Or reopen the debate about just how much we prepared to sacrificr for an independent nuclear deterrent?

It doesn’t matter what government ministers say the people in the rest of the UK do not want to be responsible for bailing out foreign countries. We don’t care if businesses suffers a bit if we don’t go into a currency union we are not prepared to lose some of our own independence to help a potentially foreign country gain more independence. A currency union would have to be put to a referendum and the polls indicate that it just would not happen. You can whine on about not taking your share of the national debt or kicking Trident out on day one because the majority of shared assets are in the control of the UK and would remain that way after independence. From day one you would have no military assets, no lender of last resort and no access to UK embassies around the world. If Scotland does not take any debt we withhold an equivalent amount of assets. The UK can also block Scotland joining the EU and there are no legal documents stating that Scottish citizens have any EU status they all state that UK citizens do though. We are not going to be dictated to by a small foreign country.

It doesn’t matter what government ministers say the people in the rest of the UK do not want to be responsible for bailing out foreign countries. We don’t care if businesses suffers a bit if we don’t go into a currency union we are not prepared to lose some of our own independence to help a potentially foreign country gain more independence. A currency union would have to be put to a referendum and the polls indicate that it just would not happen. You can whine on about not taking your share of the national debt or kicking Trident out on day one because the majority of shared assets are in the control of the UK and would remain that way after independence. From day one you would have no military assets, no lender of last resort and no access to UK embassies around the world. If Scotland does not take any debt we withhold an equivalent amount of assets. The UK can also block Scotland joining the EU and there are no legal documents stating that Scottish citizens have any EU status they all state that UK citizens do though. We are not going to be dictated to by a small foreign country.

Oh dear. You sound a bit mad.

It doesn’t matter what government ministers say the people in the rest of the UK do not want to be responsible for bailing out foreign countries

Aye the govt always listens to the people – IRAQ war for example
FWIW they have helped out Ireland recently as well because it was so important to the UK. If Scotland’s economy completely collapsed it would clearly have an impact on rUK and it is not in its best interests for this to happen either – it will clearly be worse for iS but rUK would not be unaffected by this.

You can whine on about not taking your share of the national debt or kicking Trident out on day one because the majority of shared assets are in the control of the UK and would remain that way after independence. From day one you would have no military assets,

You are contradicting yourself here
Firstly legally scotland can refuse the debts it belongs to the Uk so you cannot stop her doing this by any legal means – it is very unlikely to do this IMHO
Everyone knwos that rUK is the majority but if the assets get split then clearly they would have military assets, Have you noticed some of the bases are actually physically there – you invading and taking them back brick by brick or something?

The UK can also block Scotland joining the EU and there are no legal documents stating that Scottish citizens have any EU status they all state that UK citizens do though.

I think we all know that it is the UK that is the EU and not Scotland.

We are not going to be dictated to by a small foreign country.

I think they know a number of you intend to bully her like you have done for the entire union 😛

Both sides have nuclear options over debt or vetoing EU mebership or nukes or currencies etc. It is most unlikely that either side will negotiate as you suggest as it harms both sides

Johhners cybernats continue to argue the case for a currency union while ignoring statements from the three main political parties saying there will be no currency union and polls from the rest of the UK indicating no support for a currency union. Ignoring facts and accusing the people stating the facts of bluffing or being bullies is bit mad as well. Is it not time for plan b?

Politicians lie.

Frequently.

^^^^^^^This and i really should learn brevity

Are you saying that all three of these parties have never broken their word? 😀
Saying that what a politician says before an election is a fact is mad- i would not use your word i would say it is very very unwise as they almost never keep to their pledges or manifesto as a quick check of any political parties claims and outcomes when elected will show.
Its funny only on this issue do people hold up those parties and these people as honourable folk whose word we can trust.

In this instance Junkyard.

It’s fairer and more balanced that all four parties are more than capable of telling porkies.

Junkyard telling the rest of the UK that they have to be the lender of last resort to Scotland in a currency union or Scotland would not take on any debt is not negotiating it is blackmail.
I also hope that in the event of independence we could amicably agree a fair division of assets. We did help out Ireland but we were not obliged to bail out their banks entirely and that is what Salmond is trying to force us to do.

