Is Scottish independence a &#x27;good or bad&#x27; thing?

Original post by R-KAM

To join the Euro, you have to commit your currency to the ERM (Exchange Rate Mechanism) for two years.

To join the EU, you have to commit to joining the Euro. Conditions of that nature are convergence criteria for currencies, they are not implicit conditions for a member-state to have the Euro adopted as their currency.

This would be dealt with as part of accession negotiations. A core requirement is not going to be waved away under a technical detail about ERM II or the fact that - to my knowledge - no EU state used another state's currency. Taking that possibility as being strictly the case would imply that the UK would have the deciding say on whether an independent Scotland joined the Euro: if the UK signed up Sterling to ERM II, it would not be obliged to join due to its opt-out, but an independent Scotland would after 2 years. That'd be a patently absurd situation.

Yet the EU has already shown a clear flexibility in agreeing official use of the Euro in certain countries. Andorra, for example, did not have its own currency and entered the Euro by means of a simple agreement between it and the EU institutions.

we can't even be forced to either.

I've heard Nicola Sturgeon make this argument. To me, it's the most bizarre way of looking at EU law imaginable. Joining the Euro is voluntary, but it is - and has been for many years - a condition of membership. If anything, Scotland not having its own currency makes it an even more pressing issue.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 2183

Original post by R-KAM

That does not make independence pointless, Scotland has a share of the BoE (as do Wales and NI) so have every right to use the pound. It's a fully convertible currency, any country in the world can use it if they want.

Scotland doesn't have a "share" of the B of E, it is wholly owned by the UK Government. You may suggest morally that an independent Scotland should get a proportion of UK assets (and accordant liabilities) as it contains 5 million taxpayers, but it's certainly not a legal or political right. It would be very strange indeed if the UK were to go even beyond currency union and suggest a separate Scottish state had some sort of rights over its national institutions.

As for using the pound, it is indeed possible to do that regardless of arrangements. However the problem there is that it's a very, very poor option. Monetary policy will be set in the interests of another country. I hate to say it, but if that's what's being seriously pitched, an independent Scotland would be better off just going into the Euro.

Original post by R-KAM

Under international law an Independent Scotland would still 'own' circa 9% of it.

That's simply not true. If the UK Parliament votes to make Scotland an independent state, it is not obliged to give it anything whatsoever. However obviously a negotiated settlement is in everyone's interests - but control over the national bank simply won't be on the cards.

Original post by R-KAM

The set up costs would be well worth the investment anyway. There will likely be a couple years at least before full independence is achieved as both governments will have to sort everything out. I imagine we'd still be sharing everything until then.

The SNP have said we'd be independent by May 2016 in the event of a Yes vote. Which is a fairly restrictive timetable (and one they ultimately don't have any control over).

We currently only control 7% of our revenue, with Independence we'd control 100%. We'd be able to set policies that suit us, not London & the South east.

Thanks very much, but as citizens of a democratic United Kingdom we already control 100% of our revenue.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 2184

Midlander

Original post by R-KAM

There are perks for the both of us if Scotland was to keep using Sterling...

I suppose my main point was that Salmond has not formally agreed with anybody about what currency Scotland can take on. Who would vote for independence, based on that alone? It's a huge financial gamble.

Reply 2185

pane123

Original post by Midlander

It is becoming increasingly obvious that Salmond is making a lot of it up as he goes along. While I'm all for debate, I cannot wait for this waste of time and money referendum to be over.

With the referendum happening next year, it's quite scary that simple answers to many important questions aren't available.

Reply 2186

Midlander

Original post by pane123

I can't wait to see the look on his face when the No vote is returned. His whole life dedicated to destroying the union ending in failure.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 2187

Original post by pane123

Some people are vaguely surprised the SNP haven't been thinking about this for years and planning for independence. But the problem isn't so much that, it's that they change their stances constantly.

Only a couple of months ago, we went in their policy platform from being neutral to being NATO members. They suggested a Scottish pound, then the Euro, then said it was harming Scotland to wait for Brown's economic tests before joining, and now they want to remain in Sterling with (or, potentially, without) a currency union. Until recently entry into the EU was "automatic", now they've conceded that there'd have to be a negotiation.

Even if they just stuck to one line they'd do better.

Original post by Midlander

I can't wait to see the look on his face when the No vote is returned. His whole life dedicated to destroying the union ending in failure.

Portillo moment!

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 2188

Original post by R-KAM

Under international law an Independent Scotland would still 'own' circa 9% of it. Keeping the same currency, inflation and interest rates as one of your main trading partners would be a good thing economically. The pound would also want the backing of oil and other exports. It'd make sense for all of us. I'm not against eventually moving to our own currency down the line however. It would just make it more expensive for the rUK to buy our energy and exports.

