Osbourne says no to currency union.

actions are what counts

Usually I’d agree, but in this case the published documents form the mandate upon which the vote will be based. What they promise is, I believe, damaging to Scotland’s prospects. For from being “if they’re mistakes, at least they’re our mistakes”, the ceding of control on so many important subjects means they’re not even our decisions.

Where do you get the notion that Scotland has not thrived under the Union? I may have missed evidence to that effect, but that’s a pretty broad statement which needs some evidence to support it.

Oddly, were genuine independence to be proposed I’d be quite open to it. But what we’re being offered is subservience to a number of countries and bodies way bigger than we are.

Spot on.

Has Scotland ever thrived before or after the union? Was it better under the union before the last one hundred years?

What is clear is that Yorkshire has not thrived under any Scottish or English politician in the last 100 years. Now when we have full Yorkshire independence from the rest of the UK that are a drain on our blessed county every thing will be great.

Eager to help mt, so I’ve gone and bought some Yorkshire Tea. That work?

Thanks oldbloke hope you asked for discount, it’s the Yorkshire way.

the ceding of control on so many important subjects means they’re not even our decisions.

TRue of any member of the EU as well though

No “independent nation” is an island , we all know this.

IMHO and I assume anyone who looks at democracy nothing is ceeding control more than getting a govt you did not vote for time and time and time again.

Could you explain how this is not ceeding control and it is better than what they propose

FWIW I think you argument has a point but it is also simplistic and one sided.

IMHO and I assume anyone who looks at democracy nothing is ceeding control more than getting a govt you did not vote for time and time and time again.

36% of the Scottish voters voted either Con or Lib Dem at the last general election – that’s about the same as the number of people who voted the SNP into power at the Scottish government elections.

In an independent Scotland will the 10% of the Scottish population who vote Conservative get the government they vote for?

He who controls the currency controls the debate!

oh. well if you’d only said that 200 pages ago we could have saved time and asked the hedge funds what they wanted to do about the pound.

TRue of any member of the EU as well though

Not quite. Some have a right of veto on some subjects. Some incorporate EU law into their own law through a parliamentary process which guides or limits its application – like the UK. iS is deleting that safeguard.

Under union before and after devolution Scotland has ceded control to UK. But it still has significant representation there – at 2010 election, Scotland had 59 of 650 MPs.

A Currency Union – go read the Fiscal Commissions recommendation on how it would work and compare with the present situation and look at the impact the loss of 59 MPs influencing policy might have.

Handing control of your law to the EU means a legislature you have negligible influence in shaping – currently 6 seats of the 751. Compare % of seats Scotland has at Westminster with the % impact on EU Parliament and Commission. It makes worries about a government you didn’t vote for somewhat pointless. It is roughly equivalent to Scotland’s representation at Westminster being dropped to 5 seats.

So, I’d argue that an iS proposes to cede more control than it currently retains through the Union or EU arrangements.

oh. well if you’d only said that 200 pages ago we could have saved time

I did, and on the day the Book of Dreams was published. From the start, the ship had a fatal hole in it below the waterline. It has been the elephant in the room that I have reminded you of repeatedly.

and asked the hedge funds what they wanted to do about the pound.

Nothing to do with them. As we have seen again last night JM Keynes’ view remain true and at the heart of the debate. The DO cannot escape that, he tried the three Bs from the start but that didn’t work. He has a few days now to re-assess. His “pants are down” and it is not a pretty sight at the moment. There is still a slim chance of proper debate.

A Currency Union – go read the Fiscal Commissions recommendation on how it would work and compare with the present situation and look at the impact the loss of 59 MPs influencing policy might have.

Indeed yS’ team HAS done the work and knows the answers and anyone can read them. It’s pretty simple stuff really, you don’t need a Nobel prize just 30m reading time and a little reflection.

TRue of any member of the EU as well though

JY interesting you mention this. Scotland within the UK with the GBP vs Scotland outside the UK but in the EU with the euro ? I know you believe there is a chance of an alternative outcome but I think its remote. An independent Scotland will loose the various EU opt out the UK secured and will have the sign up for the full united-states-of-europe.

Like @oldbloke says, and independent Scotland will have less influence not more over its own affairs.