Pie – i actually included AS in my post but removed it for brevity- double fail 😳 🙄
Of course he lies to he is a politician.
faster you can use whatever language you wish to describe it- you seemed fine threatening iS yourself up there for example over military assets- but it is the best negotiating strategy for iS.
I doubt either side will use nuclear options – veto EU or take no debt but I bet they both threaten it at some point

AS started the threats by saying no currency union means no debt. I personally think that it would have been better to start negotiations by offering an incentive for a currency union, like offering the use of Faslane for 20 years, more than enough time to set up an alternative site.

Well legally the debts are not the responsibility of Scotland so one could easily say he was simply pointing out the legal position in response to the UK saying there would be no currency union whilst also saying they wont negotiate – is that credible or consistent?

That is just conformation bias tbh and I see little point in some sort of playground who started it debate.

Both sides do the same thing you are only telling us which side you support

No he is saying that if we enter into a currency union then Scotland would not take on a share of the national debt, if he does not get what he wants he threatens to not take any of the debt. I view that as AS trying to force the UK into a currency union that we don’t want, that is blackmail.
The debt was run up by the UK government for all of the people currently in the UK, if part of the UK leaves it is not unreasonable for them to take some of the debt. Even if they don’t accept any debt a similar amount in assets can be withheld. I do hope things don’t come to this though and a currency plan b is announced.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/osborne-dismisses-currency-union.1396096757

I suspect the damage is done now.

fasternotfatter – Member

I view that as AS trying to force the UK into a currency union that we don’t want, that is blackmail.

That is negotiation.

I view that as AS trying to force the UK into a currency union that we don’t want, that is blackmail.

as he said it is trying to get the result you want in a negotiation.

The debt was run up by the UK government for all of the people currently in the UK, if part of the UK leaves it is not unreasonable for them to take some of the debt

Unfortunately the law disagrees with you. I dont think what you is say is an unfair proposal but they counter by saying they need to then get a share of the assets and this includes the currency [see what i did there]. The law is not on iS side there but rUK will have to make a choice and other factors [ bullying as you call it] will impact on this decision.

. Even if they don’t accept any debt a similar amount in assets can be withheld.

That is not blackmail then?
They do not legally need to take the debt but if they do you will steal assets to pay off a debt 😯
You can disagree with the law and the “threat” but what you propose is at least as bad ….still they are the baddies eh.

I do hope things don’t come to this though and a currency plan b is announced.

Time will tell none of us really know

Junkyard, negotiation is not about the result you want, rather the result you are prepared to accept. What are both sides prepared to accept?

I dont think what you is say is an unfair proposal but they counter by saying they need to then get a share of the assets and this includes the currency [see what i did there]. The law is not on iS side there but rUK will have to make a choice and other factors [ bullying as you call it] will impact on this decision.

You are not talking about an asset that can be split and you take your share you are saying that the UK government and UK taxpayers should bail out Scottish banks after independence or you will not take on a share of jointly accumulated debt. I am sure in the scenario of an iScotland suffering a banking crisis we would offer some assistance but expecting us to totally bail out your banks is madness. Post independence you need to stand on your own feet, have your share of UK assets but do not expect UK taxpayers to save you should your banking system collapse.

They do not legally need to take the debt but if they do you will steal assets to pay off a debt
You can disagree with the law and the “threat” but what you propose is at least as bad ….still they are the baddies eh.

I offer my own opinion about the UK holding back assets from Scotland whereas AS has issued a threat that I consider blackmail against the UK therefore using your logic AS is a baddie but the UK government are still the goodies? eh! We could always apply tariffs on all Scottish imports to the UK until your debt to us is paid off and we could get away with this because you won’t be a member of the EU or the WTO. It is the UK’s name that is on EU and WTO agreements just like it is the UK’s name on all UK debt, how ironic. Small countries shouldn’t try to bully big countries or maybe it is just bluff and bluster.

read the thread, there’s a good fellow.

fasternotfatter – Member
….Small countries shouldn’t try to bully big countries or maybe it is just bluff and bluster.

I’m sure India & Africa would have been grateful for that sentiment 100+ years ago. 🙂

I think its obvious now that, in the event of a yes vote, horses will be traded. So, yes: Scotland would almost certainly get the THE POUND to use, if an agreement can be reached on exactly what Scotland would offer in return.

