[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

was kind of after a linky supporting ben's assertion

Do you see what i did there

How do you quantify uncertainty?

The Harvard prof is addressing moral hazard hat incentivized risky behavior when there is a safety net (where the government interferes with the market). We don't have to imagine what would happen in a system without lenders of last resort - you can just look at bank behavior in markets where there isn't an effective central bank capable of intervening.

Scotland (or any other country) doesn't need the permission of the UK to use the pound. That is bobbins. It would need agreement determine monetary policy. Query whether that's a big loss when you only have a tenth of a voice anyway.

[quote=konabunny ]Scotland (or any other country) doesn't need the permission of the UK to use the pound. That is bobbins. It would need agreement determine monetary policy. Query whether that's a big loss when you only have a tenth of a voice anyway.

At the moment the economies of both parts are quite similar, and it isn't in the interests of the rest of the UK to have a monetary policy which would harm the Scottish economy, no matter how little "say" they might have in the matter. If I understand correctly one of the points of iS is to allow them to do things differently, and clearly it would no longer be in the interests of rUK to worry about the effect of monetary policy on Scotland. I wonder if there's any recent precedent of a currency area where the parties have different economies and the monetary policy which suits one doesn't suit the other, which we could use to see what happens?

Of course Scotland doesn't need permission to use the pound - or if that is awkward politically they could have their own Scottish pound which is tied to the rUK pound. That would be plan B and plan C I think, but those don't apparently exist (and opinion among the SNP advisors appears to be divided over the merits of either option). There does seem to be a lot of confusion over the idea that Scotland using the pound has been ruled out (I wonder if it's in some people's interests to further that confusion), when it's simply the currency union which has.

A tenth of a voice versus no voice - you decide. There is plenty of recent and relevant evidence to help you make the sensible decision.

I wonder if there's any recent precedent of a currency area where the parties have different economies and the monetary policy which suits one doesn't suit the other, which we could use to see what happens?

😀 but not sure it works without a smiley!!! 😀

I think he means the Euro zone

That said it would seem fair to say the ruk and iS are harmonised currently

When these guys agree, Independence is nearly a done deal. 🙂

[url=

Fans for Independence[/url]

[url=

Fans for Independence[/url]

I am confused. The paper today has a factual,balanced story that in the event of a yes vote Scotland would have as few as 3,000 uni places for Scots as English students would use the EU agreement to flood over the border. But I thought that on the second 10 or so pages of this thread all the clever English people on here were telling us we would not be part of the EU. Or is that just an example of another non scary project no-fear story and I should not worry myself about it?

Oh it is all so difficult! What is a poor simple Teuchter like me to do in September?

How could you forget [url=

Thistle fans for independence[/url] 😉

I don't think anyone sensible has ever said Scotland won't be part of the EU, what is debatable is what conditions are imposed to join it, and most would expect the Euro to be one.

Once part of the EU, then the Scottish Uni's will have to let in people from England, Wales and N.I. under normal EU conditions. The SNP have tried claiming they'd keep the current system in place once independent, but that clearly would be in breach of EU law.

all the clever English people on here were telling us we would not be part of the EU.

English ? Why English ? You appear to be assuming that all those who question the wisdom of Scottish independence must be English, why's that ?

Alistair Darling is a Scottish MP, lives in Scotland, represents Scottish constituents, and will vote in the Scottish referendum.

This is what he says : [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9856083/Alistair-Darling-Scotland-faces-nine-year-wait-to-join-EU.html ]Scotland faces nine-year wait to join EU[/url]

The need to reduce the argument for Scottish independence to the level of Scottish v English smacks of desperation. Presumably this desperation is due to a lack of a sensible strategy which has looked at all the consequences of independence in detail.

There's certainly no carefully thought out 'business plan' by the yes campaign to offer the referendum voters.

You appear to be assuming that all those who question the wisdom of Scottish independence must be English, why's that ?

I do agree that reducing it to nationality is pointless but i think his broader point was the no campaign is more "english" and runs scare stories that are utter BS via a campaign called project fear.

Yes I'm aware that Alistair Darling doesn't post on here. But as I said, he [i][b]appears[/i][/b] to be assuming that all those who question the wisdom of Scottish independence must be English.

Of course I might have got that wrong and duckman fully understands that the problem for the Yes campaign isn't opposition from the English and Welsh, but from Scottish voters.

[b][i] Some 46% of those outside of Scotland asked to imagine waking up and finding the country independent from the rest of the UK said they "wouldn't mind", while 34% said they would be dismayed and 11% said they would be delighted.

When adults in Scotland were asked the same question, there was more evidence of the task facing Alex Salmond, the leader of the Scottish National Party, and the Yes campaign - with 46% saying they would be dismayed and just a quarter saying they would be delighted.[/i][/b]

http://news.sky.com/story/1201211/scottish-independence-46-percent-dont-mind

ernie_lynch - Member
English ? Why English ?

Crikey, Ernie I know you said you haven't been following the debate that closely, but I am surprised that you need to ask this!!!! The answer is obvious.......

All this uncertainty business.

