Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: normal rules on May 08, 2021, 10:31:44 pm
-
It seems this is gathering momentum again.
With some of our supporter base no doubt exiled North of the Border, and some with family and or friends in Scotland, what are people’s thoughts on this?
Consider that if independence does ever occur, the SNP have made it clear they would, if allowed, reapply to join the EU.
What chaos would ensue if this became a reality.?
Is anyone bothered? Should we be?
-
Well it does affect us all clearly. I'm more for it than I used to be. Scotland (through snp policies) is diverging from the rest of the UK more so each year.
Most of my family is Scottish. Most are against independence. The snp argument contradicts itself. They want more integration with Europe but less with the rest of the UK. They want that with no border and they want their own currency. They also can't run their economy at anything but a huge deficit. A lot of the arguments don't make sense but culturally it matters to them.
One aspect not noted is how the Scottish education system had driven a lot of this. There's a lot of teaching about politics in Scottish schools and that makes a huge difference.
-
Lots of issues need sorting before the go independent, they will not be in NATO for a start, so who will be responsible for their defence, is the rest of the UK going to spend on Scottish defence? They have no currency, they will be tied to the BoE if they want to use the £, Border Controls? Who finances that?
The SNP are living in Cuckoo land if you ask me
-
Big. I wasn’t aware about politics in Scottish education. Do you think it’s a deliberate attempt to get young Scottish people on the side of independence? That’s quite a frightening thought, if so.
-
Lots of issues need sorting before the go independent, they will not be in NATO for a start, so who will be responsible for their defence, is the rest of the UK going to spend on Scottish defence? They have no currency, they will be tied to the BoE if they want to use the £, Border Controls? Who finances that?
The SNP are living in Cuckoo land if you ask me
Will Scotland need Nato if they are accepted into the EU following a split from the UK?
-
Lots of issues need sorting before the go independent, they will not be in NATO for a start, so who will be responsible for their defence, is the rest of the UK going to spend on Scottish defence? They have no currency, they will be tied to the BoE if they want to use the £, Border Controls? Who finances that?
The SNP are living in Cuckoo land if you ask me
Will Scotland need Nato if they are accepted into the EU following a split from the UK?
It will be years before Scotland meets the criteria to join the EU, who defends them in the meantime?
-
Would the UK and the EU stand on the side lines if in they were attacked and who would do that?
-
LoL.
I guess that if they were invaded we would be safe because we would have border control to stop an invading army, oh, and Hadrian’s Wall might need a bit of reinforcing.
-
I guess the only reason a separate Scotland would be attacked is if they still wanted and allowed trident missiles to be in in their territory
lol?
-
fyi hound, hadrian's wall is in England
-
Big. I wasn’t aware about politics in Scottish education. Do you think it’s a deliberate attempt to get young Scottish people on the side of independence? That’s quite a frightening thought, if so.
It wasn't when I was there as I was educated there before snp were in power and I think it's a good thing the young are educated in politics. It does though help snp build momentum I feel.
The snp stance on it all just isn't logical to me, there stance on so many issues is short sighted.
-
I don't think Scottish Independance can really work particularly now North Sea oil revenues are under pressure and really we should be working to keep what's left of that oil under the sea anyway.
Truth be told the Scots don't even really want Independance now. They want to be a part of the EU.
There is probably a good argument that Labour should adopt an unambiguous pro EU stance and make a pact with the SNP on the understanding that the UK would rejoin the EU and Scotland would get more devolved powers.
That should placate Scotland, sort out N Ireland and It's the only way I can see the Labour Party getting a sniff at power again.
-
There's a lot of merit in that call RD.
-
I don't think Scottish Independance can really work particularly now North Sea oil revenues are under pressure and really we should be working to keep what's left of that oil under the sea anyway.
Truth be told the Scots don't even really want Independance now. They want to be a part of the EU.
There is probably a good argument that Labour should adopt an unambiguous pro EU stance and make a pact with the SNP on the understanding that the UK would rejoin the EU and Scotland would get more devolved powers.
That should placate Scotland, sort out N Ireland and It's the only way I can see the Labour Party getting a sniff at power again.
I think you misunderstand the snp. They aren't Pro EU it's a means to an end. They are pro independence nothing more, nothing less.
-
fyi hound, hadrian's wall is in England
Did I say anything different.
The invaders would still have to get past it wouldn’t they, you know, like in days gone by, built to keep the Scots back. :facepalm:
-
Did you get your mum to help you with the answer, it took you long enough?
-
I don't think Scottish Independance can really work particularly now North Sea oil revenues are under pressure and really we should be working to keep what's left of that oil under the sea anyway.
Truth be told the Scots don't even really want Independance now. They want to be a part of the EU.
There is probably a good argument that Labour should adopt an unambiguous pro EU stance and make a pact with the SNP on the understanding that the UK would rejoin the EU and Scotland would get more devolved powers.
That should placate Scotland, sort out N Ireland and It's the only way I can see the Labour Party getting a sniff at power again.
I think you misunderstand the snp. They aren't Pro EU it's a means to an end. They are pro independence nothing more, nothing less.
I doubt the majority Scots population buy into the idea of Independance in that way though. They don't want a hard border near Hadrians wall and a new Scottish groat and the fountain of wealth in the North Sea doesn't exist anymore.
What's driving the independence movement in Scotland now is the prospect of rejoining the EU and getting away from the Tory government and Brexit.
-
Did you get your mum to help you with the answer, it took you long enough?
You really are an obnoxious person SR.
I have other things to do, probably unlike yourself.
You have suggested that I don’t know where Hadrian’s Wall is just start an argument when clearly my post didn’t suggest anything like that.
Also, for your information, my mother is dead so please don’t be a prat by bringing her into your imaginary world.
Half a World away.