A big chunk of the debt? Trident?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

(I’m sure I mentioned this a few weeks back…..)

negotiation is not about the result you want, rather the result you are prepared to accept. What are both sides prepared to accept?

I dont think any of us really know tbh. I would be very surprised if iS dont take some debt and not that surprised if there is or there is not a currency union as i think it depends. It will be a political decision rather than economic IMHO. rUK will demand/negotiate/bully some concessions for this, if given, as would anyone in this position. I find it hard to believe either side will press a nuclear options here as it harms both sides – tariffs, no debt, blocking EU membership etc. Will there be a currency union honestly i do not know but i do not consider it to be off the table just because some politicians have said so nor do i consider it a certainty because some have said so. Its the only issue where folk seem content to accept that this shower are people of honour who always do as they say

There won’t be a currency union the only way it would be sellable to the rUK electorate is by big concessions by iScotland. I think anyone who think rUK are going to be poor at negotiation is missing a huge history of doing pretty well at it see EU rebate, see forcing France to hand over Exocet details and other events. If they want to play hardball they will and a big chunk of the electorate will be no fan of iScotland and support them IMO.

In response to epicyclo, I wouldn’t have thought you would have mentioned Africa due to the prominent part played by Scots in both the slave trade and slave ownership.

Codybrennan, taking a big chunk of debt or keeping trident has not been offered, instead we have been threatened with no currency union means no debt. Not a very amicable start to negotiations. I also have a link, The only way to keep the UK pound is to stay in the UK. It is amazing how nats take the words of one minister as gospel if he supports your cause but the three potential chancellors after the next election are bluffing when they say no to a currency union. How about the polls of the rest of the UK showing no support for a currency union, is that more bluffing? AS has said there is no need for a currency union referendum in the UK, so he gets his referendum but wants to deny the people of the UK theirs. Is AS being a bit hypocritical here?

I think the anonymous minister’s comment is an indication that Better Together is not together.

It really doesn’t help the way everyone (especially the mainstream media) confuse a currency union with “keeping the pound”. We’re keeping the pound, no-one can stop us, the question is whether we have a currency union to go along with it.

Anyhow, some interesting analysis on why “no currency union” now will become a more sensible position after a Yes vote:

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/8962-the-whole-worlds-watching

Oh, and Trident is not on the table. With a Yes vote, Trident is going – everyone on the Yes campaign of all parties agrees on that.

just like they all agree that a currency union is not on the table eh Ben? Both are on the table though both unlikely.

If they want to play hardball they will and a big chunk of the electorate will be no fan of iScotland and support them IMO.

This is true both sides of the border and each side will portray the other side as the cause.

In response to epicyclo, I wouldn’t have thought you would have mentioned Africa due to the prominent part played by Scots in both the slave trade and slave ownership

Woosh…. What a nice way to miss the point entirely and then attack Scotland. No country has an illustrious history re slavery but do you think this small nation may have bullied other countries in the past…the conquests and the empire would suggest that the answer is a no brainer.

Not a very amicable start to negotiations

Declining it before the negotiations that you said you would not negotiate before the vote is what exactly then?
Your so one sided – hell you even make ben and THM look balanced 😀

Is AS being a bit hypocritical here?

He is a politician what do you think ?
As above is saying you wont negotiate before a vote and then stating your position a bit hypocritical…I wonder which side you think are the hypocrites here
Its politicians being politicians on BOTH sides.

just like they all agree that a currency union is not on the table eh Ben? Both are on the table though both unlikely.

Touché 😉

Trident isn’t staying long-term – for one thing, would the rUK really want their nuclear deterrent under the control of a foreign country? There will have to be a handover period while the rUK builds the facilities – if the rUK even wants to keep the things. Perhaps we’ll play nice in the handover period in return for a currency union.

I am sure you will try this approach….you bullies 😉

Salmond, speaking on the Murnaghan programme on Sky News, said the comments from the minister were “a very important demolition of the No campaign and “indicate that all this bluff and bluster about not sharing sterling is a campaign tactic”.

He said: “The reason we are gaining ground is that we are putting forward a positive message on what Scotland can do and can be.

Salmond also said he would not allow the British government to strike a deal in which British nuclear weapons would be retained at the Faslane nuclear base in return for retaining monetary union. He said: “We have said unambiguously Trident will have to be removed in the first parliamentary term of an independent Scotland. That is not up for negotiation”.