IMO the core argument for Yes remains, do you want to be independent of the English at all costs ?

do you want to be independent of the English at all costs

With 60 MEPs, England could have more influence on Scotland within the EU than Scotland’s own MEPs…

The more I reflect on last nights debate (or as much of it as I saw thanks to STV’s live feed) the more I can see that Salmonds real weakness is his inability to discuss ‘plan B’ on a whole variety of issues, whether through arrogance, stubbornness or deliberate simplification, seeing the ‘popularity snake’ you could see people really turn off at that point

I think Darlings line of questioning for the next session has to rely on this

For example:

‘you’ve asserted that Europe will be bound let you in, lots of other eminent people say the opposite, so what do we do if it turns out you were wrong?’

followed up by:

‘I’m not interested endless in hearing quotes from people who support you, thats been done to death Alex, we’re all hear to listen to what you have to say about it, so come on, what happens if you’re wrong?’

repeat the same about having to join the Euro, NATO, currency union – Salmond remains really weak on these answers, and by now he really ought to have them nailed. IMO he came across last night as very gimmicky. Darling in the other hand came across as frustrated, as well he might be from being constantly interrupted and spoken over, he needs to tackle that head on by telling Salmond that he needs to STFU while he answers the question – though he was needlessly rattled by Salmonds chaff questions about trivial and silly issues.

36% of the Scottish voters voted either Con or Lib Dem at the last general election – that’s about the same as the number of people who voted the SNP into power at the Scottish government elections

you are spinning here and presenting the facts in the best possible way to make your point and it still does not negate the point.
Even with your combined figure 42% sill voted labour so they still did not get the govt they voted for did they 🙄

In an independent Scotland will the 10% of the Scottish population who vote Conservative get the government they vote for?

It was actually 16.7 % and No in an democracy the losers do not get the govt they wanted.
HTH

you did not answer even attempt to disprove the self evident point that nothing relinquishes power more than getting the govt you did not vote for.

Some incorporate EU law into their own law through a parliamentary process which guides or limits its application – like the UK. iS is deleting that safeguard.

Wow you are able to predict the outcome. how helpful.
Comparing the EU parliament with the UK is a bit chalk and cheese as the UK one is still sovereign and the EU one not. there are also other checks and balances on the EU parlimanet and it needs the accord of various other bodies to get legislation through. No country can have amajority in it and yes afterwards Scotland will have the same number of seats so no change- they will be represented in the commission* and the council of ministers* though so they actually increase their influence.

Scotland outside the UK but in the EU with the euro ?

No i did not iS will not be in the euro as they cannot meet the tests.I have said this numerous times

I know you believe there is a chance of an alternative outcome but I think its remote

See even you know this so why did you do this?

they have to sign up to the euro, they cannot meet the criteria, they wont be forced to join unless they agree to it. there is at least one current EU example of this policy [ not just the UK]

do you want to be independent of the English at all costs

It independent of the UK and despite what the english say and think they are not synonyms.

* i may have got the names wrong here as no google to check

With 60 MEPs, England could have more influence on Scotland within the EU than Scotland’s own MEPs..

Is this a change from now then ?

I think you will find the answer is a resounding no and iS representation increases in other areas with in the EU

It independent of the UK and despite what the english say and think they are not synonyms.

I certainly do not believe the UK and English are synonymous. I am very proud to be English but I am a citizen of the UK with all the diversity and benefits that brings. The SNPs language is so much anti-English and anti-elitist that of course that is the agenda.

We do go round in circles but you had the government you voted for for 10 years with Scots at its very heart and head but that didn’t work out so well did it. We don’t always individually get the government we vote for but we accept the greater good of being a large democracy than a few small ones.

Wow you are able to predict the outcome. how helpful.

I’m not sure which bit you’re referring to here and a reference might be more useful than sarcasm. Apologies if I’ve picked the wrong bit to reply on, but the outcome is predicted in the draft Scottish constitution. It says:

24 Incorporation of European law
(1) Directly effective EU law forms part of Scots law.
(2) Scots law is of no effect so far as it is inconsistent with EU law

It says separately that Treaties must be approved by Parliament, but the two points above effectively remove the role of Scottish Parliament in adopting EU legislation.

nothing relinquishes power more than getting the govt you did not vote for.

So please explain how moving from a position where you get legislation from a body on which you have c. 9% representation is less empowering than adopting legislation automatically from a body on which you have <1% representation?

