[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

my experience from listening/ reading what is said overseas it that our systems is one that is eyed with respect rather than derision.

there are other ways to get the expertise other than political patronage and birthright. all of them more democratic as it is hard to think of anything less democratic.

Ps Gove will be on the phone for you to [s]write[/s] right the politics syllabus 😉

They like the castles. People overseas like the castles and the Queen and the golden carriage and the pomp and circumstance. They like the plucky Brit with the stiff upper lip (though not so much when they're bayoneting the natives). They like the story about how it's still legal to shoot a Welshman in Bristol or whatever.

The history is what they like. As a democratic system, it leaves a lot to be desired, which is why not many other countries use it.

However you interpret it the [b]unelected[/b] house of lords still added an amendment to a bill, the amendment was not debated in the commons .This amendment resulted in a loss of powers for the[b] elected [/b]Scottish parliament

@gordimhor they were no loss of powers, there were a loss of proposed powers. If they were so important then why were they not discussed in the HoC after the revisions by the Lords. The Commons can overrule any revisions. The HoL has breadth of knowledge compared to the Scottish Assembly or the HoC.

We seem to be criticising the house of Lords but not addressing the problem of no second chamber for an iScotland. Yes the house of Lords can be improved on but no second chamber for iScotland can also. I personally do not think iScotland would be too wee to have a proper two chamber system and this should be something voters in Scotland should be interested in. I often hear separatists using the phrase "a fairer more democractic society", IMHO no second chamber means a less democratic society.

[list]@sadmadalan Fergus Ewing Scottish Energy Minister,(edit) said the issue concerned the Scottish govt existing powers. This is from a press release on 2/11/13

Mr Ewing has also challenged Mr Davey to explain a last minute amendment to the UK Energy Bill that will remove the Scottish Government’s existing powers and discretion over support for renewable technologies across Scotland. The UK Government’s amendment is to be debated by the House of Lords on Monday November 4, 2013.

Rumble, rumble, rumble.....,,,

Edit: echo not required

The unionists are simply trying to use any term that has negative connotations.

Meanwhile today the USA celebrates Independence, not Separation Day.

Why do you think that the term "separatist" has negative connotations ? I don't think it has. Is the term "Basque separatist" negative while "Basque independentist" acceptable ?

I personally don't like using the term 'pro-independence' because I disagree with the nats that separating Scotland from the rest of the union will make Scotland significantly more independent.

I believe that a separate Scotland will be more dependent on institutions such as the EU and have less input than it has now. Similarly a separate Scotland will still be heavily reliant on UK institutions such as the City of London but have no input over control and regulation as it does now. In another example the taxation policy of a separate Scotland will be heavily influenced by the taxation policy of the UK despite the fact that unlike now they will have no input.

Putting yourself more at the mercy of things which you have less control over does not represent a greater level of independence imo. Even if they do give you your own seat at the UN.

So call it "independence" if you wish but I would rather not subscribe to what I consider to be a misleading term.

The way forward for greater autonomy and control of the conditions which affect the lives of ordinary Scots is not by breaking away from the rest of the UK. imo.

ernie_lynch - Member
...The way forward for greater autonomy and control of the conditions which affect the lives of ordinary Scots is not by breaking away from the rest of the UK. imo.

Well we'll soon find out. 75 days.

I suspect that in 75 days time my opinion which you've just quoted will be exactly the same.

I can't be certain of course, but it's unlikely to change.

However you interpret it the unelected house of lords still added an amendment to a bill, the amendment was not debated in the commons .This amendment resulted in a loss of powers for the elected Scottish parliament

IMHO no second chamber means a less democratic society.

Rumble, rumble, rumble

Hiding behind a troll claim wont make your position anymore credible but at least you have the sense to not defend the indefensible

The world does not envy our system it is why they do other things.

Thoughts bouncing around inside your hollow head?

😀 😀

Dodgy yS practices on C4 at 8 (phew still on the train for that) then Peston ("Welllllll Huw....) on the biased (!!) Beeb at 9

Even less to learn that "more Lance" at 9 on C4. Appropriate level of telling the truth perhaps? From a viewing perspective I reckon lance gets it just

What amazes me is what delicate flowers these big businessmen are.*

What's also amazing is that the boss of Braehead Travel sent a message to all his employees telling them to vote No, and somehow he's the victim.

* Actually it's only a couple, and it's all very vague what they think might have been intimated to them by persons unknown.