How on earth did all those countries which fought for independence survive? Surely they faced much more uncertainty than the Scots will with a negotiated independence. Or is this just another version of the Scots are stupider than other people?

Can anyone show an example of the EU expelling 5 million citizens? There is not a precedent for Scotland. The EU has shown a pragmatic approach in the past and it will again. Something will be negotiated, and sooner rather than later. This is just fear tactics.

But if we don't get into the EU, what's the problem with that? There's other similar sized European countries flourishing outwith the EU. Heck, even the Channel Islands are not EU members, and they're tiny. Or is this once again just another version of the Scots are too stupid argument?

How on earth did all those countries which fought for independence survive?

Well for a start they weren't part of the UK. This theory that Scotland is somehow the last colony of the British Empire is absurd.

Of course Scotland can be independent, and of course it shouldn't have too much trouble joining the EU. The uncertainty is whether it will benefit Scotland. In the opinion of many it won't.

Can anyone show an example of the EU expelling 5 million citizens?

Scottish people won't stop being in the EU for the simple reason even if Scotland wasn't in it, you'd just use a rUK passport, which you;d be entitled too. It's the trade deals, rebates, currency etc. that will change for an iScotland regardless of whether it's in or out of the EU. These could have profound effects on everything from companies of all industries, farmers, fishermen, and other things like EU money for regeneration projects.

he appears to be assuming that all those who question the wisdom of Scottish independence must be English

all the clever English people on here were telling us we would not be part of the EU

ernie_lynch - Member

all the clever English people on here were telling us we would not be part of the EU.

English ? Why English ? You appear to be assuming that all those who question the wisdom of Scottish independence must be English, why's that ?

Ernie; see JY's post. And if you can be bothered, about pages 10-20 of the thread.

Of course I might have got that wrong and duckman fully understands that the problem for the Yes campaign isn't opposition from the English and Welsh, but from Scottish voters.

Yes,you did get that wrong,you lot can't vote in Sept,only folk up here can,hence stories like today's Uni scare. "my clever English people" quote was based on the number of posts started with "You are dreaming if you think you will get into Europe." or words to that effect. Perhaps I am barking up the wrong tree, and there are lots of Spanish people who want to ensure they keep Catalonia posting on here. It is of course also to be commended that nobody from the Westminster Government has attempted to influence the decision making progress in any way.

[quote=epicyclo ]Can anyone show an example of the EU expelling 5 million citizens?

Have I missed something here? Isn't it you voting to leave, rather than us voting to throw you out?

But if we don't get into the EU, what's the problem with that?

<shrug> don't expect me to try and argue the advantages of being in the EU, but there seem plenty on your side who consider it essential.

Why wouldn't Scotland want to be in the EU? The benefits would outweigh the losses. Though we want independence from Westminster we don't want to be isolationist. That doesn't work. The No campaign are trying their best to paint it as a choice between being part of everything or being part of nothing, which is so far from the truth.

Despite all your protestations duckman, you give every impression that you see the Scottish independence debate as a Scottish v English issue.

And misgivings about an independent Scotland's EU status isn't restricted to "you lot" who can't vote, as my link shows.

Whatever you want Ernie,as JY pointed out to you I used the term "on this thread" but hey-ho, if you want to reduce my reasons for wanting independence,which have been stated on this,and many other threads a number of times to a dislike of the English,carry on. Oh and good to see your multiple bans haven't stopped your selective use of quoting to try and score cheap points.

"you lot" who can't vote

Yes,you did get that wrong,you lot can't vote in Sept,only folk up here can,hence stories like today's Uni scare.

Despite all your protestations duckman, you give every impression that you see the Scottish independence debate as a Scottish v English issue.

Whatever you want Ernie,as JY pointed out to you I used the term "on this thread"

Yes I was fully aware that you said "on this thread", I never doubted that. I pointed out that misgivings about an independent Scotland's EU status isn't restricted to 'clever English people' on this thread.

I provided a link to comments made by a Scottish politician (which junkyard helpfully pointed out doesn't post on here) to show that.

I'm glad to hear you claim that you don't see the Scottish independence debate as a Scottish v English issue, that's excellent. I do however retain the right not to be fully convinced.

[quote=Junkyard ]I am not sure why you have decided to play the man with a made up attack.

Not been here long? 😉

ernie_lynch - Member
"How on earth did all those countries which fought for independence survive?"
Well for a start they weren't part of the UK. This theory that Scotland is somehow the last colony of the British Empire is absurd...

I'm not just talking about countries which got independence from the UK. There's plenty other examples. Nothing to do where they got their independence from, they would have faced far more uncertainty, and yet somehow they have gone forward.

I agree. Scotland is not a colony. We are a country in a bipartisan agreement with England and its territories (at 1707) to form the United Kingdom.

<whoosh> - you know what that sound is epicyclo?

I'd imagine those countries which actually fought for their independence had rather less rosy prospects if they hadn't done so than ones which have a nice civilised vote on the issue.

aracer - Member
<whoosh> - you know what that sound is epicyclo?...

The air leaking from your head? 🙂

😆

That WAS a good comeback.

