the phrase came from Better Together, and tries to laugh it off as trivia, but he's obviously uncomfortable.

Is he still kicking himself?

"Not particularly, no. Look, these things, people get very excited about them, but are they really going to influence people's views in terms of how they vote? I don't think so."

Was it his personal coinage? "No."

Has he stopped using it? "I don't think we're going to get into this."

Did Alistair Darling not pick up the phone and say, "What the hell was that about?"

There is a weary pause. "I think we've said everything we've got to say."

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/no-boss-unionist-parties-cant-agree-on-more-powers.23568841

[eFestivals]

maybe also worth flagging up that for a sizeable number of people, the currency union stuff doesn't appear to be the biggest issue

The biggest issue is what a person might gain or lose.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25833692

The Scottish people don't seem to much care either way about independence, but they do care about being richer or poorer.

Whether independence will make Scots richer or poorer is yet to be seen. Claims are being made from each side, but the only way anyone will find out for sure is if independence happens.

[eFestivals]

The whole Treaties thing still seems a bit foggy ?

From 30 January 2014 : An independent Scotland could expect to become a member of the European Union within 18 months of a yes vote, according to Graham Avery, the European Commission's honorary director general.

Yep, it could. I've not seen anyone say that it could not, but there's a big difference between "could" and "will".

Scotland's entrance requires EU treaty changes from the current member states, who have to agree to a further dilution of their own power within the the EU by the addition of a further member. In theory, given the EU's aims, that's no deal breaker.

However, at the level of some of member states, that causes difficulties.

For example, the UK now has a law in place which says that any EU treaty change triggers a UK referendum on EU membership, and I know there's at least two other member states that will have to do similar.

I don't see that as anything which can't go in Scotland's favour, but neither is it a given or automatic.

With the UK, they'll be further difficulties and legal arguments on who exactly is the "UK" for the purposes of that EU referendum: does the "UK" include Scotland for the purposes of that vote? That'll get quite messy, I think.

.

[eFestivals]

I don't think Spain would want to miss out on income from fishing in Scottish waters if it was no longer part of the EU and the loss of the benefits of the common fisheries policy.

You might well be right.

But I also doubt that Spain will want to take any action which makes it a breeze for Catalonia to separate from Spain - which is a massively bigger issue for Spain than EU fishing rights in Scotland's waters.

The most 'easy' scenario for Scotland that Spain is likely to agree to is that Scotland follows the current agreed entry procedures and that no 'fast track' mechanism is created, as that would set a precedent for Catalonia.

Spain might be reasonable and agree to allow Scotland entry and not use its veto. But it might not do, too; Spain's interests will be much more about itself than anything about Scotland.

[eFestivals]

The point is that Spain has nothing to gain from not agreeing to an independent Scotland joining the EU.

Don't be so ridiculous. Spain has its own geographical integrity to gain, or more correctly keep.

The Catalan situation is different.

No it's not. Easy entry for Scotland would set a precedent which might mean easy entry for an iCatalonia.

The UK government has agreed to a referendum on Scottish independence.

that only decides how easy independence might come after a yes vote, it decides nothing of anything else.

What benefit would excluding Scotland from joining the EU have? As far as I can see, there are only negatives for other EU countries.

who is saying that Scotland might be excluded from the EU? No one of any sense.

What people are saying is that Scotland will not have EU membership and will have to apply to join via the currently agreed entry rules. That means that an iScotland has a number of hurdles to jump over, some of which have to take a period of time by their very nature (such as having an established central bank).

The EU might find ways to trim some of those factors and so make Scotland's membership easier than the current rules say it should be, but there's no guarantee that will happen. Scotland will only get to find out out if/when it gets there.

Regardless of any negatives and positives of Scotland's EU membership, the entry process takes time.

[eFestivals]

If Scotland's plan for their economy is "low corporation tax so we can steal business from other European countries" then I can think of why other nations might not be impressed with that.

Scotland's plan is just that.

Which is why there will be very definitely no currency union with that being allowed to happen, because rUK will not help a foreign state steal its tax base.

The 'yes' campaign likes to claim that Scotland is already more prosperous than rUK, so currency union can't be spun by any rUK political party as 'helping a mate out as they learn to stand on their own two feet'. iScotland have by their own words made a currency union on the terms they want an impossibility.