Rather ironic what the dispatches website says

Antony Barnett goes on the campaign trail with [b]both sides[/b] of the Scottish independence debate to investigate[b] claims of dubious tactics and misinformation.[/b]

My emphasis obviously.

So both sides not just one...I think I know which you think comes out best without either of us bothering to watch it

EU entry would be simple, according to an Oxford professor:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28197298

EU entry would be simple, according to an Oxford professor:

Sounds a lot like what several of us have been saying, along with some of official legal advice. Don't worry though, THM will be along shortly to tell the Prof that she's wrong.

In other news, C4's Dispatches are giving both sides a bit of a beating for some of the pressure and underhand tactics that are going on.

She is obviously impartial coming from Scotland herself. Being as the white paper is based on a series of assumptions another assumption about automatic EU membership is just what the nats ordered.

She is obviously impartial coming from Scotland herself. Being as the white paper is based on a series of assumptions another assumption about automatic EU membership is just what the nats ordered.

Right, so a Professor at one of the top universities in the world and en expert on EU law and you're dismissing her as unreliable because she's Scottish?

Don't worry though, THM will be along shortly to tell the Prof that she's wrong.

Nah, missed it. Got in and the programme on Uni Challenge (lots of very bright people from elite institutions) seemed far more interesting and factual. Starter for ten, is a currency an asset, a liability or neither......

Still Peston (errr, we don't know the answer) or lance at 9?!?...yS or LA for the great dishonesties of our time......

Did you expect some deep and well reasoned argument from Faster then

Even when wrong on simple facts of trams and the SNP the response was to just rant about nats.

From the article - the key points

Prof Douglas-Scott acknowledged that there was no precedent within EU law for a territory of an existing member state becoming independent and wishing to retain EU membership, and the treaties do not provide for such an event.

But she said EU law characteristically takes a "pragmatic and purposive approach" to pressing issues that are not dealt with by specific treaty provisions.

She added: "There was no explicit provision in the treaties capable of dealing with the situation of German unification in the 1990s.

"But the (then) EEC Institutions responded to this event in a pragmatic and expedient manner, enabling a united Germany to become a member of the EU without long drawn out negotiations, accession proceedings or legal wranglings."

'Values and norms'
Prof Douglas-Scott said she took issue with Mr Barroso's assessment that it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the EU for four main reasons.

She explained: "First, it is inconsistent with previous Commission pronouncements on the issue of Scottish independence. Second, it threatens to cast out Scotland from the EU, thus fracturing the Single Market, ignoring acquired rights and obligations of good faith.

"Third, it ignores the existence and growth of EU citizenship as elucidated in case law of the European Court. Lastly, it is difficult to reconcile with the EU's values and norms as enshrined in the general principles and spirit of the Treaties."

She added: "Rebuffing or alienating a country such as Scotland, that wants to maintain EU membership, and is keen to stress its European credentials, will hardly do much for the EU's image.

"The EU ought to be showing what it can do for its citizens, not rebuffing them."

Responding to Prof Douglas-Scott's paper, a spokesman for the UK government said: "There is no doubt the route into Europe for a separate Scotland would be uncertain and the weight of expert evidence is against the unprecedented use of Article 48.

SO THM did you watch Dispatches - would you like a link?
Both sides guilty and not just YS - surprising eh.

Would you like to call me a troll or do you prefer to ignore my posts as it highlights your glaring, and inaccurate, one sided view? I very much doubt you will choose to retract, in the face of facts that counter your view, even though the programme is freely available for all to see.

Can I call you the DO for that comment then as it is economical with the actualité 😉

EDIT : Crossed posts innit
THM watching tv earlier tonight

[img] [/img]

Right, so a Professor at one of the top universities in the world and en expert on EU law and you're dismissing her as unreliable because she's Scottish?

I said impartial not unreliable old chum.

It disturbs me to find myself most commonly in agreement with Junkyard.

JY I suggest you calm down, especially taking into consideration that you practically had a mental breakdown online a few pages back. You are an intellectual heavyweight, but only in your own opinion unfortunately.

More rumbling..... 😀 (extreme hunger messes with the mind!)

I said impartial not unreliable old chum.

Fair play, but do they not amount to the same thing in this context?

I definitely meant impartial. She undoubtedly knows her stuff about the EU I just doubt that she is impartial on the subject. After all there is more support among Scot expats than there is in Scots actually living in Scotland for independence according to some polls I have seen.