Does anyone need the second debate? Last night achieved little (other than pricking the obvious bubble), AS has no answers to the central questions and nothing will change there, why waste any more time and money? The whole thing is a vanity project, it doesn’t need an expensive trim.

Have the vote now and we can get on with living in one of the most successful unions in modern history

iS representation increases in other areas with in the EU

Says who? If you could point me to proposals any body of the EU governance regime is considering, that would be handy.

So please explain how moving from a position where you get legislation from a body on which you have c. 9% representation is less empowering than adopting legislation automatically from a body on which you have <1% representation

Oldbloke, those simple questions are wasted!!! The blindingly obvious contradiction have been ignored for >7k pages and no one will change now.

I know, but as the debate has moved back from the trivial to the meaty issues, it is worth a reminder.

Does anyone need the second debate? Last night achieved little (other than pricking the obvious bubble), AS has no answers to the central questions and nothing will change there, why waste any more time and money? The whole thing is a vanity project, it doesn’t need an expensive trim.

Given Salmonds performance against Darling, I reckon they should roll out Blair 😀

(whispers, or even Gordon… shudder)

It is indeed and I admire your patience and persistence. Just, don’t hold you breath for an answer!

It was actually 16.7 % and No in an democracy the losers do not get the govt they wanted.
HTH

No, it was ~10% of the POPULATION – I was quite considered about that. What’s the proportion of the UK population based in Scotland, ~10% again.

So your standpoint seems to be that if 10% of one population don’t get what they want then the Westminster brand of democracy is failing them, but if 10% of another population don’t get what they want it’s democracy in action.

Oldbloke Which draft Scottish Constitution are you quoting ? There are two at least on the net.
Jambalaya Can you quote from or link to documents or media clips from the SNP which feature anti english language? As for being anti elitist …if that means wanting a fairer society i am all for it.

Gordimhor – I’m looking at the document from the Scottish Government website entitled “THE SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE BILL: A CONSULTATION ON AN INTERIM CONSTITUTION FOR SCOTLAND”.

this one

you had the government you voted for for 10 years with Scots

I am still not in Scotland
Oh 10 years well that should be enough then to be democratic 😕

We don’t always individually get the government we vote

Scotlands price for union is to get the govt they do not vote for for roughly 50% of the time. Its a high price and i doubt the english would pay it hence the opt outs fro the EU for example. Whatever you wish to call it democracy is a stretch and i is legitimate point.

but the two points above effectively remove the role of Scottish Parliament in adopting EU legislation.

Not getting your point here tbh every EU country [ opt outs aside] has to comply with EU legislation whether you do this directly or vote to do it you still do it. I am not sure a “rubber stamping exercise” is actually critical to a functioning democracy.

So please explain how moving from a position where you get legislation from a body on which you have c. 9% representation is less empowering than adopting legislation automatically from a body on which you have <1% representation?

OK I will do it again but it si still the same point
Scotland have no more or less MEP’s after independence than it does before. Given this its influence has not changed in that chamber- perhaps you wish to claim UKIP speak for them 😉
It also then gets representation at the head of states and via commisioners as a member state of the EU.
By any judge it has greater representation after independence than before.

Does anyone need the second debate?

NO one does but we wont be able to stop it.

Have the vote now and we can get on with living in one of the most successful unions in modern history

Give it 300 years and you will say that about the EU and Euro

PS the USA may disagree as well on best union [ both points tongue in cheek to be clear]

If you could point me to proposals any body of the EU governance regime is considering, that would be handy.

The EU’s standard decision-making procedure is known as ‘Ordinary Legislative Procedure’ (ex “codecision”). This means that the directly elected European Parliament has to approve EU legislation together with the Council (the governments of the 28 EU countries). The Commission drafts and implements EU legislation.

http://europa.eu/eu-law/index_en.htm
It would be 19 with iS and they would have a voice there. That as far as i can tell is more influence and not less.

it has various ways to pass various laws to be clear
Quick guide here

http://www.out-law.com/page-7766

mt – Member
Has Scotland ever thrived before or after the union? Was it better under the union before the last one hundred years?…

The big problem with bandying figures about is that there are so many opposing sides to them and political interpretations.

There is however one set of figures that are incontestable and apolitical. The census returns.

I don’t think you can call a country thriving when many of its population have to move out of it to make their living.

For the last 100 years Scotland’s population has remained almost static, while that of England has risen by 40%.

