There will be no mercy for the Scots Watch

Classical Liberal
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
I'm an Englishman from the Midlands with some Scottish heritage who is currently on holiday in Scotland - somewhere my family frequents. As an Englishman and UK citizen it has been very alarming to see how the issue of Scottish independence has been discussed and debated in Scotland. The most important issue has not been raised in the debates or by the talking heads on TV. How the UK government will negotiate in the case of Scottish independence.

(1) Capital Flight
If the Scots do decide to go independent they will firstly be in a very weak negotiating position. The Scots will have to negotiate to get the pound. During the negotiations there will be massive uncertainty and there will be significant capital flight from Scotland to Britain (as Britain will be seen as a safe bet). This will obviously be to the benefit of the British, so during negotiations the British will deliberately drag them out and induce uncertainty so that wealthy Scots in Edinburgh and Aberdeen move the money at least down to Leeds and probably into London.

(2) The British will negotiate very tough terms
If the Scots insist on keeping the pound there will be massive costs to pay for that. Obviously the shipbuilding, submarine building, UK tax collection work and various UK government operations will be moved South as soon as possible. The UK may insist on receiving some of the tax revenue from North sea oil. They may also insist on the Scots bearing significant debts of the UK government (the UK will definitely play the card that it was the Scottish banks - RBS and HBSO - that got us into recession). The UK will also block the Scots entry to the EU until they get what they want.

A Scot reading this might think this is all hokum and the UK gov wouldn't do this. The problem is that in England there is strong feeling that foreigners (the EU) are screwing the UK over - vis a vis UKIP. An incumbent UK government would play hard ball with the Scots (a now foreign nation) to show their strength in negotiating terms for the UK .

(a) if David Cameroon is in power he will screw the Scots over partly because the Tory party won't care about the Scots once they leave the union and because Cameroon needs to appear strong in foreign negotiations to undermine UKIP

(b) Ed Milliband will face similar pressure to appear strong in negotiations with foreign countries - and let's remember that Ed Milliband is willing to really screw people over, remember his brother...

(3) Remember what forced you into the union
The reason why Scotland and the UK came together was because the Scottish tried to build a strong nation to compete with the English. The Scots made risky investments into South America - the Darien scheme - to do this. This risky speculative endevour went terribly wrong, the Scots were completely broke and were forced to accept unification with the UK in exchange for reinstating the wealth of Scotland (at the expense of the English it is worth noting).

There are parallels between the Darien scheme and Scottish independence. Both of these were and are, respectively, stepping into the unknown, taking a big gamble on an otherwise decent situation - and ultimately, both end up with the English getting what they want.


If you are Scottish and thinking of voting yes - and you think England has been screwing the Scots over since the union - how'd you think the English will treat you if you betray them?
24
reply
yo radical one
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
This pleases me.

To be honest, I think that the London governments have appeased Scottish voters far too much; what consequences would there be for not allowing an independent Scotland to keep any of the North Sea oil?
1
reply
Pennyarcade
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
(Original post by Classical Liberal)
I'm an Englishman from the Midlands with some Scottish heritage who is currently on holiday in Scotland - somewhere my family frequents. As an Englishman and UK citizen it has been very alarming to see how the issue of Scottish independence has been discussed and debated in Scotland. The most important issue has not been raised in the debates or by the talking heads on TV. How the UK government will negotiate in the case of Scottish independence.

(1) Capital Flight
If the Scots do decide to go independent they will firstly be in a very weak negotiating position. The Scots will have to negotiate to get the pound. During the negotiations there will be massive uncertainty and there will be significant capital flight from Scotland to Britain (as Britain will be seen as a safe bet). This will obviously be to the benefit of the British, so during negotiations the British will deliberately drag them out and induce uncertainty so that wealthy Scots in Edinburgh and Aberdeen move the money at least down to Leeds and probably into London.

