Alex Salmond and Independence

Team Brian GB said:
Maybe he was referring to the current financial crisis but it would have been fair to say he was referring to Irish economic history since 1921.

You were an impoverished country based on agriculture with little to offer the international economy, by many accounts you were not considered a developed, first world country until the 1990s. You have had one relatively short period of prosperity in your history which involved taking on very cheap debt in an environment devoid of the notion or risk, worth ten times more than the value of your economy.

I hope that you retain at the very least a semblance of the celtic tiger era Ireland, a wealthy country that we can do business with, a country with which it was no coincidence that we could come to terms on Northern Ireland with in the 1990s as your economic fortunes improve dramatically.
Click to expand...

Of course, but one of the things of doing it on your own is that you take the rough with smooth. So I can see why you and others would be uncomfortable with Scotland hoping to have all the benefits of Independence and none of the downfalls.

Bad timing probably from the Scottish (or brilliant, I can't quite decide). They should stick with the Union until the world economy has improved and stability and prosperity has returned as it would make their transition to an Independent state infinitely easier.

But Salmond knows that the hunger probably wouldn't be there if that was the case so he's striking while the iron is hot (in his opinion 2014).
 
WeasteDevil said:
Just pointing out that neither use the Pound Sterling, just something very closely linked to it, as the Irish Punt was to an extent. You also have the issue of Scottish banks being able to print their own notes as long as they are backed by a Bank of England equivalent. It's not an easy tapestry to unwrap.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Though four Scottish banks can print currency they can only print it with the backing of Sterling printed by the Bank of England and held in reserve by the Bank of England - which I understand they do with one uber enormous denomination of notes.

That isn't the same as having central bank facilities.
 
Team Brian GB said:
It might just be so from a technical standpoint that they would allow Scottish membership if international law was to say it is a requirement but that they subsequently expell them for not meeting the terms as an independent state, purely for the purposes of covering themselves on paper.
Click to expand...

If they allowed Scottish membership, even on a technical basis, isn't that the end of it? I was under the impression that there is no mechanism in the Treaties that allow a member state to be expelled. So once they're in, they're in. And it would be just a matter of waiting for them to get their house in order, rather than expelling them and making them reapply.
 
shaydun said:
If they allowed Scottish membership, even on a technical basis, isn't that the end of it? I was under the impression that there is no mechanism in the Treaties that allow a member state to be expelled. So once they're in, they're in. And it would be just a matter of waiting for them to get their house in order, rather than expelling them and making them reapply.
Click to expand...

They wouldn't be in, they would be in for the purposes of any provisions of international law - an agreement that would only exist on paper.

Entry to the EU always takes years, they couldn't fast track it because they would to have rewrite EU law to do so and why would 27 countries across Europe want to come together and unaminously approve such changes for the benefit of a new state in the far north west of the continent?

The simple answer is they wouldn't especially if they wanted to join the Eurozone in which case the Germans would tell them to get lost.
 
The EU have already admitted that there are ideas in place to allow a country to leave, but there is no point putting them into writing until the time comes because they wont know what is necessary.

To be honest, I don't think the EU are as inflexible as they appear. An EU as important as the UK member splitting into two would be very important, if the UK gave Scotland it's blessing you'd imagine they would gain entry.

We simply haven't had this situation before TGB
 
No we haven't which is why it is hypothetical though there is a clear progression in place and it would require all member states to come together to change that process, and we all know how difficult it is for EU members to all come together as one.

This is especially the case when the Eurozone is in deep trouble and Scotland would probably want to join it with their potential bank sector being larger than GDP by ten times over. There is absolutely no way in that scenario that not a single country in the EU would not allow them to join by the backdoor.
 
Team Brian GB said:
They wouldn't be in, they would be in for the purposes of any provisions of international law - an agreement that would only exist on paper.
Click to expand...

That's where I'm stuck.

How can they be in without being really in? If they're any way in, then it will be pretty hard to remove them without their consent.

I'm not saying you're wrong btw, but I'm just finding it hard to see how they could be 'technically' or 'legally' in and then removed without their consent.
 
shaydun said:
That's where I'm stuck.

How can they be in without being really in? If they're any way in, then it will be pretty hard to remove them without their consent.

I'm not saying you're wrong btw, but I'm just finding it hard to see how they could be 'technically' or 'legally' in and then removed without their consent.
Click to expand...

Your membership is only in good standing whilst you are compliant with all laws and regulations as are contained in the Acquis Communautaire and you have to demonstrate that you are. This is a set of guidelines that includes thirty five chapters of various things, many of which are managed nationally and therefore Scotland would have no previous experience of dealing with - and by not having such they couldn't be a member.