-
I don't understand the mentality of the SNP , they want independence from the Uk Parliament and they then intend to join the EU and get governed by Twits from Luxembourg and Poland!
They claim they barely trade with us but in reality 80% of their trade is with us!
They seem to think they can harvest a vast bonanza of wealth from, oil Gas and Coal reserves, they are all grey power sources and will be in total decline in the next decade.
Oil revenue makes up 1% of the U.K. GNP.they have some Blue sky vision of being able to finance their country with these meagre resources. . Faslane will become the Guantanamo bay of Britain, The warship building programme will go to British Ship yards, The Shetlands and Orkney will vote for their own independence or remain in the U.K. They are casting themselves adrift from the massive Power output which will be coming from The Dogger Bank wind power infrastructure.
As for Defence they will be like Eire, totally reliant on The UK for Air defence. On the plus side they can save their Shipbuilding industry by building a Littorial Naval defence Force.
I assume the Scots in The UK will have similar travel rights as to Eire citizens.
-
Oh and by the way it's our National Debt, its nowt to do with them, AND we owe em a couple of hundred £Billion in Oil money we skanked.!
Looks like they will not be re joining the EU after all, who have issues of a similar nature with parts of Spain, Belgium etc!
Omething similar happened in The former Yugoslavia when Tito died I seem to recall.
-
The point is simple really....self determination.
You can only have that if you have control of your own currency. The EU argument needs to factor this in.
Bottom line is that it is up to them.
If it turns out to have downsides, then that is up to them to sort it.
Nowt to do with us really, is it?
What if the EU had said to Cameron that we could not have a referendum on leaving....there would have been uproar!
Yet Bozo seems to think its OK to say that to Scots, although they have a pro-ref majority...barmy!
-
But you can’t just keep having referendums until you win. Both sides called it the referendum of a generation. Until one side lost.
-
The thing with the Scottish independence referendum and the EU referendum was in both cases the results were quite close. That's why they don't feel definitive.
And since the Scottish vote we have had Brexit, which has changed the arrangement.
I think the government is going to find it difficult to resist calls for a 2nd referendum.
The two things are linked. Scotland hasn't yet agreed to remain part of the UK outside of the EU and without Scotland remaining a part of the UK, I don't think Brexit really works either.
-
But you can’t just keep having referendums until you win. Both sides called it the referendum of a generation. Until one side lost.
Belton,
It is about renewing the mandate. That's why we have a GE every 5 years!
The electoral roll is changing all the time,
Would it be fair to bind the younger generation to a choice made by those who have passed away?
By 2024 some of those young uns will be mid twenties, its only fair that they have the chance to reconsider.
I reckon 10 years is about right. Sturgeon was not saying NOW, just within this election cycle.
Seems very reasonable to me!
-
But you can’t just keep having referendums until you win. Both sides called it the referendum of a generation. Until one side lost.
Belton,
It is about renewing the mandate. That's why we have a GE every 5 years!
The electoral roll is changing all the time,
Would it be fair to bind the younger generation to a choice made by those who have passed away?
By 2024 some of those young uns will be mid twenties, its only fair that they have the chance to reconsider.
I reckon 10 years is about right. Sturgeon was not saying NOW, just within this election cycle.
Seems very reasonable to me!
On the contrary do you fix that referendum and do it again every ten years then no matter what the result?
7 years ago 55% of people voted to keep the union in a once in a generation vote, quite comprehensive. That also disregards the many Scots who don't live in Scotland and were not given a say in the future of their country.
-
Pud,
No, you respect the wish of the majority if they want to revisit the matter after 10 years.
That works both ways, so if a majority wanted to restore the union that would have equal merit.
55% (of those who voted) is not comprehensive, it is a narrow result which can easily change over 10 years. The number of governments who have lost such a position in a short time scale are numerous.
I agree with your point about non-doms though.
There is a basic problem with this "once in a generation" rhetoric...it is complete nonsense when applied to democratic systems of governance. That Cameron should use the term is not surprising, but it has no meaning or constitutional validity.
-
Albie, I don’t see the comparison with a GE.
-
Belton,
It is about what is a reasonable timescale to use.
See my reply to Pud where I explain the reasoning.
-
But 10 years isn’t a reasonable timescale for such a huge, momentous and very expensive referendum.
Potentially, by that system, Scotland could have 10 years in and 10 years out continuously.
It makes no sense.
-
So what is reasonable, Belton?
I am not wedded to 10 years, give me your bid.
Keep in mind there would only be a call for a referendum if a majority supported it. It is very unlikely to repeat as you suggest switching between demands.
The key fact is that across the UK almost 700k people die each year.
These are replaced by the new intake, who tend to have a different perspective.
Do the maths, and explain why the current voters should be bound by a decision taken by their grandparents.
The idea is that over 10 years a significant change in the electorate has taken place, and the political outcome from that needs to be recognised.
-
It’s very unlikely to repeat because, generally, people accept these democratic decisions.
I honestly don’t know the answer to this question: when was the last referendum for Scotland to leave? And the one before that?
You say it is very unlikely to repeat, but what if they lose again? What happens when the next 10 years of people die and children become adults? And the next? And the next?
In answer to your question, there should be a very significant period of acceptance before it is even considered again. Impossible to put a year on it, but I think if it is to happen again, none of us should know anything about it.
-
An independent Scotland would raise big questions re the trident nuclear deterrent. They are based at Faslane currently and I’m unsure anywhere on the English or welsh coast would be suitable as a replacement. Plus that would cost billions no doubt for relocation.
Then there are the raf bases like Lossiemouth which houses 4 squadrons of typhoons and is one the largest raf bases in the uk.
-
If a motion of UDI was put before and passed by the Scottish Parliament, wouldn't that be just as democratic as a referendum continually denied by Boris?
