- Osbourne says no to currency union.
honeybadgerx – Member
Slightly off topic but ladybadger just came out with something that made me giggle… ‘If we get independence do you think we could get google renamed as Dougal?’
We won’t be getting any internet from the south after independence.
The leaders of the Tory, LibDem, Labour, and UKIP have said a firm NO to any electrons or magic internet stuff crossing the border.
The SNP have a plan B though, and our internet will be conducted by semaphore and Aldiss lamps mounted on all the wind turbines. Apparently optical internet is the latest technology, so we’ll be laughing.
We will have our own search engine called Weardafukizit.Posted 4 years ago
Been away for a few days, 1700+ posts wow …
bencooper – Member
The point really is that Standard Life back plans for a currency union.
Should someone tell Osborne?
Thanks for the video above – ’twas interesting and amusing – note the part about EU being inundated with small nations wanting to join.
Standard Life: IMO this should be read as a big negative for an independent Scotland, basically SL has said unless there is a formal currency union it’s going to leave Scotland (that statement by the way puts zero pressure on Osbourne to agree to a union, in fact it’s an argument not to as SL will relocate to the UK). SL has said this as it’s business (most clients outside Scotland including me 😉 ) makes no sense being located in a country with either the euro, a Scottish pound or a British pound but with no union.Posted 4 years ago
basically SL has said unless there is a formal currency union it’s going to relocate… as it’s business (most clients outside Scotland including me ) makes no sense being located in a country with either the euro, a Scottish pound or a British pound but with no union.
1) that’s not what SL said
2) the more of its business is outside Scotland, the less it matters what currency Scotland uses. Explain how SL would significantly be affected by Scotland using a euro, new currency or non-union pound.Posted 4 years ago
@kona – 1) SL said they where preparing a contingency plan to relocate to the UK in the event Scotland voted yes and there was no currency union. That reads to me very clearly that a yes vote means they leave. Why would Scorland vote for independence then keep a currency and interest rates it has no control over. It may be “management speak” but I read it clearly that they’d be relocating.
2) It makes very little sense for a company to have most of its earnings in one currency (the pound) then have most of its cost base (employee wages etc) in another (Scottish pound, euro) – that to me is one reason but to the people whose opinion really matter is the SL management and they’ve told us already they are preparing a contingency plan due to the threat to their business.Posted 4 years ago
1) that’s not what SL said
2) SL and every other export-oriented business already does this – look at all the countries in which it operates in currencies other than the pound. The costs of a company the affected by way more than currency. And in any case none of that would change if Scotland carries on usig the pound, in union or otherwise.Posted 4 years ago
@kona – yes it was what the company said, I’ve read all the direct quotes and the various press releases. SL believes an independent Scotland without a currency union with the UK is a material risk to its business. Your export analogy doesn’t make sense in this case. Retail financial services rely on relatively thin margins, an adverse move between the Scottish currency and the pound would wipe out its profits very quickly, that’s exactly why they’ve put this contingency plan in place.Posted 4 years agoNorthwindSubscriber
jambalaya – Member
@kona – yes it was what the company said, I’ve read all the direct quotes and the various press releases.
Perhaps you’d care to quote one then? SL have said they’ve prepared contingency plans but as far as I can see they’ve not said what you claim- that they will leave Scotland if there is no currency union.Posted 4 years ago
SL pointed out the material issues which remain unclear including currency, regulatory framework and whether Scotland would join the eu on the quoted schedule. All of these are material risks to the company which they are seeking to mitigate by preparing a plan (and setting up the relevant uk companies) to move to the uk in the event of a yes vote. All 3 UK political parties have said there will be no currency union. SL have said they will move their business if there is a material risk to it post the referendum, the currency issue alone ticks that box.Posted 4 years ago
Before the next Oscar is awarded ..
SL will also have a major issue with Scotland meeting it’s target of joining the eu on the agreed timetable, this will have a major negative impact on its UK pension business unless the management of that moves to the UK and thus retains its status as a business domiciled and regulated by an eu member.Posted 4 years agogrumMember
Project Fear are at it again I see with their relentlessly negative campaign. Oh no hang on…Posted 4 years ago
Bunch of polled questions in the Goniad.Posted 4 years agofootflapsSubscriber
Another Grauniad poll:
The Scots are more anxious than the English and Welsh about the effect of independence on the United Kingdom as a whole, and also worry about Scotland in particular. That is the finding of new Ipsos Mori polling on both sides of the border, which has been exclusively shared with the Guardian.