Though I do not think it would happen in that way, that would purely be a pedantic way to get around various interpretations of international law that may or may not be enforcable. The fact of the matter is it is a long and drawn out process that takes many years of reform and monitoring and then it relies on the political support of every member state not blocking it or holding it up for whatever nafarious reasons they can dream up.
 
Team Brian GB said:
They wouldn't be in, they would be in for the purposes of any provisions of international law - an agreement that would only exist on paper.

Entry to the EU always takes years, they couldn't fast track it because they would to have rewrite EU law to do so and why would 27 countries across Europe want to come together and unaminously approve such changes for the benefit of a new state in the far north west of the continent?

The simple answer is they wouldn't especially if they wanted to join the Eurozone in which case the Germans would tell them to get lost.
Click to expand...

I don't know why people don't listen to what Salmond says. He's made it quite clear he doesn't want to join the Europne. When asked on the radio he said he had similar views to Gordon Brown, that they should join if the time was right and if it were to the benefit of Scotland. And then laughed, saying in practice probably never. This was also the conservative policy, if I remember rightly.
 
Though to join the European Union you have to join the Eurozone, we don't because we opted-out.
 
Team Brian GB said:
Though to join the European Union you have to join the Eurozone, we don't because we opted-out.
Click to expand...

True.

Except in practice, not quite true, because the nations economy has to pass several thresholds which won't apply to Scotland for a long time.
 
711 said:
You have no idea what the terms would be. Scotland would be part-existing member, part newly-independent state. Bearing in mind the UK is not exactly popular in Europe, they might be welcomed with open arms.
Click to expand...

And on the contrary they might not be welcomed at all, the last thing the EU would want is a country with an unbalanced economy with a big question mark over it when the Eurozone is teetering on the edge.

There will be countries that would rather Scotland stays outside so it would be easier to entice their industries away, essentially the sort of thing I said would happen between Scotland and the UK but that wouldn't need us to do much at all whereas other countries will specifically court such companies and industries to relocate to their countries.
 
rcoobc said:
True.

Except in practice, not quite true, because the nations economy has to pass several thresholds which won't apply to Scotland for a long time.
Click to expand...

That is a good point, tests they would very likely never pass given what their likely public/private debt to GDP ration would be.
 
Team Brian GB said:
And on the contrary they might not be welcomed at all, the last thing the EU would want is a country with an unbalanced economy with a big question mark over it when the Eurozone is teetering on the edge.

There will be countries that would rather Scotland stays outside so it would be easier to entice their industries away, essentially the sort of thing I said would happen between Scotland and the UK but that wouldn't need us to do much at all whereas other countries will specifically court such companies and industries to relocate to their countries.
Click to expand...

This is also possible, my point was that you were making statements as if they were facts, whereas they were merely supposition.
 
711 said:
This is also possible, my point was that you were making statements as if they were facts, whereas they were merely supposition.
Click to expand...

Ahh right, indeed you are right, it is unchartered waters that I doubt anybody at the European Commission has seriously thought about.
 
711 said:
I don't know why people don't listen to what Salmond says. He's made it quite clear he doesn't want to join the Europne. When asked on the radio he said he had similar views to Gordon Brown, that they should join if the time was right and if it were to the benefit of Scotland. And then laughed, saying in practice probably never. This was also the conservative policy, if I remember rightly.
Click to expand...

What currency does he want to use then?

The rest of the UK does not want to guarantee Scotland's finances with its currency. If Scotland votes for independence it will not be allowed to use sterling.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
What currency does he want to use then?

The rest of the UK does not want to guarantee Scotland's finances with its currency. If Scotland votes for independence it will not be allowed to use sterling.
Click to expand...

A Scottish pound, which might initially be linked to sterling or the euro, or neither. No one yet knows, including you, as complex negotiations would obviously have to take place.

There are scores of countries all over the world that have gained independence, being denied the use of sterling did not stop them.
 
711 said:
A Scottish pound, which might initially be linked to sterling or the euro, or neither. No one yet knows, including you, as complex negotiations would obviously have to take place.

There are scores of countries all over the world that have gained independence, being denied the use of sterling did not stop them.
Click to expand...

That is a bit disingenuous because how many of the newly independent countries were using sterling before they separated and tried to continue to use sterling against the wishes of the UK govt? I can't think of any.
 
And people thought I was being mean and nasty, I was simply ahead of the curve.

Now Westminster and the media are questioning the economic literacy of an independent Scotland, especially with regard to currency and their use of Sterling.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
That is a bit disingenuous because how many of the newly independent countries were using sterling before they separated and tried to continue to use sterling against the wishes of the UK govt? I can't think of any.
Click to expand...

