Scottish Independence

[Touring Mars]

From a position of full independence, Scotland could if it so desired, do something about its EU membership.

Upon gaining independence, Scotland will not have EU membership - it will have to negotiate its way in. rUK, Spain and others may veto or otherwise hinder Scotland's application for a whole variety of possible reasons - for example, why would rUK (who would retain EU membership) negotiate in favour of Scottish entry to the EU if the SNP follow through on their threat to not accept any of the UK national debt?

The nationalists are adamant that Scotland will automatically be an EU member state, despite the fact there is no basis for this claim in law... but this is absolutely typical of the SNP/Salmond - they genuinely believe that they can get their way on anything by insisting on what a good idea it is, rather than focusing on the reality. Salmond may well be right to say that automatic EU membership for an independent Scotland would be 'common sense', 'logical' and 'a good idea', but there's no law or precedent that says it will actually happen, especially when Salmond also seems to think that he can dictate the terms of Scottish membership as well e.g. not only will Scotland be automatic members of the EU if it becomes independent, but it will not take the Euro or have a central bank either...

 

[doblocruiser]

I think in the longrun it would be beneficial not to be member of this political EU. With all the consequences it might or might not have for Scotland, I wish them the best of luck! I hope they succeed and apply the peoples will!

 

[Liquid]

if the SNP follow through on their threat to not accept any of the UK national debt?

but this is absolutely typical of the SNP/Salmond - they genuinely believe that they can get their way on anything by insisting on what a good idea it is, rather than focusing on the reality.

think that he can dictate the terms of Scottish membership as well

not only will Scotland be automatic members of the EU

but it will not take the Euro or have a central bank either...

Really? Really? This Salmond chap sounds bloody dangerous. I can't help but laugh at him suggesting that Scotland won't accept UK debt when RBS and HBOS are responsible for a portion of it.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Personally I'm of the view that the Scots will vote yes on independence with a very small majority, but as the complexities of gaining independence arise and the harsh truths or reality become clear public opinion will turn and the plans for independence will fall through.

 

[mistersafeway]

I'm not a fan, purely because I think there'll just be yet another war of conquest, and then we'll be right back in the dark ages with all the pointless hatred to go with it. That said, I'm just a pessimist and it could turn out fine. I suppose I mean I tentatively support the vote.

 

[jackargent]

There are a significant number of issues that neither side is even touching on - new Scotland would be outside every single one of those groups and would have to apply to join them.

I mean, let's take Schengen. The UK is outside Schengen, so we have immigration checkpoints on all borders. Scotland will be outside of Schengen too (though it's effectively irrelevant whether they are or aren't because they only have one land border - with a non-Schengen country) and that means they'll need to run Scottish Immigration points on all the ports and airports, rather than using the UK Border Agency. But what of the land border? They'll need to negotiate a free movement pact with The Kingdom or erect a border barrier with immigration controls on the A1, M6/M74, A68, A7, A697, B7076, B6138, B6352, B6396, B6350, B6461 and a number of minor roads - including the Pennine Way which crosses from one side to the other about 20 times down its route. Not to mention the railways - the East Coast Mainline would either have to stop at Berwick or have passport controls at the stations. There's about 100,000 border crossings a day, so there'd be queues. The UK can probably bear its share of the cost of putting UK Border Agency personnel and facilities up, but can Scotland?

And that's just Schengen. What about the European Union or the European Economic Area? Will Scotland apply to be part of the EuroZone and adopt the Euro as currency - or will Salmond get his wish to retain the UK pound - and financial dependence on the UK. What about NATO or the UN? Forget G7, G8 or G20. And, for that matter, what political clout does Scotland bring to get its way in these international agreements the way the UK does?

Scotland doesn't want border controls. the Uk has managed without border controls with the republic of ireland for nearly 100 years - if rUK feel they need border controls (although I can't think why they would) they woudl have topay for them themselves.

The whole Europe thing is strange. The No campaign loves to spread scare stories which put the status of Scotland as being the same as Kosovo or Turkey. This is clearly nonsense, they love to quote treaties but the fact is there is absolutely no precedent for a member country dividing into 2. The EU doesn't do reduction - it never has - it does enlargement. It also reacts pragmatically to situations as it did with the unification of Germany which equal;y had no precedent. So, chances are they will make it work.

In fact the real danger to Scotland's membership of the EU lies with staying in the and taking our chances with a possible in/out referendum for the UK.

Don't you think, then, that the Scottish government's position on full EU membership is a tad inconsistent with the idea of full independence?