-
Oh the once in a generation referendum that they had a couple or so years ago
I don't like the result lets have another go
-
Did you get your mum to help you with the answer, it took you long enough?
You really are an obnoxious person SR.
I have other things to do, probably unlike yourself.
You have suggested that I don’t know where Hadrian’s Wall is just start an argument when clearly my post didn’t suggest anything like that.
Also, for your information, my mother is dead so please don’t be a prat by bringing her into your imaginary world.
Half a World away.
No offence at all meant hound, but credit where it's due hound, how you manage to keep your little feuds going across the forum/s is amazing
-
I'm not sure why people get hung up on this "once in a generation" thing. That's just hype to get people out to vote. The SNP are entitled to hold a referendum every 6 months if they keep getting a mandate for it. The political landscape has changed substantially since the last one.
I think Scotland is better off as part of the UK for the record, but there clearly is growing support for at least a referendum up there, if not independence.
-
A bit ironic if anyone tries to say a small margin isn't a mandate? Boot on the other foot, if England were ruled by Scotland would we be voting on it?
-
Did you get your mum to help you with the answer, it took you long enough?
You really are an obnoxious person SR.
I have other things to do, probably unlike yourself.
You have suggested that I don’t know where Hadrian’s Wall is just start an argument when clearly my post didn’t suggest anything like that.
Also, for your information, my mother is dead so please don’t be a prat by bringing her into your imaginary world.
Half a World away.
No offence at all meant hound, but credit where it's due hound, how you manage to keep your little feuds going across the forum/s is amazing
SR, I only go on this forum so I’m not sure why you put the plural on your post.
Some of your posts are so bizarre and confrontational.
You tell me you aren’t interested in what I have to say and then you ask me a question.
Very odd that.
Anyway, have a nice life and I hope you can find someone else to fall out with.
The right person is out there for you.
-
:)
-
It’s very unlikely to repeat because, generally, people accept these democratic decisions.
I honestly don’t know the answer to this question: when was the last referendum for Scotland to leave? And the one before that?
You say it is very unlikely to repeat, but what if they lose again? What happens when the next 10 years of people die and children become adults? And the next? And the next?
In answer to your question, there should be a very significant period of acceptance before it is even considered again. Impossible to put a year on it, but I think if it is to happen again, none of us should know anything about it.
Some interesting points there Belton.
If it is right to allow referendum after referendum because of the rights of young people who didn’t vote because they were too young to do so at the last vote then I guess we should be thinking about another Brexit referendum in five or six years time.
-
It’s very unlikely to repeat because, generally, people accept these democratic decisions.
I honestly don’t know the answer to this question: when was the last referendum for Scotland to leave? And the one before that?
You say it is very unlikely to repeat, but what if they lose again? What happens when the next 10 years of people die and children become adults? And the next? And the next?
In answer to your question, there should be a very significant period of acceptance before it is even considered again. Impossible to put a year on it, but I think if it is to happen again, none of us should know anything about it.
Some interesting points there Belton.
If it is right to allow referendum after referendum because of the rights of young people who didn’t vote because they were too young to do so at the last vote then I guess we should be thinking about another Brexit referendum in five or six years time.
It can't happen regularly with either.
In both cases it sets a structure for the economy. Each time the structure is reset there is huge disruption. Brexit is a huge disruption, a Scottish Independance would be another huge disruption. The economy needs stability.
I think now we are in a state of flux. The assumption that the future for the UK would integrate with the rest of the EU economic area is being broken. The Scots I think want to return to it. I don't think their ambition is really to have an Independant Scottish nation with its own currency and economy.
The real argument is, should Scotland have its say on whether it wants to be a part of the UK Economic area or the EU economic area?
When Scotland last voted on the question of Independance it was part of the EU. Now it's been forced out of it by Brexit.
Even in the first Indyref is was probably more to do with the EU. An independent Scotland would probably have wanted to adopted the Euro currency and move to life under the European Central Bank rather than the Bank of England.
It's all about who controls the money in the end.
-
This is why it's vital for the tories to prevent another indyref.
If Scotland goes off and joins the EU, then I think it scuppers Brexit. A hard border here on the mainland would be intolerable.
-
RD, I know and understand that it isn’t economically viable to vote for Brexit or national independence every ten years and to possibly go in and out depending on the outcome of the vote.
I mentioned it in my earlier post because some posters were asking the question, is it fair to impose the outcome of a referendum on young people ten years or so down the line.
As a remain voter I was disappointed that our Brexit vote went the way it did but there is no point in crying about it now.
It is what it is and we have to crack on and make the best of what our situation is.
-
In a sense it's not fair to impose something on future generations but life is often not fair.
It's just one of those things that has to be decided one way or another.
-
I think that Brexit has thrown a hand grenade into the independence issue. Brexit means that free and easy movements and relationship with England, Northern Ireland and Wales would be greatly impacted - especially if the EU get involved in deciding the border relationships .... and the Barnier bandwagon moves in to decide the protocols required.
Scotland would end up being faced with the same kinds of choice that faced the UK in Brexit. Would an independent Scotland have a hard or soft border with England? - in essence a second land border between the UK and the EU.... and we all know how smoothly the other border issue has gone. What would the EU demand from the Scots regarding their border? Will cars and trains need to stop en route for passport checks? - will lorry drivers have their ham sandwiches confiscated? And who decides all this – Barnier and Brussels or Sturgeon and Scotland? It could be very messy and the flow of goods north and south would be inevitably be slowed and probably add costs...... are the Scottish public OK with this?
This is without starting on the Euro or £ issue - and that may prove even harder to navigate through.