As for Yorkshire, that’s up to the residents of that region, but I’d agree it doesn’t seem to have had a fair shake. Maybe you should be pressing for devolved regional govt?

This whole independence business could have been headed off at the pass if more devolution had been one of the choices.

But it wasn’t. We got an all or nothing choice, so we’ll take the all, thanks. We will make it work, and it will be better in the long run.

As we have seen again last night JM Keynes’ view remain true and at the heart of the debate. T

KDM is spitting in the ocean of global capitalism. you can’t outspend the market. let it go, mate

Just, don’t hold you breath for an answer!

Should i just insult him , call troll and then say I am ignoring him 😀
That is how you answer someone then 😉
Oh the irony
your ability to do the things you object to clearly knows no limits and you have a blind spot the size of a small planet.
You do often make me laugh with your post though so thanks
FWIW i dont feel the need to avoid difficult questions by simply insulting posters as troll as I am able to defend what i say on here and dont need to hide behind that tactic. A number of folk have called you out on this and no one else has called me a troll. read into that what you will

So your standpoint seems to be that if 10% of one population don’t get what they want then the Westminster brand of democracy is failing them, but if 10% of another population don’t get what they want it’s democracy in action.

i am saying that currently scotland does not have the govt they voted for and nothing is giving away power more than that scenario
Can you counter that at without a red herring/moving the goalposts?
i notice you have chosen to run with this rather than address the actual point 🙄

Scotlands price for union is to get the govt they do not vote for for roughly 50% of the time. Its a high price and i doubt the english would pay it hence the opt outs fro the EU for example. Whatever you wish to call it democracy is a stretch and i is legitimate point.

Hmm, England certainly have paid it on occasion, indeed we are paying it now, plus we’ve spent a hugely disproportionate amount of our time under Scottish Prime Ministers (7/52) and England has still done nothing to solve the infamous West Lothian question

edit

i am saying that currently scotland does not have the govt they voted for and nothing is giving away power more than that scenario

Currently England doesn’t have the government they voted for!

England has still done nothing to solve the infamous West Lothian question

England has the power to change that, if you are looking for an explanation as to why it hasnt changed already ask The Labour Party.

ninfan – Member
…Currently England doesn’t have the government they voted for!

Yes, independence for Scotland will be good for England too. 🙂

Yes, independence for Scotland will be good for England too. 🙂

Hey, I’m all for a permanent Tory government 😈

Yes, independence for Scotland will be good for England too.

er, no. it would leave us with a Conservative government forever.

(coughs up some sick)

(Dear, dear, if the cap fits and all that (in this case clearly not)….for clarity oldbloke, I was OF COURSE referring to official sources when talking about proper answers and holding breath. No need to wait for unofficial stuff, that’s just for entertainment though)

KB, happy to let JMK go at the right moment. Given that his comments are central and completely relevant to the current debate, this is not it.

Hey, I’m all for a permanent Tory government

[ american voice] are you some kind of Liberal and have you gone soft on us[american voice] 😉

for clarity

No one could accuse you of not talking clearly on here now could they …..oh wait …passes cap 😉

I was OF COURSE referring to official sources when talking about proper answers and holding breath

Forgive me its sometimes very hard to tell whether you are insulting him or me 😛

DP

I am saying that currently scotland does not have the govt they voted for and nothing is giving away power more than that scenario

Which as a statement is correct, very few people voted for the SNP government 😉 . But what you originally said was,

IMHO and I assume anyone who looks at democracy nothing is ceeding control more than getting a govt you did not vote for time and time and time again

“Time and time and time again” many people in Scotland have the UK government they voted for. In the last election only ~100k people more voted Lab than the combined Con/Dem count (in Scotland) that’s 0.3% of the total number of voters.

Can you counter that at without a red herring/moving the goalposts?

It’s not moving the goalposts, as you stated, “in an democracy the losers do not get the govt they wanted” and in any democracy you have to accept the possibility that the outcome of an election might be a result that you (or any given block of 10% or less of the electorate) didn’t vote for.

i notice you have chosen to run with this rather than address the actual point

Because the basic premise of your opening statement is wrong, many people in Scotland DO get the government they vote for ”time and time and time again” so these people aren’t ceding any power they are benefitting from a democratic system which has favoured their views.

Edited, as I just don’t care.

Not in response to anything recent. Just mleh.