Tell me a country that is "fully independent"

Msybe the USA, China & Russia

we live in an interconnected world

Upon gaining independence, Scotland will not have EU membership - it will have to negotiate its way in. rUK, Spain and others may veto or otherwise hinder Scotland's application for a whole variety of possible reasons - for example, why would rUK (who would retain EU membership) negotiate in favour of Scottish entry to the EU if the SNP follow through on their threat to not accept any of the UK national debt?

The nationalists are adamant that Scotland will automatically be an EU member state, despite the fact there is no basis for this claim in law... but this is absolutely typical of the SNP/Salmond - they genuinely believe that they can get their way on anything by insisting on what a good idea it is, rather than focusing on the reality. Salmond may well be right to say that automatic EU membership for an independent Scotland would be 'common sense', 'logical' and 'a good idea', but there's no law or precedent that says it will actually happen, especially when Salmond also seems to think that he can dictate the terms of Scottish membership as well e.g. not only will Scotland be automatic members of the EU if it becomes independent, but it will not take the Euro or have a central bank either...

& there is no law or precedent that says otherwise.

there is an assumption that post indy negotiations will be horrible - but once the campaigning posturing on both sides is over, common sense suggests that is in both sides' interests to get things sorted as soon as possible.

 

[Roger the Horse]

The EU doesn't do reduction - it never has - it does enlargement.

As far as I'm aware, both Algeria and Greenland have both left the EU over the years, in one case as the result of gaining independence from France, in the other as the result of furthered devolution from Denmark.

Also, please try to avoid triple posting in quick succession, use the edit button or the +Quote button.

 

[Touring Mars]

The whole point of going to the immense trouble and cost of dismantling the UK is so that Scotland can enjoy the full powers of a sovereign nation in its own right, is it not? So why, then, do we want to be fully fledged members of a club that requires sovereign powers to be surrendered for it to work properly? Europe is union writ large - I just don't understand why it is so important to leave the UK when it is also so important to sign up to the European project.

there is an assumption that post indy negotiations will be horrible - but once the campaigning posturing on both sides is over, common sense suggests that is in both sides' interests to get things sorted as soon as possible.

Perhaps it would be a good start if the Scottish nationalists showed any inclination to negotiate on anything, rather than expecting everyone else to simply accept our demands/terms. Scotland will certainly be a part of the EU, but on what terms, and when? And what happens in the interim, or if the terms/conditions for our entry are unfavourable/not met? What happens if the SNP are wrong about the 'welcomed with open arms' thing? I'm not saying it is guaranteed to go wrong - I just want to know what the plan is if things don't go according to plan.

 

[jackargent]

I'm not a fan, purely because I think there'll just be yet another war of conquest, and then we'll be right back in the dark ages with all the pointless hatred to go with it. That said, I'm just a pessimist and it could turn out fine. I suppose I mean I tentatively support the vote.

As far as I'm aware, both Algeria and Greenland have both left the EU over the years, in one case as the result of gaining independence from France, in the other as the result of furthered devolution from Denmark.

Also, please try to avoid triple posting in quick succession, use the edit button or the +Quote button.

I was replying to 3 separate posts

seems to me to make sense to keep separate issues separate.

I am well aware of the edit button

The whole point of going to the immense trouble and cost of dismantling the UK is so that Scotland can enjoy the full powers of a sovereign nation in its own right, is it not? So why, then, do we want to be fully fledged members of a club that requires sovereign powers to be surrendered for it to work properly? Europe is union writ large - I just don't understand why it is so important to leave the UK when it is also so important to sign up to the European project.


Perhaps it would be a good start if the Scottish nationalists showed any inclination to negotiate on anything, rather than expecting everyone else to simply accept our demands/terms. Scotland will certainly be a part of the EU, but on what terms, and when? And what happens in the interim, or if the terms/conditions for our entry are unfavourable/not met? What happens if the SNP are wrong about the 'welcomed with open arms' thing? I'm not saying it is guaranteed to go wrong - I just want to know what the plan is if things don't go according to plan.

I think you would find the SNp would be delighted to negotiate on anything. Finding someone to negotiate with them is the problem. The main UK parties will not entertain any negotiation for fear it gives independence credibility. Then they campaign on the basis that the Yes campaign cannot provide definite answers !

 

[Touring Mars]

Please use the +Quote or Edit button - I know you're replying to separate posts, but multiple posting is not accepted here.

As to your point, I disagree with your assessment - the SNP have made their position quite clear on a number of issues and I've seen very little evidence that they are willing to negotiate at all, lest you think that shirking on £100billion worth of the UK national debt if Salmond doesn't get his way on a currency union is 'negotiating'.