-
I think that Brexit has thrown a hand grenade into the independence issue. Brexit means that free and easy movements and relationship with England, Northern Ireland and Wales would be greatly impacted - especially if the EU get involved in deciding the border relationships .... and the Barnier bandwagon moves in to decide the protocols required.
Scotland would end up being faced with the same kinds of choice that faced the UK in Brexit. Would an independent Scotland have a hard or soft border with England? - in essence a second land border between the UK and the EU.... and we all know how smoothly the other border issue has gone. What would the EU demand from the Scots regarding their border? Will cars and trains need to stop en route for passport checks? - will lorry drivers have their ham sandwiches confiscated? And who decides all this – Barnier and Brussels or Sturgeon and Scotland? It could be very messy and the flow of goods north and south would be inevitably be slowed and probably add costs...... are the Scottish public OK with this?
This is without starting on the Euro or £ issue - and that may prove even harder to navigate through.
Freedom of movement is already covered by the Common Travel Area which provides the absolute right for people anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to travel, live and work anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. This agreement predates, and is not in any way impacted by, Brexit it also provides the added benefits for all people to enjoy associated rights and privileges, including voting in certain elections, as well as to access social welfare benefits and health services of those areas the choose to visit or live. It has nothing to do with the EU in any way, shape or form!
The CTA was reaffirmed in 2019 by the governments of the UK and the ROI.
Not something you'll read in the right wing media. I wonder why?
-
I think that Brexit has thrown a hand grenade into the independence issue. Brexit means that free and easy movements and relationship with England, Northern Ireland and Wales would be greatly impacted - especially if the EU get involved in deciding the border relationships .... and the Barnier bandwagon moves in to decide the protocols required.
Scotland would end up being faced with the same kinds of choice that faced the UK in Brexit. Would an independent Scotland have a hard or soft border with England? - in essence a second land border between the UK and the EU.... and we all know how smoothly the other border issue has gone. What would the EU demand from the Scots regarding their border? Will cars and trains need to stop en route for passport checks? - will lorry drivers have their ham sandwiches confiscated? And who decides all this – Barnier and Brussels or Sturgeon and Scotland? It could be very messy and the flow of goods north and south would be inevitably be slowed and probably add costs...... are the Scottish public OK with this?
This is without starting on the Euro or £ issue - and that may prove even harder to navigate through.
Freedom of movement is already covered by the Common Travel Area which provides the absolute right for people anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to travel, live and work anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. This agreement predates, and is not in any way impacted by, Brexit it also provides the added benefits for all people to enjoy associated rights and privileges, including voting in certain elections, as well as to access social welfare benefits and health services of those areas the choose to visit or live. It has nothing to do with the EU in any way, shape or form!
The CTA was reaffirmed in 2019 by the governments of the UK and the ROI.
Not something you'll read in the right wing media. I wonder why?
Didn't realise that NNK - I assume that doesn't cover lorries/vans/trade vehicles though...?
-
I think that Brexit has thrown a hand grenade into the independence issue. Brexit means that free and easy movements and relationship with England, Northern Ireland and Wales would be greatly impacted - especially if the EU get involved in deciding the border relationships .... and the Barnier bandwagon moves in to decide the protocols required.
Scotland would end up being faced with the same kinds of choice that faced the UK in Brexit. Would an independent Scotland have a hard or soft border with England? - in essence a second land border between the UK and the EU.... and we all know how smoothly the other border issue has gone. What would the EU demand from the Scots regarding their border? Will cars and trains need to stop en route for passport checks? - will lorry drivers have their ham sandwiches confiscated? And who decides all this – Barnier and Brussels or Sturgeon and Scotland? It could be very messy and the flow of goods north and south would be inevitably be slowed and probably add costs...... are the Scottish public OK with this?
This is without starting on the Euro or £ issue - and that may prove even harder to navigate through.
Freedom of movement is already covered by the Common Travel Area which provides the absolute right for people anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to travel, live and work anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. This agreement predates, and is not in any way impacted by, Brexit it also provides the added benefits for all people to enjoy associated rights and privileges, including voting in certain elections, as well as to access social welfare benefits and health services of those areas the choose to visit or live. It has nothing to do with the EU in any way, shape or form!
The CTA was reaffirmed in 2019 by the governments of the UK and the ROI.
Not something you'll read in the right wing media. I wonder why?
Once the two areas are working to different standards there would have to be border checks though. For instance, if England allowed hormone injected cattle, the EU would need to check for that at the border with Scotland wouldn't they?
-
Funny innit politicians want to stop votes on what they don't want but want flexibility to call an election whenever they feel they have an advantage.
-
I think that Brexit has thrown a hand grenade into the independence issue. Brexit means that free and easy movements and relationship with England, Northern Ireland and Wales would be greatly impacted - especially if the EU get involved in deciding the border relationships .... and the Barnier bandwagon moves in to decide the protocols required.
Scotland would end up being faced with the same kinds of choice that faced the UK in Brexit. Would an independent Scotland have a hard or soft border with England? - in essence a second land border between the UK and the EU.... and we all know how smoothly the other border issue has gone. What would the EU demand from the Scots regarding their border? Will cars and trains need to stop en route for passport checks? - will lorry drivers have their ham sandwiches confiscated? And who decides all this – Barnier and Brussels or Sturgeon and Scotland? It could be very messy and the flow of goods north and south would be inevitably be slowed and probably add costs...... are the Scottish public OK with this?
This is without starting on the Euro or £ issue - and that may prove even harder to navigate through.
Freedom of movement is already covered by the Common Travel Area which provides the absolute right for people anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to travel, live and work anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. This agreement predates, and is not in any way impacted by, Brexit it also provides the added benefits for all people to enjoy associated rights and privileges, including voting in certain elections, as well as to access social welfare benefits and health services of those areas the choose to visit or live. It has nothing to do with the EU in any way, shape or form!