[img] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Edinburgh_tram_02.jp g" target="_blank">http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Edinburgh_tram_02.jp g"/> &imgrefurl= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Tram_(vehicle)&h=2409&w=2920&tbnid=X5V5rzWPfRpvrM:&zoom=1&q=edinburgh+trams&docid=G9V5TDHBqsj4kM&hl=en&ei=NPy6U4aSL6SV7Ab6s4DICQ&tbm=isch&ved=0CB0QMygAMAA [/img]
Watch out FnF these trams are very quiet

Prof Sionaidh Douglas-Scott

Nice impartial name 😀

JY I suggest you calm down, especially taking into consideration that you practically had a mental breakdown online a few pages back. You are an intellectual heavyweight, but only in your own opinion unfortunately.

* lolz at the irony you think I am the one becoming angry here and a bit mental and you post that.

[quote=bencooper ]EU entry would be simple, according to an Oxford professor

Oh good. Would be handy to be able to send my kids to uni for free.

Good to see you have calmed down old bean. Think calm thoughts, control your breathing, unclench your fists etc. All I did was say nats...

of the SNP were responsible for the trams and then got "tired and emmotional" when a number of posters pointed out the FACT that the SNP actually opposed the legislation, but were outvoted, and not responsible.
FTFY

With some more ad homs from you I might just reach the tranquillity and zen like calm enlightenment that blind ignorance and denial seems to have brought to you 😉

You wont admit you were wrong even though we all know you were

Shall we move on or do you want to insult me a bit more first?

Maybe it's time this thread is closed. It seems to have degenerated into petty name calling, trolling and no analysis or debate.

It seems to have degenerated into petty name calling, trolling and no analysis or debate.

Spot the common denominator? Remove that and the thread is pretty civil and interesting.

I knew some clever person would spot that that oxford professor was Scottish 😉

Okay, so Scottish people are unreliable when they're talking about independence? Does that apply to No-voting Scots like Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown? Or does it only apply to Scots who say things that might be construed as helping the Yes side?

That circular argument has been tried on this thread before - an expert was accused of being a Yes supporter, the evidence was that they said something that agreed with the Yes position.

If by civilised you mean making claims you cannot back up then crying troll then yes it is very civilised.

Nothing i said in my previous post did anything other than point out your somethingion of the dispatches programme was at odds with the facts, was biased and was one sided. Playing the man wont alter the fact you were incorrect in your analysis.

You know you cannot defend what you said as accurate hence you play me and not the point I made as you know you have no defence.

Okay, so Scottish people are unreliable when they're talking about independence? Does that apply to No-voting Scots like Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown?

It's reasonable to assume that most Scots have a biased opinion concerning whether Scotland should separate from the rest of the UK. Any opinions expressed with regards to that issue by Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown can only seen in the context of their bias. It would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

So in answer to your question of course the opinions of Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown should not be considered neutral and impartial.

What about people from elsewhere in the UK? Can they be impartial? Can anyone?

Some interesting points raised in Pestons program . In my opinion the most surprising one was that at the end he concluded economics is only one important factor to be considered among many including identity.

People are unreliable when they (1) are ignorant of the facts, (2) know the facts but forget them, (3) know that facts but prefer to lie, (4) know the facts but prefer to deceive the voters.

So start with a trained economist (MA no less) from Scotland's finest University who regularly states in public that a currency is an asset. 1,2,3 or 4 or a combination?

It's impossible to be neutral or unbiased but is is possible to stick to factual evidence. Funny how a whole range of people manage to do that even though they are on very different sides of the political and economic debate! Takes a magician to unite so many against himself.

qSome interesting points raised in Pestons program . In my opinion the most surprising one was that at the end he concluded economics is only one important factor to be considered among many including identity.

True and yet odd that the early poll indicated that £500 and the vote is yours pall!

People are unreliable when they (1) are ignorant of the facts, (2) know the facts but forget them, (3) know that facts but prefer to lie, (4) know the facts but prefer to deceive the voters

So pretty much every politician, then?

Unlike, say, academics at prestigious universities who have to produce peer-reviewed papers to get funding.

Every played poker with a prof Ben?

Anyway what's the issue with Europe? Smooth negotiations immediately and all done and dusted in 18 months. Yer man works miracles, he says so with a "straight" face (1,2,3 or 4?)