 

[jackargent]

Please use the +Quote or Edit button - I know you're replying to separate posts, but multiple posting is not accepted here.

As to your point, I disagree with your assessment - the SNP have made their position quite clear on a number of issues and I've seen very little evidence that they are willing to negotiate at all, lest you think that shirking on £100billion worth of the UK national debt if Salmond doesn't get his way on a currency union is 'negotiating'.

Well, the first people to refuse to negotiate were the 3 Westminster parties who in a remarkably choreographed announcement ruled out CU.

Now the arguments for & against CU are kind of complex and personally it's not a deal breaker for me. But what stuck in the craw of many folk here was the way it was done. Where it appeared to be a calculated campaign tactic rather than a considered position. The way they have played the issue ever since simply underlined that impression. And it has largely backfired on them.

Personally, I don't see why the Snp made such an issue of it.

You say the Snp is unwilling to negotiate. Who exactly are they meant to be negotiating with?

In case I've not made it clear, I am not voting for salmond or the Snp.

 

[Famine]

So Scottish Widows and RBS will both move HQ out of Scotland in the event of a "Yes" vote - along with similar, but less job-lossy moves from Lloyds and Standard Life...

 

[Scaff]

Well, the first people to refuse to negotiate were the 3 Westminster parties who in a remarkably choreographed announcement ruled out CU.

Now the arguments for & against CU are kind of complex and personally it's not a deal breaker for me. But what stuck in the craw of many folk here was the way it was done. Where it appeared to be a calculated campaign tactic rather than a considered position. The way they have played the issue ever since simply underlined that impression. And it has largely backfired on them.

Personally, I don't see why the Snp made such an issue of it.

You say the Snp is unwilling to negotiate. Who exactly are they meant to be negotiating with?

In case I've not made it clear, I am not voting for salmond or the Snp.

How else should they have played it?

The only party that would potentially benefit from a CU would be a newly independent Scotland (and that is still a maybe), and just about ever independent commentator on the subject agrees on that point.

As such why should the remainder of the UK have to negotiate on this? If Scotland want to go independent they don't take with them a 'right' to force a CU; as such this is not a case of the rest of the UK are refusing to negotiate. Its a case that this is one area in which we have a quite clear veto.

I honestly think that while that clear 'no' will have hurt the No campaign to a degree, the refusal of the Yes campaign to accept that (as they were doing again this morning on Radio 4) is potentially more damaging for the Yes campaign. They should of had a plan in place for an independent currency, fully costed, had they pulled that out when CU was ruled out they would potentially have been in a much stronger position.

 

[Liquid]

Whereas instead it's spun to a case of "Oooh, look at these Westminster swines. They wouldn't let us use their money."

In my view, being dependent on someone else's currency* taxes the definition of independent.

*In the sense of using another sovereign nation's currency instead of printing your own.

 

[Touring Mars]

So Scottish Widows and RBS will both move HQ out of Scotland in the event of a "Yes" vote - along with similar, but less job-lossy moves from Lloyds and Standard Life...

Totally called it - SW is owned by Lloyds so it was definitely going to happen... also, it is where David Cameron gave his speech yesterday.

Clearly, this doesn't necessarily mean they will move out of Scotland completely - but I used to work at the old SW HQ in Edinburgh before they moved to their shiny new premises in the new financial district across town, and while there is still some people in the old building, it is (apparently) half empty these days.

What are the implications if a company that is currently based/registered in Scotland moving to England - does that have implications for tax revenues for the fledgling Scottish economy?

 

[Liquid]

Would they bother changing their names?

I don't know, what exactly is the SNP banking on to finance this brave new world? Apart from North Sea Oil, which is going to be an acrimonious issue anyway, it would seem that it is relying on a strong financial sector but it would receive a devastating blow if some of its biggest players decide to move south.

 

[Famine]

Totally called it - SW is owned by Lloyds so it was definitely going to happen...

Oddly, Salmond said that the whole concept of banks and financial institutions leaving Scotland in the event of independence was "nonsense". Now he says it will have no impact

I certainly can't see why financial institutions would want to leave a country that has no clear plan for taking its share of natural resources, taking its share of national debt, currency, health services, military spending (apparently Scotland will have 12 Typhoons...), no credit rating (I'm sure S&P and Moody's would look kindly on a Scottish UK national debt default) or for what to do if it is excluded from the European Union, European Economic Area or Schengen. Oh wait, the other thing.