The CTA was reaffirmed in 2019 by the governments of the UK and the ROI.
Not something you'll read in the right wing media. I wonder why?
Didn't realise that NNK - I assume that doesn't cover lorries/vans/trade vehicles though...?
It does only covers people MM. If Scotland gained independence AND joined the EU then Goods would be subject to the same cross border checks as they are between any third country, (which the UK is), and the EU. However, if Scotland gained independence but did not become a member of the EU then border control for the movement of goods would be something that the UK and Scottish would have to negotiate and agree on.
Here's a link to the CTA.... https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/common-travel-area-guidance
-
Should Scots born residents in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland be given a vote?
-
I think that Brexit has thrown a hand grenade into the independence issue. Brexit means that free and easy movements and relationship with England, Northern Ireland and Wales would be greatly impacted - especially if the EU get involved in deciding the border relationships .... and the Barnier bandwagon moves in to decide the protocols required.
Scotland would end up being faced with the same kinds of choice that faced the UK in Brexit. Would an independent Scotland have a hard or soft border with England? - in essence a second land border between the UK and the EU.... and we all know how smoothly the other border issue has gone. What would the EU demand from the Scots regarding their border? Will cars and trains need to stop en route for passport checks? - will lorry drivers have their ham sandwiches confiscated? And who decides all this – Barnier and Brussels or Sturgeon and Scotland? It could be very messy and the flow of goods north and south would be inevitably be slowed and probably add costs...... are the Scottish public OK with this?
This is without starting on the Euro or £ issue - and that may prove even harder to navigate through.
Freedom of movement is already covered by the Common Travel Area which provides the absolute right for people anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to travel, live and work anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. This agreement predates, and is not in any way impacted by, Brexit it also provides the added benefits for all people to enjoy associated rights and privileges, including voting in certain elections, as well as to access social welfare benefits and health services of those areas the choose to visit or live. It has nothing to do with the EU in any way, shape or form!
The CTA was reaffirmed in 2019 by the governments of the UK and the ROI.
Not something you'll read in the right wing media. I wonder why?
Once the two areas are working to different standards there would have to be border checks though. For instance, if England allowed hormone injected cattle, the EU would need to check for that at the border with Scotland wouldn't they?
Quite right RD. The point I was making though was that the free movement of people would not be impacted. Goods would be subject to border checks and controls, the extent of which would be determined based on whether Scotland joins the EU or not - they could have independence without joining the EU.
The CTA is very important as it confers significant benefits to all parties. Pity it's so little publicised.
-
I think a lot of Scots would vote for independence if EU membership was guaranteed, but that's only my opinion. So the process and time lines would need to be drawn up and of course a probability scale of being accepted.
-
Too much "what if" for some folks here.
The issue is simple....do the Scots have the right to a vote if the majority want it?
To me, that is a clear yes.
What happens after that is up to them.....it is not our business.
After all, you would not want your next door neighbour to have control over your finances, would you?
-
I think that Brexit has thrown a hand grenade into the independence issue. Brexit means that free and easy movements and relationship with England, Northern Ireland and Wales would be greatly impacted - especially if the EU get involved in deciding the border relationships .... and the Barnier bandwagon moves in to decide the protocols required.
Scotland would end up being faced with the same kinds of choice that faced the UK in Brexit. Would an independent Scotland have a hard or soft border with England? - in essence a second land border between the UK and the EU.... and we all know how smoothly the other border issue has gone. What would the EU demand from the Scots regarding their border? Will cars and trains need to stop en route for passport checks? - will lorry drivers have their ham sandwiches confiscated? And who decides all this – Barnier and Brussels or Sturgeon and Scotland? It could be very messy and the flow of goods north and south would be inevitably be slowed and probably add costs...... are the Scottish public OK with this?
This is without starting on the Euro or £ issue - and that may prove even harder to navigate through.
Freedom of movement is already covered by the Common Travel Area which provides the absolute right for people anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to travel, live and work anywhere in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. This agreement predates, and is not in any way impacted by, Brexit it also provides the added benefits for all people to enjoy associated rights and privileges, including voting in certain elections, as well as to access social welfare benefits and health services of those areas the choose to visit or live. It has nothing to do with the EU in any way, shape or form!
The CTA was reaffirmed in 2019 by the governments of the UK and the ROI.
Not something you'll read in the right wing media. I wonder why?
Didn't realise that NNK - I assume that doesn't cover lorries/vans/trade vehicles though...?
It does only covers people MM. If Scotland gained independence AND joined the EU then Goods would be subject to the same cross border checks as they are between any third country, (which the UK is), and the EU. However, if Scotland gained independence but did not become a member of the EU then border control for the movement of goods would be something that the UK and Scottish would have to negotiate and agree on.
Here's a link to the CTA.... https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/common-travel-area-guidance
I think a lot of Scots would vote for independence if EU membership was guaranteed, but that's only my opinion. So the process and time lines would need to be drawn up and of course a probability scale of being accepted.
Thanks NNK. My thoughts regarding Brexit impacting on independence still remain though. I think Sydney makes a valid point above also.
-
The irony of the Indyref case is that the SNP will trot out PRECISELY the lies that the Leave side pedalled in 2016. They will say that you can have a trade border between Scotland and the rest of the UK without affecting the Scottish economy. They will appeal to nationalist gut feeling and encourage people to reject expert analysis. And they will say that anyone who suggests Scotland cannot thrive outside its current trading relationship with its much bigger neighbour is belittling the ability and spirit of the Scots.
A bunch of shysters they are. Prepared to lie to their people about the costs of independence to sate their quasi-religious determination for a faux freedom.