How will the vote work then?
Will it be a simple majority, if so how would it go if it were 50.3 % yes, 49.7% no for example?
Is there a minimum figure at which Independence is achieved?

Aha, you have spotted a problem - the Edinburgh Agreement allows the Scottish Government to hold a referendum on independence. It does not bind the Westminster Government to honour the result of that referendum, and some Westminster ministers have hinted that they might not. In the event of a close vote, Westminster could argue that the referendum has failed to deliver a "decisive expression of the views of the people of Scotland", as required by the Edinburgh Agreement.

bencooper - Member
Aha, you have spotted a problem - the Edinburgh Agreement allows the Scottish Government to hold a referendum on independence. It does not bind the Westminster Government to honour the result of that referendum, and some Westminster ministers have hinted that they might not...

That could result in a small amount of unrest...

[quote=bencooper ]In the event of a close vote, Westminster could argue that the referendum has failed to deliver a "decisive expression of the views of the people of Scotland", as required by the Edinburgh Agreement.

Does the Edinburgh agreement actually say the bit you've quoted and give any more context (clearly I could go and look it up, but as you have a greater interest in this than I do I'm assuming you might know)?

Well if there isn't a clear cut result perhaps they could agree to give independence to any counties that vote for it, but any counties that vote against it remain in the union ?

It seems to have worked well in Ireland so I can't see why the same arrangement shouldn't be used in Scotland.

In the event of a close vote,

I wouldn't worry, at the current rate of progress it will be No in front by a big margin..

Here's probably the most relevant paragraph from the Edinburgh Agreement:

The United Kingdom and Scottish Governments are committed, through the Memorandum of Understanding between them and others, to working together on matters of mutual interest and to the principles of good communication and mutual respect. The two governments have reached this agreement in that spirit. They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome. The two governments are committed to continue to work together constructively in the light of the outcome, whatever it is, in the best interests of the people of Scotland and of the rest of the United Kingdom.

So there are two issues. What if the referendum doesn't produce a decisive result? (And who defines what is decisive?) and what if the best interests of the rest of the UK (as judged by the UK government) do not include Scottish independence?

I wouldn't worry, at the current rate of progress it will be No in front by a big margin..

Only a 5% swing needed, according to the latest Panelbase poll. The margin is getting smaller and smaller, and we've still got 6 months to go. It's going to be close.

you are going to get a YES majority, the former Primementalist is backing the Union

[img] ?w=150&h=136[/img]

The result wil be upheld I am sure of that.
The only people I have heard promoting a result that may be against the wishes of the Scottish people are in the yes camp.

Ernie and teamhurtmore, can you both register to vote up here please!

epicyclo, I see you displayed a link to Rangers and Celtic for independence. You can have them.

It is heartening to see that Scotlands religious bigots can side together against a common enemy. 😉

athgray - Member
...epicyclo, I see you displayed a link to Rangers and Celtic for independence. You can have them.

It is heartening to see that Scotlands religious bigots can side together against a common enemy.

No thanks. They've debased the ancient sport of kicking a human head from one end of the village to the other. They're a bunch of Philistines!

Athgray I think you'll find there are many people involved with the old firm who detest bigotry as much as anyone.

gordimhor - Member
Athgray I think you'll find there are many people involved with the old firm who detest bigotry as much as anyone.

Both the Ranger & Celtic for Independence FB pages make it very clear bigotry will not be tolerated.

In my nationalist days believe it or not I used to attend Ibrox fairly regularly. Drifted away from football to a certain degree, based in part to the tribalism and waving of Union Jacks or Tricolours with nothing to do with football, and also the pleasant songs.
I am sure that FB warnings will keep the wrong sort from supporting the cause.

There have been 2 stories I can find which suggest at least a [b]possibility[/b] that the Uk government might attempt to delay or prevent Scottish independence if there is a Yes majority.

[url= http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/politics/yes-vote-no-guarantee-of-independence-1.223772 ]Baroness Jay[/url]

This from The Herald of Feb 14th this year

Yet the referendum debate is today intensified by one of Mr Cameron's senior colleagues, who indicated a Yes vote in September's poll would not be the end of the matter.

Dismissing the SNP Government's 18-month timescale for completing negotiations as "totally unrealistic", the source said: "A Yes vote in the referendum would be the start of a process, not the end of one; we would start negotiations. But if Alex Salmond made impossible demands, we would not just roll over and agree to everything he wanted. If we could not reach agreement, the status quo would be the default option."

The senior Coalition figure said one such impossible demand would be the First Minister's threat, repeated yesterday, that Scotland would not pay its share of UK debt if it were denied a currency union by Whitehall.

"It would not be a question of defying the wishes of the Scottish people. As the UK Government, we would have a duty to represent the interests of the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland," the source said.

But Mr Salmond hit back, saying: "This is an astonishing and irresponsible intervention by a senior Coalition source. The Westminster establishment are now so worried about losing the referendum that they are threatening to refuse to respect the democratic will of the people of Scotland and rip up the Edinburgh Agreement, signed in all good faith with the Prime Minister."