The GBP took a 10% hit on yesterday's news that an adjusted straw poll finally put Yes ahead for the first time. That alone should tell people just how financially unstable the banking sector thinks independent Scotland - and, lest we forget, The Kingdom with Scotland's absence - would be...

 

[Liquid]

Are Moody's, S&P, NHS Scotland, the Army, ScotRail, BAA and all the other groups affected by this consulting with the SNP and offering their opinion and advice? Or have they at all been consulted by the SNP about what will happen?

 

[Famine]

BP and Shell say Salmond is overestimating North Sea Oil reserves and production:

He said voters must be aware the Scottish Government’s economic plans rely on extracting 24 billion barrels, three billion more than even the most optimistic projections and a total he said that was “significantly unachievable."

In 1999 daily production was 4.6 million barrels but this has fallen to 1.45 million barrels. He said by 2030 this will be down to 1.1 million barrels, by 2040 down to 500,000 and by 2050, it will be as little as 200,000 to 250,000 per day.

Sir Ian concluded there would no longer be “significant” income tax revenue after 2040 and none at all after 2050, meaning Mr Salmond has to prove a separate Scotland could survive without it in 25 to 30 years’ time.

Alex Salmond's response?

"everybody's is entitled to their point of view."

And here's a good read for the Yes voters - @daan will lend you a copy if you struggle downloading this 600 page PDF.


Salmond has no plan. He is relying on things post-independence that he has no business relying on - he calls the fact that The Kingdom won't go for a currency union "a bluff" by "the establishment"! He literally expects the world to do what he says because what he says is how he wants it to work...

His MO is based on lessons he learned from a REDCO workshop - that the candidates who remain the most positive and upbeat more often win in US elections ("Yes We Can!"). So he's ignoring - literally ignoring - anything negative in favour of a cheery demeanour and a projected can-do attitude that taps into the roots of self-determination. It's pretty much relying on the blind fervour for nationalism derided, or at least cautioned against, by Orwell.

 

[Liquid]

And Scots who happen to be outside of Scotland at this time have no say on the matter. Democracy!

 

[Touring Mars]

Are Moody's, S&P, NHS Scotland, the Army, ScotRail, BAA and all the other groups affected by this consulting with the SNP and offering their opinion and advice? Or have they at all been consulted by the SNP about what will happen?

As Famine suggests, I don't know what good it would do to offer one's opinion or advice to someone who is going to ignore you if you say something that doesn't chime with their sworn agenda e.g. keeping the pound is a bad idea because it won't work without a fiscal/political union... "Sorry, not interested, we're keeping the pound anyway."

 

[Touring Mars]

First article to broach the thorny issue of independence not happening even after a Yes vote:

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/sep/11/nine-legal-questions-scotland-yes-vote-joshua-rozenberg

If there is a Yes vote next week, it is likely to be a very tight win - no more than 51% is my guess.

But, even if there is a No vote, I don't think the Yes camp will accept the result...

Either way, you can expect to see it kicking off if independence does either fall through, or is ruled out for some other reason - including by a Scottish government who refuse to accept unfavourable terms, either from rUK or the EU.

 

[Liquid]

I liked the last bit.

But that won't satisfy Salmond

Nothing in reality can.

 

[Roger the Horse]

And Scots who happen to be outside of Scotland at this time have no say on the matter. Democracy!

Meanwhile, a citizen Mozambique (a former Portuguese colony) legally resident in Scotland is eligible to vote but a Faroese national (The Faroe Islands being only 285 km from Scotland) legally resident in Scotland can't. So much logic there. (Surely anybody who is legally resident in an area should be able to vote in its elections?)

 

[MisterWhiskers]

The EU is going to crap from what I heard. Even Britain might split away from the Union.

 

[Liquid]

 

[Scaff]

The EU is going to crap from what I heard. Even Britain might split away from the Union.

Don't believe everything you read/see on TV.

 

[Roger the Horse]

The only problem with the EU is that it's too nice and doesn't use its potentially massive power to tell other people what to do enough. If the EU accepted that, yes, in theory it is more powerful than the US or China, Europe would get a lot more games before they come out in the US rather than having to wait two years to get Persona 3.

 

[daan]

I'm glad someone has asked the most important question.

(MOTD obviously. The others are indeed *****)

Also, if we do become independent, do we get to reclaim Scotland Yard?

 

[Famine]

BP and Shell say Salmond is overestimating North Sea Oil reserves and production

I just read a belter on Twitter, where the response was basically "It doesn't matter if he's lying, because it'll run out at the same time for the UK too.".

There's literally not a sufficient combination of 140 characters to explain what's wrong with that statement.