-
The irony of the Indyref case is that the SNP will trot out PRECISELY the lies that the Leave side pedalled in 2016. They will say that you can have a trade border between Scotland and the rest of the UK without affecting the Scottish economy. They will appeal to nationalist gut feeling and encourage people to reject expert analysis. And they will say that anyone who suggests Scotland cannot thrive outside its current trading relationship with its much bigger neighbour is belittling the ability and spirit of the Scots.
A bunch of shysters they are. Prepared to lie to their people about the costs of independence to sate their quasi-religious determination for a faux freedom.
Well said!
-
pros and cons ........ independence
https://www.schule-bw.de/faecher-und-schularten/sprachen-und-literatur/englisch/unterrichtsmaterialien-nach-kompetenzen/sprechen/kommunikationspruefung/themen/scottishindependence-1.pdf
-
pros and cons ........ independence
https://www.schule-bw.de/faecher-und-schularten/sprachen-und-literatur/englisch/unterrichtsmaterialien-nach-kompetenzen/sprechen/kommunikationspruefung/themen/scottishindependence-1.pdf
That appears to be a recycled pre-Brexit summary Sydney - it even refers to the possibility of a hard Brexit in one part...
IMO the goal posts have moved since Brexit and have muddied the waters even more.
-
The author got the hard brexit bit right MM, I didn't look at the date on it tbh
-
25yrs for me. No one says a time scale but to me a decision as complex and divisive as this need to rest no matter how close the results.
Quarter of a century. It's that disruptive.
-
If Scotland did eventually leave the union, what would their currency be?
-
Shortbread.
-
Shortbread.
I’ll move there then...
-
If Scotland did eventually leave the union, what would their currency be?
That's the $64,000 question.
They have two choices. Both come with massive problems and the SNP have assiduously and consistently lied to the Scottish people in playing down those problems. The core of the problem is that Scotland runs a massive structural budget deficit. "Structural" means that they don't just borrow money to underpin the economy when times are tough, as all Governments should do. It means they are borrowing hugely even when the economy is running well. In simple terms, they live massively beyond their means.
They get away with that as part of the UK because they are a small part of a large overall economy. The UK as awhole can borrow to cover that debt on terms that Scotland on its own could not. Once they leave the UK, they run into two potential brick walls.
1) Have their own currency. This means they have to finance their own deficit and debt. Which means issuing bonds in the new Scottish "Thistle" currency. But running a structural budget deficit of 5-6% means that their currency would lose value rapidly against other currencies. And the consequence of your currency devaluing is that your export costs rocket up, hugely lifting inflation.
2) Be part of a bigger collective currency, the Pound or Euro. If independent Scotland was part of a bigger currency, they wouldn't have the option of devaluing the currency. That decision would be made in Frankfurt or London and Scotland would have a tiny input on that. And then here comes the rub. We saw in the Euro crisis in 2011 that any country that needed to borrow to finance debt but didn't have control of its own currency, saw the interest rate on their borrowing rocket up. Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland all saw cripplingly high interest rates which devastated their economies. The answer to that in all thei cases was appalling levels of Austerity to squash down Govt spending and get their debt under control.
So whichever way you look at it, Independent Scotland cannot continue to run the levels of public spending and debt that it currently does. That results in either crippling inflation or crippling interest rates. It is an utter disgrace that the SNP never, ever engage in that discussion. They would lead the Scottish people into an economic disaster, to satisfy their Braveheart myth.
-
Shortbread.
I’ll move there then...
Gold Mcnuggets
-
Shortbread.
If it were square sausage, white puddings and haggis.... I'd be investing...!!
-
In many ways the American solution should be the answer for Scotland. A federal approach where they control lots of things but remain part of some union where economic and defence policies are taken at that federal level. That is independence in all but name.
The problem is the EU. If they really want to be part of the EU rather than GB then they have to make that choice. Much of that is nothing to do with what Europe gives but an anti English approach.
-
Let them go alone, in twelve months they'll be wanting to lynch Wee Jimmy.
-
BB, my nephew is a bricklayer and he is hoping that the Scots do go it alone.
That wall up there needs plenty of patching up and he is hoping to put a price in for the job.
He should have a good chance of getting it because he votes Tory.
-
I've said all along that the SNP were massively lucky to lose the 2014 vote. They based their economic plans on the basis that oil would never again drop below $120/barrel. Within 6 months of the referendum, oil was down to $40/barrel. If they had gone for independence, Scotland would have been bankrupt before they started and there would have been riots on the streets.
Instead they lost and the SNP just became more popular. It truly is a bizarre turn of events.
-
BB, my nephew is a bricklayer and he is hoping that the Scots do go it alone.
That wall up there needs plenty of patching up and he is hoping to put a price in fo4 the job.
He should have a good chance of getting it because he votes Tory.
Don't exile me the wrong side of the border mate, that there wall is a couple of miles south of me
-
BB, my nephew is a bricklayer and he is hoping that the Scots do go it alone.
That wall up there needs plenty of patching up and he is hoping to put a price in fo4 the job.
He should have a good chance of getting it because he votes Tory.
Wouldn't Starmer claim that to be borderline criminal?
-
BB, my nephew is a bricklayer and he is hoping that the Scots do go it alone.
That wall up there needs plenty of patching up and he is hoping to put a price in fo4 the job.
He should have a good chance of getting it because he votes Tory.
Don't exile me the wrong side of the border mate, that there wall is a couple of miles south of me
I know, I have been up there plenty of times.
-
Yep I've heard you're a bit of a traveller
-
I've said all along that the SNP were massively lucky to lose the 2014 vote. They based their economic plans on the basis that oil would never again drop below $120/barrel. Within 6 months of the referendum, oil was down to $40/barrel. If they had gone for independence, Scotland would have been bankrupt before they started and there would have been riots on the streets.
Instead they lost and the SNP just became more popular. It truly is a bizarre turn of events.