They didn't 'try to continue to use sterling' mate, that's the point, that you are assuming Scotland would.
 
Team Brian GB said:
And people thought I was being mean and nasty, I was simply ahead of the curve.

Now Westminster and the media are questioning the economic literacy of an independent Scotland, especially with regard to currency and their use of Sterling.
Click to expand...

People were asking the same questions before you were born, you arrogant feckwit.

You're a good poster though, you do make one think.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
What currency does he want to use then?

The rest of the UK does not want to guarantee Scotland's finances with its currency. If Scotland votes for independence it will not be allowed to use sterling.
Click to expand...

In what way? Are you suggesting Scottish people won't be able to trade sterling on the open market?

Currently, there are a number of small countries outside the "Eurozone" that use the Euro as their currency. There are also a number of countries that have currencies pegged to the Euro. Scotland would be likely to initially use Sterling, then a currency pegged to Sterling, and eventually they'd allow it to move freely.
 
Hypothetically speaking, if Scotland break away from the UK and aren't members of the European Economic Area. Wouldn't Scottish people need work permits to work in England and Wales?
That would be hilarious!
 
Ray Peterson said:
Hypothetically speaking, if Scotland break away from the UK and aren't members of the European Economic Area. Wouldn't Scottish people need work permits to work in England and Wales?
That would be hilarious!
Click to expand...

I doubt it!

In theory those from the Crown protectorates of the Isle of Mann and the Channel Islands are not fully fledged European Citizens and have no freedom of movement within the EU, but there are no restrictions on access to the UK are there?

Step 1 for Scotland could be to become a Crown Dependency. They would probably be quite happy for that also, as the rest of the UK would be responsible for the cost of its defence.
 
WeasteDevil said:
I doubt it!

In theory those from the Crown protectorates of the Isle of Mann and the Channel Islands are not fully fledged European Citizens and have no freedom of movement within the EU, but there are no restrictions on access to the UK are there?

Step 1 for Scotland could be to become a Crown Dependency. They would probably be quite happy for that also, as the rest of the UK would be responsible for the cost of its defence.
Click to expand...

Good point about the Islands, I hadn't considered their situation.
 
Here's something from Wikipedia....

Of the Four Freedoms of the EU, the islands take part in that concerning the movement of goods, but not those concerning the movement of people, services or capital. The Channel Islands are outside the VAT area (as they have no VAT), while the Isle of Man is inside it.[28] Both areas are inside the customs union.[29]

Channel Islanders and Manx people are British citizens and hence European citizens.[30] However, they are not entitled to take advantage of the freedom of movement of people or services unless they are directly connected (through birth, descent from a parent or grandparent, or five years' residence) with the United Kingdom.[31]
Click to expand...

It might be a good idea for Scotland as a first step, even Salmond seems to be highly in favour of retaining the Crown in terms of being the head of state in any case. I also doubt that they would have a problem in regards to movement in the European Union, as they are all fully fledged European Union citizens at the moment.
 
lynchie said:
In what way? Are you suggesting Scottish people won't be able to trade sterling on the open market?

Currently, there are a number of small countries outside the "Eurozone" that use the Euro as their currency. There are also a number of countries that have currencies pegged to the Euro. Scotland would be likely to initially use Sterling, then a currency pegged to Sterling, and eventually they'd allow it to move freely.
Click to expand...

I should have used the word keep or maybe even print instead of use. All I am trying to say is that Scotland would have to join the Euro or start its own currency. It couldn't continue as an independent country and continue with sterling as if nothing had happened. The rest of the UK haven't avoided being in the Euro zone only to become a sterling zone with all the internal structural difficulties that would bring.

I don't know how you peg a new Scottish currency to the pound either. Or how Scotland manages to stay out of the Euro but remain inside the EU, which I don't think is allowed anymore.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
That is a bit disingenuous because how many of the newly independent countries were using sterling before they separated and tried to continue to use sterling against the wishes of the UK govt? I can't think of any.
Click to expand...

Scotland can use sterling as currency without the UK government's say so. They have to stop issuing sterling though, and simply rely on the stocks of sterling held by the Scottish central bank.

Not a permanent solution, but ok for a while.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
I should have used the word keep or maybe even print instead of use. All I am trying to say is that Scotland would have to join the Euro or start its own currency. It couldn't continue as an independent country and continue with sterling as if nothing had happened. The rest of the UK haven't avoided being in the Euro zone only to become a sterling zone with all the internal structural difficulties that would bring.

I don't know how you peg a new Scottish currency to the pound either. Or how Scotland manages to stay out of the Euro but remain inside the EU, which I don't think is allowed anymore.
Click to expand...