TBH i am not sure why each side is drawing such lines in the sand as it makes it so much harder to change tact once the actual negotiations start.
As i said both doing the same who choose to believe is just saying which way you would vote

Incidentally- the ‘unnamed’ insider is alleged to be Vince Cable. Given that VC has a tendency to brief against party line, and has a strong economic background, I could believe this.

None of us know whats going to happen, of course. But its makes sense, and is pragmatic, for all sides to think about the possibilities and weigh up options. If Scotland does vote yes, and would like to retain a currency union- and I was George or David (shudder!) I’d be keeping the option of selling the Scots some debt or keeping Trident. Horse trading.

I think at this stage the only certainty is that there are no certainties, and any politician who states categorically that option x or y is not possible is just being a politician- attempting to influence an outcome, but preparing for other eventualities. Its in the job description.

codybrennan – Member

Incidentally- the ‘unnamed’ insider is alleged to be Vince Cable. Given that VC has a tendency to brief against party line, and has a strong economic background, I could believe this.

He’s also of course relatively unlikely to be happy with toeing the blue line (because of course, “no currency union” isn’t his party’s decision, it’s the new boss’s.)

How is a currency union still on the table when all parties state is is not and the electorate don’t support it either? I can get my head around trident not being negotiable can you not do the same for a currency union? I don’t see the UK voting for being lender of last resort of a foreign country.

Woosh…. What a nice way to miss the point entirely and then attack Scotland. No country has an illustrious history re slavery but do you think this small nation may have bullied other countries in the past…the conquests and the empire would suggest that the answer is a no brainer.

He mentioned Africa and I pointed out the role of Scots in bullying African nations, he also mentioned India and we took over India by liquidating the East India company, hardly bullying. You are not jealous of our successful empire in comparison to the failure of the Darien scheme are you? 😉

Declining it before the negotiations that you said you would not negotiate before the vote is what exactly then?
Your so one sided – hell you even make ben and THM look balanced

Hey I can handle Scotland saying no to Trident Can you not handle us saying no to a currency union? Saying no to a currency union and threatening not to take on any debt are two separate things, the UK is declining an offer and AS is make a threat in return. The hypocrisy is AS saying we are being bullies for not accepting currency union while trying to bully us into one. The last time I felt this bullied I was still at school.

fasternotfatter – Member

Can you not handle us saying no to a currency union? Saying no to a currency union and threatening not to take on any debt are two separate things

Why?

Fasternotfatter- who is the ‘us’ you mention? You speak for a group?

……of course, I’m being a d!ck- you mean “English people”. I’ll stop being disingenuous.

Listen- if Scotland votes yes, newsflash- you and I won’t be invited to the decision making party. It will be politician to politician, thrashing out a compromised solution based on who is in the stronger position. There will be disappointments on all sides. If it goes down, it will change everything. But regarding a currency union- if Scotland wants it, it will happen, but a price will need to be paid.

@codybrennan

Newsflash – if Scotland wants a currency union it will happen, it already has because we’re in one! The point is, currency union under an independent Scotland will mean no real independence, the only way rUK would agree is if fiscal and monetary policy was controlled by London.

Hence we get back to page 1of this thread.

Whoops:

Alex Salmond is preparing a sensational U-turn on his promise to remove nuclear weapons from an independent Scotland, according to a senior SNP source.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/467665/Trident-on-the-Clyde-will-be-price-of-keeping-the-pound-in-event-of-a-split

Named sources too! You can expect this story to grow over the next few days!

Bainbrge-

the only way rUK would agree is if fiscal and monetary policy was controlled by London.

Proof?

As I say, when it comes to brass tacks- if Scotland did vote yes, then it will become a series of negotiations. And the outcome of these negotiations depend on many things, probably primarily who wants what the most. So, the only thing I can say to your assertion is: well, maybe?

What politicians say now is designed to set a tone and influence an outcome- that, and and what actually happens, could be two different things. (I’m basing my statement on observations of how politics in general looks to me to work.)

Ninfan- thats exactly what I’m saying. If theres a yes, neither sides currently stated position will be the final outcome. Its politics, after all- just a set of negotiations, in sequence, one running into the other.

Remember of course that America will have a voice in this, or will have expressed its voice to Whitehall already. Scotland is strategically important. Trident in their eyes must stay.