It's much like brexit though isn't it. A positive message will always beat a negative one. The snp are clever in deflecting all blame and creating a positive image that nothing is their fault even if is.
How can that be prevented? It's very tough. Give Scotland more funds the snp take the credit. Reduce any funds they blame Westminster. Every year they rubbish the economic gers calculations that are produced by their own government.
This line sums up what you say very well...
"The difference in the change in the overall net fiscal balance between Scotland and the UK is explained by falling North Sea revenue in 2019-20. Excluding North Sea revenue, the net fiscal balance for Scotland increased by 0.6 percentage points, the same as the UK. The net fiscal balance excluding North Sea revenue tends to move in line with the figure for the UK, but is typically around 7 percentage points weaker."
Quite clear in there that Scotland can't pay its way yet they still deny it.
-
i would not make any economic predictions based upon how the dependent economy functioned, even in the recent past.
The same sort of arguments were used when small countries departed the former Soviet bloc, and they proved pessimistic.
The currency question falls into the same category error.
Central banks across the world will move to cryptocurrency within the next few years. Plans are already in place to institute and accelerate this. In a world where financial transactions are increasingly borderless, the need for protections required by the old system recede.
No-one is going to base national financial planning on the same metrics that applied in 2014. If the SNP did so, they would be very foolish.
It will be interesting to see how they pitch this, because in 2014 they were saying that they would stay with sterling....that is not independence, and it will be irrelevant anyway by 2025.
-
It will be interesting to see how they pitch this, because in 2014 they were saying that they would stay with sterling....that is not independence, and it will be irrelevant anyway by 2025.
Quite right albie and I doubt we will find out this detail anytime soon...
As others have said, will the EU want them and their budget deficit, will Spain vote against them entering etc etc..... it's unlikely that we will get any meat on the bone for some time.
-
Albie
Are you saying the whole concept of how central banks operate is about to be turned over? I think I missed that memo.
Your post is a perfect example of how folk try to obscure the simple macroeconomic argument against Scottish independence. Fairy stories about how "everything is going to be different" as though the basic mechanisms of economics no longer apply.
Nationalistic political ambitions put before black and white economics. Precisely what the Leave campaign did.
-
If Scotland did eventually leave the union, what would their currency be?
Haggis?
If they got independence, re joining the Eu would be the SNP’ s next target. So it would be the Euro surely?
-
If Scotland did eventually leave the union, what would their currency be?
Haggis?
If they got independence, re joining the Eu would be the SNP’ s next target. So it would be the Euro surely?
Maybe, but what would it be before they join the EU? Also, I’d imagine that give the levels public spending and debt in Scotland they wouldn’t be a particularly attractive proposition to the EU? Although I’m just guessing here- I don’t really have a clue.
-
Albie
Are you saying the whole concept of how central banks operate is about to be turned over? I think I missed that memo.
Your post is a perfect example of how folk try to obscure the simple macroeconomic argument against Scottish independence. Fairy stories about how "everything is going to be different" as though the basic mechanisms of economics no longer apply.
Nationalistic political ambitions put before black and white economics. Precisely what the Leave campaign did.
BST,
Yes, I am saying that....and so is every Central Bank in the developed world;
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/news/2021/april/bank-of-england-statement-on-central-bank-digital-currency
The IMF, the Federal Reserve, China...all going down this route.
If you want to stay in the retro field of macro economics from Keynesian principles, fair enough...but it is not the way the international economy will function.
This is important, but seldom discussed in the MSM.
Fundamental implications for the evolution of political dialogue in the slipstream.
Here is a primer with video links if you are behind the curve;
https://dci.mit.edu/cbdc-central-bank-digital-currency
-
Albie
Go on then. In what way does a move to digital currency change the fundamentals of what a Central Bank does? How does it change the basics of fiscal policy? How does the creation of a digital currency allow a country running a massive structural deficit to borrow at anything less than punitive rates if they are using a shared currency, or to avoid devaluation if they are using their own?
-
BST,
Central Banks are acting to avoid being supplanted by the digital currencies currently being worked up by Facebook and Amazon among others.
Private sector DC can undermine the fractional banking sector with clear implications for economic development options. They may also reduce the tax capabilities of Central Banks that cannot compete with their offer.
National fiat currencies are under threat of imminent reform, and how that plays out will set the frame for future economic strategies. Lagarde has been on at this for 5 years at least.
All this is well understand in the financial community. Lots of work in the academic field if you want to look.
The relevance to Scotland is that the currency options are no longer restricted to those you set out above.
I would expect any policy position from the SNP regarding a future ref to hold this in mind.
Your other questions are not to the point, until we have a clear emergent position.
A taster;
https://youtu.be/fpb-qJv6dBs
FF to 8 mins if you want to miss the long winded intro.
-
Blockchain international money transfer is relatively new and cheaper than banks, and easy to use.
-
I see Starmer's hopes of unity haven't kicked in yet!
-
''Angela Rayner, who was locked in a dispute with Sir Keir over her role in the party at the weekend, told the BBC the two had "robust conversations".
However, she also said she believed in him "100% because I wouldn't still be working with him if I didn't."
She said the party now had to "connect with voters we've lost".''
-
Albie.
The fact that Scotland has a massive structural fiscal deficit means that its Govt consumes far more than it earns. In simple terms, Scotland cannot afford to pay for its schools, hospitals and bin collections without massive borrowing.
That fact doesn't change, whether they use Pounds, Euros, digital currency or south Pacific conch shells as a means of exchange. Independent Scotland is faced with either massive spending cuts or the realisation that their currency is worth a damn sight less in the eyes of the world than the Pound is now.
No cryptocurrency magics that away. Anyone claiming it does is misleading the Scottish public for political ends. And we've had far too much of that sort of smoke and mirrors this past 5 years.