(2) The British will negotiate very tough terms
If the Scots insist on keeping the pound there will be massive costs to pay for that. Obviously the shipbuilding, submarine building, UK tax collection work and various UK government operations will be moved South as soon as possible. The UK may insist on receiving some of the tax revenue from North sea oil. They may also insist on the Scots bearing significant debts of the UK government (the UK will definitely play the card that it was the Scottish banks - RBS and HBSO - that got us into recession). The UK will also block the Scots entry to the EU until they get what they want.
There are no negotiations. It is Scotland's right to keep the pound. I suggest you watch both debates for more info.
1
reply
Makaveli_The_Don
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
TRAITORS the scots are nothing but TRAITORS
3
reply
Classical Liberal
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#5
(Original post by yo radical one)
This pleases me.

To be honest, I think that the London governments have appeased Scottish voters far too much; what consequences would there be for not allowing an independent Scotland to keep any of the North Sea oil?
Realistically the UK would be able to keep it if push came to shove, let's remember who actually owns the battleships (remember what happened when the Argentinian's tried to take the UK's oil in the Falklands). The negotiating position of the Scottish is so laughably weak that it boggles the mind that any rational Scot would vote yes.
3
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by yo radical one)
This pleases me.

To be honest, I think that the London governments have appeased Scottish voters far too much; what consequences would there be for not allowing an independent Scotland to keep any of the North Sea oil?
That would be illegal under UN law.

That said some great points above.
0
reply
Classical Liberal
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by Pennyarcade)
There are no negotiations. It is Scotland's right to keep the pound. I suggest you watch both debates for more info.
I'm an economics student with a particular interest in monetary policy. I can tell you that the pound is backed the UK government. It is the UK government's pound - not the people's pound, it is the UK government's pound - not the Scottish government's pound . It is actually the Bank of England's pound (which is wholly owned by the UK government). Also, note the name of the central bank, the bank of England.

It is outrageous that Alex Salmond is being outright deceptive on this issue, the fact that he is willing to be so dishonest really makes me question his integrity and that of the entire yes campaign.
4
reply
yo radical one
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
(Original post by Classical Liberal)
Realistically the UK would be able to keep it if push came to shove, let's remember who actually owns the battleships (remember what happened when the Argentinian's tried to take the UK's oil in the Falklands). The negotiating position of the Scottish is so laughably weak that it boggles the mind that any rational Scot would vote yes.
This is exactly what I was thinking, if the UK managed to hold on to the oil off the Falklands, how could we not keep the North Sea oil?
0
reply
joey11223
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by Pennyarcade)
There are no negotiations. It is Scotland's right to keep the pound. I suggest you watch both debates for more info.
It's their right to adopt the Kroner if they so wish, still doesn't mean deciding to use another countries currency, thus having no central bank, is a very good idea.
0
reply
Classical Liberal
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by arson_fire)
We could continue to use sterling, but without control over policy, interest rates, or a central bank. It`s not our right to expect the English taxpayer to underwrite Scottish public spending, as would happen under a formal currency union.
The problem with this is that all of the Edinburgh and Aberdeen based finance companies - think of RBS, Standard Life, Aberdeen Asset Management - would move down the England. They would just have to, otherwise people would take their money out or the companies would have to offer much higher returns (at the expense of executive compensation) to compensate for the risk of not having the UK government as a backstop.

This would hollow out many of the most well paid jobs in Scotland - house prices in East Scotland would tumble, and many Scots who make their money due to the incomes of rich financiers would be out of work.
0
reply
tomfailinghelp
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
Although I obviously want what is best for Britain and Scotland, that is no independence, there is a cruel part of me that wants a 'Yes' vote just to watch that nationalist prigs regret it.
18
reply
The Right
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by Quady)
Why would they fail?

Since the economy is Scotland is stronger than that of the rUK at the very least they're likely to 'fail less than the rUK'.
You fail to consider the GDP per head(this is an important point per head is not the same as the country as a whole. England will always have a higher GDP overall and so economically will be a stronger nation. An island with two billionaires would top the list per head, it means nothing) statistics apply to Scotland while they are in the UK and not as a separate independent state. Economists have said the GDP rating would fall on the basis of few key issues.