It might not be popular down south, but it makes the most economic sense in at least the short term for both parties.

We can't join the euro. It's a toss up between keeping the pound or starting our own. Last I read I think it was their plan to keep the pound.

There's still over a year to go before the vote, it'll swing all over the place over the coming months.

Of course it'll swing, but it won't swing enough. It's historically at 30%

Infact, if anything recent polling suggests the SNP are s**t bust on it as everything they've said has been wrong.

Infact, even their consistent battle cry of no Trident (Anti Europe, now Pro Europe. Anti NATO, now pro NATO. Pro Euro, now anti Euro) seem sto be going against them as they seem to think that the majority of Scots want rid of Trident, but over half the population wants a replacement for it.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/over-half-of-scots-voters-back-trident-replacement-1-2925653

Reply 2189

"SCOTLAND can legally walk away from its share of the UK’s debt mountain and start independence with a clean slate, according to a top constitutional expert."

"Dr Qvortrup’s explosive findings are published in a report that looks at national divorces dating from 1830, when Belgium left the Netherlands, until the break-up of Yugoslavia and the collapse of the Soviet Union in the Nineties."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/scottishnews/4924051/Expert-Scotland-can-legally-leave-the-UK-and-be-debt-free.html

I guess that will have to be the way forward.

Because, according to the 'Bitter Together' anti-Independence Axis, independent Scotland will be:

- un-welcome to be in a sterling zone with rUK;

- un-welcome to be a member of the EU;

- un-welcome to be a member of NATO.

Reply 2190

Midlander

Maths Tutor:

Suppose Scotland joins the EU. Under EU legislation no member state is able to discriminate those of another with regard to tuition fees.

Therefore, how do you propose to preserve free university education for Scots whilst also having to provide it for RUK students?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 2191

Original post by Maths Tutor

Because, according to the 'Bitter Together' anti-Independence Axis, independent Scotland will be:

- un-welcome to be in a sterling zone with rUK;

- un-welcome to be a member of the EU;

- un-welcome to be a member of NATO.

No need to post your pish in two threads. One is quite sufficient.

Anyway, I think you'll find most pro-union politicians would happily admit an independent Scotland would get into the EU eventually, and there's little reason it wouldn't get into NATO unless it decided to behave in certain, dodgy ways.

The Sterling zone is an SNP invention. You'd have thought they'd have asked the UK Government, Bank of England or, indeed, anyone about this before pitching it. But no. And the Treasury has released an exceptional level of documentation as to its concerns with such a plan.

Believe it or not, being independent means you don't get to tell the English what to do. Frankly, Scottish nationalists have been pandered to by British governments long enough: no matter what the outcome of this referendum, they will soon find that ends.

Reply 2192

Original post by Midlander

I can't wait to see the look on his face when the No vote is returned. His whole life dedicated to destroying the union ending in failure.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I think his whole life has been dedicated to massaging his own ego myself.

Reply 2193

So was it 'Better Together' or 'Bitter Together'?

You have the answer from the horse's mouth:

"The Fife MP was also in Glasgow to unveil the United With Labour campaign against independence.

The group is aiming to distance itself from Tory and Liberal Democrat colleagues in the pro-Union Better Together movement."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-22500774

(I believe the BBC is biased in favour of independence, but I couldn't find any unbiased source for this news.)

Reply 2194

Original post by Maths Tutor

What inane ramblings are you on about tonight? Shock horror. Labour, lib dens and conservatives don't see eye to eye yet still believe in staying together. You are aware that different political parties can still have the same goals? After all all if them are advocating better healthcare, education etc etc they just want it delivered in a different manner.

you appear to have posted a link about the SNP saying that taxes won't rise, yet their leaked dossier from a few months back highlighted that they expected to cut public spending to maintain the current tax level, or they'd have to raise taxes to meet existing current public spending.

http://m.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/politics/snp-s-secret-plans-to-cut-spending-revealed-1-2822794

Reply 2195

pane123

Original post by Maths Tutor

Your style of writing is incredibly hard to understand.

I can't make any sense of what you have written.

Reply 2196

Original post by pane123

Your style of writing is incredibly hard to understand.

I can't make any sense of what you have written.

I think it may be his meds :smile:

dont criticise him too much though as he'll start putting everything in bold again.

Reply 2197

Original post by pane123

Your style of writing is incredibly hard to understand.

I can't make any sense of what you have written.

"The Fife MP was also in Glasgow to unveil the United With Labour campaign against independence.

The group is aiming to distance itself from Tory and Liberal Democrat colleagues in the pro-Union Better Together movement."

What part of that did you not understand?

Reply 2198

Original post by Maths Tutor

I don't really understand any of it. Basically I think what you're saying is that Labour is setting up another anti separation party? I don't know. You've just cut a paste some random words without any context.

Reply 2199