-
Albie.
The fact that Scotland has a massive structural fiscal deficit means that its Govt consumes far more than it earns. In simple terms, Scotland cannot afford to pay for its schools, hospitals and bin collections without massive borrowing.
That fact doesn't change, whether they use Pounds, Euros, digital currency or south Pacific conch shells as a means of exchange. Independent Scotland is faced with either massive spending cuts or the realisation that their currency is worth a damn sight less in the eyes of the world than the Pound is now.
But they may be able to tap in to a flourishing Euro though......... a problem shared and all that.
-
MM.
I get that was a joke but this is serious. They would absolutely have to slash public spending if they took on the Euro, because they (like Greece) would not be able to borrow at anything less than frighteningly high interest rates.
-
MM.
I get that was a joke but this is serious. They would absolutely have to slash public spending if they took on the Euro, because they (like Greece) would not be able to borrow at anything less than frighteningly high interest rates.
I'm on the same page BST - I have loads of Scottish relatives and the majority are blinded by the SNP hype and 'Willy Wallace' type clamour for independence...... forgetting that they would begin with a budget deficit that was substantially higher than the rest of the UK...... and growing. I'm guessing that as Sturgeon states that the main reasons 'another' referendum were that Scotland should not be forced to leave the EU "against its will", she will be trying to rejoin once independence is gained....
-
BST,
Governments can issue currency, we are no longer held to a gold standard.
The matter of any structural deficit is entirely a matter for any independent Scotland.
You keep arguing that you think it is not viable, but that is not the point of the discussion about the right to a referendum.
It is very simple.....do you believe a majority in favour means they should be respected?
You are either a democrat, or you think an outside body like the HoC should know best......which is it?
-
Albie the Scottish government could yes issue currency. It would be worthless outside Scotland but they could. The problem is what accepted currency they hold (which is nil). Say they wanted to trade in Euros with their own currency they'd have to pay for the euros somehow and if their currency is useless it goes nowhere does it?
But you are in some ways right it is for Scotland to determine and currently they don't have a viable option and that has consequences for us all.
-
BST,
Governments can issue currency, we are no longer held to a gold standard.
The matter of any structural deficit is entirely a matter for any independent Scotland.
You keep arguing that you think it is not viable, but that is not the point of the discussion about the right to a referendum.
It is very simple.....do you believe a majority in favour means they should be respected?
You are either a democrat, or you think an outside body like the HoC should know best......which is it?
Albie.
Yes of course central banks can issue currency. And if they do so to address a structural deficit, they devalue the currency and produce inflation. That's Economics 101.
And yes, of course a structural deficit and the consequences thereof are a matter for an Independent Scotland to DEAL with. But they can't change basic economics on what the consequences should be. And the consequences are that Scotland would simply not be able to continue to run that deficit without incurring crippling borrowing costs or crippling inflation. No ifs or buts.
And of course I want the will of the majority to be respected, but that comes with a massive caveat. If the majority are deliberately misled over what they are actually voting for, that isn't democracy. That was what happened in 2014. The SNP deliberately avoided any discussion of the fiscal consequences of independence. That was utterly disgraceful. They willfully and deliberately misled their supporters on a matter of such huge importance. They said that people who pointed out that issue were playing Project Fear and denigrating the potential of an Independent Scotland. Sound familiar? It should, because the SNP and the Leave campaign are birds of a feather. They deliberately mislead people to achieve a political objective. You seem to be happy to support that.
-
OK, I reckon we will need to agree to disagree on some aspects of this.
My last word.
I am not supporting "project fear" as you put it, at all.
Just mindful of the pitfalls of being seen to stand in the way of a democratic majority.
The Brexit comparison is relevant, because Labour trying to pitch for Ref2 was the single biggest contribution to the 2019 election defeat beyond question. Had Labour agreed to support an orderly departure on the basis of supporting a Norway Plus type of solution, they would have been in a better place.
I don't think your "crippling borrowing costs" applies to a situation when rates are so low, but I agree about the possible inflation rise.
In a recession, with periods of deflation, it is possible to increase the money supply without causing inflation.
This is because the money supply depends not just on the amounts in circulation, but also the velocity of circulation.
During the liquidity crisis from 2008, the Bank of England pursued quantitative easing (increasing money supply) but this only had a small impact on underlying inflation. This money was channelled via the commercial banks, without conditions attached (a serious mistake).
The point here is that Central Bank digital currency (CBDC) removes that sector from the equation. A CBDC can implement a targeted policy response by direct transfer to specific sectors. By contrast, a DC provided by Amazon or Facebook is not concerned with wider economic questions, which is precisely why Central Banks are in a hurry to develop their own.
The Fintech sector sees this as a key battleground, with investment to match.
If Scotland intend to rejoin the EU, keeping the sterling currency is a nonsense. Presumably, they would look to the Euro and the DC provided by the Eurozone.
All of which is not to approve or disapprove of the principle, but simply to say that there is not enough detail to comment.
-
Albie.
1) Global borrowing rates were low in 2011. But they exploded for Greece and Italy, for precisely the reasons they would explode for Scotland if it was in a shared currency.
2) When we had huge QE in 2008-10, the pound lost a third of its value. The reason that didn't lead to a big rise in inflation was that we had the deflationary effect of the global recession, followed by Austerity. So that comparison simply doesn't apply to a soon to be Independent Scotland. As you say, you CAN increase the money supply in a recession without kicking off inflation. What you CANNOT do is to increase the money supply to fund a structural deficit - not without debasing your currency.
3) "The Brexit comparison is relevant, because Labour trying to pitch for Ref2 was the single biggest contribution to the 2019 election defeat beyond question."
That is simply nonsense. But it is going to be the Left's Betrayal Myth for the next 50 years.