One being Scotland will not achieve a currency union and so even if they create a new currency, they have no central bank to support it. If they chose the euro they do it on the conditions they have no access to the financial assets in Brussels. Whatever route they take it will never match up to the current pound sterling agreement.

Secondly Salmond said Scotland would default on their national share of the debt if no currency union is agreed. By doing this Scotland say goodbye to the current AAA credit rating in favour of a rating no country would agree to give a loan unless conditions are put in place that economically impact the receiving country(I.e. Scotland) in favour of the source country. No one in the world would let you borrow money.

Thirdly Salmond has deluded the Scottish people on the subject of North Sea oil. Let me tell you a little fact about China in Africa. The Chinese government own vast amount of recourses in Zambia, Namibia, Nigeria, Congo, Zimbabwe, Mozambique ect. Which was agreed between both governments and meets international regulations. Guess who owns the North Sea oil? Not Scotland but the UK. Westminster own the contract rights to North Sea oil and just because they are in Scottish waters international trading bodies can do nothing as the contracts were drawn up while Scotland were in the UK. The Scottish government allowed it. You would only get a small % of the oil and any newly discovered oil.

Finally Scottish citizens argue that London sucks all foreign direct investment however it is because of London that Edinburgh and Glasgow have received FDI and it works like this. London is like the big business man and Edinburgh plus Glasgow are friends of London. It's who you know and because of connections between London and these Scottish cities the UK has directed investment towards Scotland. Without London Scotland will lose a reputable city.
5
reply
The Right
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by tomfailinghelp)
Although I obviously want what is best for Britain and Scotland, that is no independence, there is a cruel part of me that wants a 'Yes' vote just to watch that nationalist prigs regret it.
And so Labour lose 40+ seats hindering any effort of winning a general election
0
reply
tomfailinghelp
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by The Right)
And so Labour lose 40+ seats hindering any effort of winning a general election
So? I'm not a Socialist anyway.
0
reply
The Right
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by tomfailinghelp)
So? I'm not a Socialist anyway.
I am saying it is a good thing as the left wing loons can not have another attempt of destroying the country
1
reply
Classical Liberal
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by Rakas21)
That would be illegal under UN law.

That said some great points above.
Would it?

The waters around Scotland are not Scottish territory, they are UK territory, are they not. As they are UK territory, why wouldn't the UK government be allowed to surround the oil fields with frigates and enforce a blockade until a deal is done?
0
reply
MagicNMedicine
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
I think this is true unfortunately.

There is some naivety on the part of Scotland, but its the same naivety on the part of the Eurosceptics that want the UK to leave the EU and say "look we can still negotiate access to the single market, we can have access to free movement of goods and services with the EU and allow Brits rights to work in the EU". The EU is a much bigger fish than us, and they can drive a very tough bargain and leave us with a very poor exit deal.
0
reply
tomfailinghelp
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
(Original post by The Right)
I am saying it is a good thing as the left wing loons can not have another attempt of destroying the country
Labour is not left wing at all anyway... I think I'd rather be destroyed by Labour than UKIP!
0
reply
Classical Liberal
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by MagicNMedicine)
I think this is true unfortunately.

There is some naivety on the part of Scotland, but its the same naivety on the part of the Eurosceptics that want the UK to leave the EU and say "look we can still negotiate access to the single market, we can have access to free movement of goods and services with the EU and allow Brits rights to work in the EU". The EU is a much bigger fish than us, and they can drive a very tough bargain and leave us with a very poor exit deal.
Who has more negotiating strength? The Scottish against the British. Or the British against the Europeans.
0
reply
The Right
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
(Original post by tomfailinghelp)
Labour is not left wing at all anyway... I think I'd rather be destroyed by Labour than UKIP!
Whether the men at the top exhibit left wing personas or not the core labour ideals are left wing. UKIP is the only party who can stop this country being the joke it currently is.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (56)
66.67%
No I haven't decided yet (18)
21.43%
Yes but I might change my mind (10)
11.9%

Watched Threads

View All