Scotland would probably have to set up a central bank, and have that central bank hold a certain amount of sterling (bought from the Bank of England). This sterling then supplements the sterling currently in use in Scotland, which continues to flow round the Scottish economy (and in and out). The problem occurs if the Scottish central bank runs out of sterling (because Scots suddenly go crazy for the iPad 3, say). It can't replenish sterling without the Scottish government somehow injecting it, from taxation or borrowing.
 
spinoza said:
Scotland would probably have to set up a central bank, and have that central bank hold a certain amount of sterling (bought from the Bank of England). This sterling then supplements the sterling currently in use in Scotland, which continues to flow round the Scottish economy (and in and out). The problem occurs if the Scottish central bank runs out of sterling (because Scots suddenly go crazy for the iPad 3, say). It can't replenish sterling without the Scottish government somehow injecting it, from taxation or borrowing.
Click to expand...

That has got to be a recipe for disaster though hasn't it?
 
spinoza said:
Scotland would probably have to set up a central bank, and have that central bank hold a certain amount of sterling (bought from the Bank of England). This sterling then supplements the sterling currently in use in Scotland, which continues to flow round the Scottish economy (and in and out). The problem occurs if the Scottish central bank runs out of sterling (because Scots suddenly go crazy for the iPad 3, say). It can't replenish sterling without the Scottish government somehow injecting it, from taxation or borrowing.
Click to expand...

Given the volume of global currency flows and the reserves central banks maintain I would imagine this highly unlikely.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
That has got to be a recipe for disaster though hasn't it?
Click to expand...

It's been tried in the past with the US dollar. Ecuador had it for a few years in the 90s, and it tamed their inflation problem. So did Argentina. Basically you use it if the local politicians can't be trusted not to keep their hands off the printing press. Of course, if you run out of dollars, like Argentina did, you have a financial crisis.

It's a stop gap nothing more. I'm sure any Scottish independence would be planned to the nth degree, and that will include the establishment of a new currency. If they wanted to rush it though, they can use sterling for a while. They would just be running the economy at the whims and fancies of the Bank of England - ironically.
 
Jippy said:
Given the volume of global currency flows and the reserves central banks maintain I would imagine this highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

Depends on what level of reserves the Scottish central bank has in the first place. It's not unknown for central banks to run out of reserves. In fact, running out of reserves in the late 90s is why the Asian central banks now have more reserves than God.
 
lynchie said:
In what way? Are you suggesting Scottish people won't be able to trade sterling on the open market?

Currently, there are a number of small countries outside the "Eurozone" that use the Euro as their currency. There are also a number of countries that have currencies pegged to the Euro. Scotland would be likely to initially use Sterling, then a currency pegged to Sterling, and eventually they'd allow it to move freely.
Click to expand...


They could use it if they liked but the problem is they would have no authority whatsoever over monetary policy - their fiscal policy and economic integrity would be at the complete mercy of the Bank of England changing its stance on interest rates or the money supply.

For instance, say the priority in Scotland was to bring down inflation whereas in England it was to increase economic growth - the solutions of both problems are the complete opposite of each other which would make things far worse if implemented. The Bank of England would bring interest rates down and flood the economy with Sterling, whilst Scotland without any say in the matter as it wouldn't be their currency would see their inflation rate go through the roof.
 
The Isle of Mann uses Sterling but prints its own notes. It's not part of the UK, it's a Crown Dependency. I see no reason why this could not be done with Scotland. Also, the Irish Punt was directly linked to Sterling up until around 1979.
 
spinoza said:
It's a stop gap nothing more. I'm sure any Scottish independence would be planned to the nth degree, and that will include the establishment of a new currency. If they wanted to rush it though, they can use sterling for a while. They would just be running the economy at the whims and fancies of the Bank of England - ironically.
Click to expand...

Which is what makes their plans somewhat farsical, the only way they would satisfy the Bank of England and HM Treasury to have fair access to Sterling is if they surrendered all rights of monetary policy to them and gave us approval of their fiscal policy. Something they wouldn't give and we would require otherwise they have to find something else.
 
Team Brian GB said:
Which is what makes their plans somewhat farsical, the only way they would satisfy the Bank of England and HM Treasury to have fair access to Sterling is if they surrendered all rights of monetary policy to them and gave us approval of their fiscal policy. Something they wouldn't give and we would require otherwise they have to find something else.
Click to expand...

I think you're going off on one and making things far more complicated than they really are. Irish monetary policy for example is dictated by the ECB. In the case of Scotland, WTF would be the difference in the short term between the Bank of England and the ECB? Just like Ireland, they would have no real say in their own monetary policy. The Isle of Mann has no control over its monetary policy either, the IMP is locked to the GBP, however they have total control over fiscal policy - no capital gains tax for example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.