An outright majority of Scots – 52% – believe that a yes vote would weaken the pound, compared with just 32% of voters in England and Wales. Large proportions of Scots likewise believe that independence would reduce available public funds – 49% fear it would mean less public money in Scotland, compared with the mere 24% of voters south of the border who believe the break-up of the union would mean spending cuts in England or Wales.
Similar proportions – 52% in Scotland, 53% in England and Wales – believe that the Scottish economy would be negatively affected by independence.
Scottish voters say departure would have graver effects for the UK as a whole than do their English counterparts. A Scottish majority of 57%, compared with just 43% of English and Welsh voters, believe the UK economy would be damaged; 51% of Scots believe the UK’s standing in the world would decline, a view shared by only 40% of voters south of the border.
More Scots (63%) than English and Welsh (50%) feel that independence would lead to a worsening relationship between Edinburgh and the residual UK. Among Scots, 47% expect that political independence would weaken north-south cultural ties, compared with only 37% who fear that in England and Wales.
Polling methodPosted 4 years ago
The Scottish results are based on a survey of 1,001 respondents (adults aged over 16) conducted by telephone 20-25 February 2014. Data are weighted to match the profile of the population, England and Wales results are based on a survey of 1,012 respondents (adults aged 18-plus) across Great Britain. Interviews were conducted by telephone 1-3 February 2014. Data are weighted to match the profile of the population.teamhurtmoreMember
Thanks for that post Gordi – I watched first 10 mins but need to go now. I will try to watch it all later.
AS should not HH’s opening words – all currency options have pros and cons – ie, you cant pretent that you only have the pro’s!!! He was “clever” when discussing risk-sharing!!!
There will be some on here unhappy with Beveridges conclusion that ultimately the economics will trump the politics!!
The main gist still seems (1) Plan A is correct for Scotland and (2) admitting that there is a Plan B is poor negotiating. IMO, they have got this wrong!!Posted 4 years ago
Not admitting there is a plan B, when the people who would need to agree a plan A have ruled it out would appear to be poor negotiating. I note that it doesn’t matter how much they might say plan A is in the best interests of rUK if those in rUK happen to disagree.Posted 4 years agoernie_lynchMember
Massive boost for Yes Scotland
I assume this is some sort of funny joke referring to Gordon Brown’s huge lack of popularity in Scotland ?
Despite clear evidence which suggests a completely different reality ?
At the last general election the Labour Party in Scotland, under Gordon Brown’s leadership, received more than twice the number of votes of its nearest rival.
And Gordon Brown’s personal vote in the Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath constituency was almost five times greater than that of his nearest rival (the SNP)Posted 4 years agoteamhurtmoreMember
Why worry about a bloke who describes HIMSELF as an ex-politician, who rarely votes and who speaks approx 1 a year in the HoC (at least that is normally on constituency matters)? TBF, his genuine charitable donations mark him above another similar ex-politician.
So wee eck’s “friends in EU” are bullying again with reminding him how laws work. How will he twist this one? It’s great not to be over-exposed to the auld friends at Gogarburn, perhaps?Posted 4 years ago
Your export analogy doesn’t make sense in this case. Retail financial services rely on relatively thin margins, an adverse move between the Scottish currency and the pound would wipe out its profits very quickly,
You’re making the fundamental error of assuming that if SL were in an independent Scotland it would automatically be converting its revenue into a new Scottish currency – which is both a goalpost-shift from your earlier assertion that even unilateral pound use would be unacceptable and also…untrue. You can avoid currency risk by not exchanging money pointlessly.
It wasn’t an export analogy by the way – the provision of financial products overseas is an export.Posted 4 years agomuddydwarfSubscriber
Global banking group ‘astonished’ at Scottish Govt’s inability to form a coherent currency policy :-
although they do say Scotland welching on debt would benefit Scotland in the short term.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Osbourne says no to currency union.’ is closed to new replies.