Osbourne says no to currency union.

There’s 82 pages on the question of Scottish independence but you’ve decided to keep your “persuasive argument for independence” to yourself ?

You’re such a tease.

Junkyard – lazarus

2 They are in the EU now and after so that is no change

If once you have gained membership of the EU it will be on tottaly different terms to those that the (r)UK has. You will have had to sign up to the full fiscal treaty/monetary policy (or whatever it’s called), taken the Euro, you won’t have a Veto vote, and a much smaller proportion of MEPs. iS would be a much smaller fish in a bigger pond.

So there will be significant changes in your ability to steer/influence the policy making which affects you.

You forgot the VAT exemptions that as a new EU member state Scotland will no longer have michaelbowden.

michaelbowden – Member

take the Euro,

Never been true, been debunked a million times, people keep repeating it…

ernie_lynch – Member

You forgot the VAT exemptions that as a new EU member state Scotland will no longer have michaelbowden.

Sorry didn’t know about that. Probably other stuff too.

ernie_lynch – Member
There’s 82 pages on the question of Scottish independence but you’ve decided to keep your “persuasive argument for independence” to yourself ?

You’re such a tease.

You have read the thread, aye? Youse canny even argee that there is a degree of ambiguity on the EU question ffs! 😀

Northwind – Member

michaelbowden – Member

take the Euro,

Never been true, been debunked a million times, people keep repeating it…

Not by anyone who will actually have to decide on the matter. Where as several that would be deciding have (as does the EU constitution) stated a new member will have to take the euro. I do accept that there maybe a time scale to be negiotiated.

Youse canny even argee that there is a degree of ambiguity on the EU question ffs!

I thought it was Yes Scotland who were refusing to accept that the EU question was anything other than clear cut ?

Admittedly they might have changed their minds – what’s the latest thing they’re saying now ? More spectacular u-turns/change of mind ?

michaelbowden – Member
Northwind – Member
michaelbowden – Member

take the Euro,

Never been true, been debunked a million times, people keep repeating it…
Not by anyone who will actually have to decide on the matter. Where as several that would be deciding have (as does the EU constitution) stated a new member will have to take the euro. I do accept that there maybe a time scale to be negiotiated.you completely ignore the fact that scotland isn’t leaving the uk on it’s on, it would be by mutual consent. So if Scotland is a new member, rUK will also have to apply as a new member.(It won’t come to that both would be accommodated.)

The rumblings from the likes of Barosso about having to join as a new member, are just rumblings intended to be heard by their respective home countries, in particular to spain with, Catalonia and the basque country. Who don’t have mutual consent for their planned referendum, therefore are illegal.

The Scottish referendum is not illegal.

But carry on, continue to blank that point.

ernie_lynch – Member
I thought it was Yes Scotland who were refusing to accept that the EU question was anything other than clear cut ?

It isn’t clear cut.

seosamh77 – Member

michaelbowden – Member
Northwind – Member
michaelbowden – Member

take the Euro,

Never been true, been debunked a million times, people keep repeating it…
Not by anyone who will actually have to decide on the matter. Where as several that would be deciding have (as does the EU constitution) stated a new member will have to take the euro. I do accept that there maybe a time scale to be negiotiated.
you completely ignore the fact that scotland isn’t leaving the uk on it’s on, it would be by mutual consent. So if Scotland is a new member, rUK will also have to apply as a new member.(It won’t come to that both would be accommodated.)

The rumblings about having to join as a new member, are just rumblings intended to be heard by their respective home countries, in particular to spain with, catalonia and the basque country. Who don’t have mutual consent for their planned referendum, therefore are illegal.

The Scottish referendum is not illegal.

But carry on, continue to blank that point.

I can’t be bothered to find it but somehwere in the 82 pages someone quoted from the EU constition. Where it basically said if one part of a member state (iS) splits from the Member (UK), the Member(rUK) would contine to be a member(rUK) and the part that split off(iS) would be considered to be a new state and therefore would have to apply to join the EU as a new state.

No one at a EU decision making level has said (as far as I am aware) otherwise. And the split may be by mutual consent, but you (iS) are still leaving the member state.

So if Scotland is a new member, rUK will also have to apply as a new member.

Wow, someone needs to tell the Europeans that. You should have this added to the BoD as well. It’s about as true as most of the stuff in there.

It’s becoming clearer where these concepts of fighting with fear, the 3Bs and negativity come from. No wonder these words slip so readily off AS’s tongue.

I can’t be bothered to find it but somehwere in the 82 pages someone quoted from the EU constition. Where it basically said if one part of a member state (iS) splits from the Member (UK), the Member(rUK) would contine to be a member(rUK) and the part that split off(iS) would be considered to be a new state and therefore would have to apply to join the EU as a new state.

No one at a EU decision making level has said (as far as I am aware) otherwise. And the split may be by mutual consent, but you (iS) are still leaving the member state.you’re going to have to show me that.

The Uk wouldn’t have to re-apply again, when Germany was reunited it became a new state and didn’t have to re-apply so the UK wont, Scotland probably wont have to either.
But as it’s looking like both Scotland and Wales want to stay in the EU, maybe they should and then England can leave if they don’t want to be in it 😉 But that’s a different discussion 🙂

pelaton – Member
The Uk wouldn’t have to re-apply again, when Germany was reunited it became a new state and didn’t have to re-apply so the UK wont, Scotland probably wont have to either.

He shoots, he scores!

michaelbowden – Member

Not by anyone who will actually have to decide on the matter. Where as several that would be deciding have (as does the EU constitution) stated a new member will have to take the euro.

Nope. The EU constitution and treaties, not to mention proven precedent, are all absolutely clear on this- Scotland is required to commit to join the Euro, and would be set criteria to do so and a timescale. But it cannot and may not join until it’s fulfilled all of those, whatever they may be and including but not limited to the Maastricht criteria.

However, there is no penalty for failing to meet those criteria in those timescales. So remaining outwith the Euro is a simple matter of not conforming to the criteria.

None of these points are in dispute at all. And just in case you’re wondering how difficult Scotland would find it to follow this strategy; the UK apparently doesn’t currently meet 4 of the 5 maastricht criteria.

It would actually be impossible for Scotland to join on day one even if we wanted to. And no doubt, if we did want to join the euro, the No campaign would never stop telling us we couldn’t possibly do so. But because we don’t want to, we have to be told that we must, even though we can’t. It is a nice wee microcosm of the debate really.

you’re going to have to show me that.

It’s in the letter linked below, in direct response to the official request for information from Christina McKelvie. It seems that the EU would answer the question and there really wasn’t any need for the UK government to ask after-all 😉

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

It’s in the letter linked below, in direct response to the official request for information from Christina McKelvie.

Yes but it’s not very clear cut is it, I mean what do they mean by this ?

When part of the territory of a Member State ceases to be a part of that state, e.g. because that territory becomes a independent state, the treaties will no longer apply to that territory.

Junkyard » 1. Scotland did not vote for the current govt and will always vote for the govt they get in iS
It doesn’t appear the borders and northern islands will ever get the government they voted for in iS.

they might though it is unlikly.Whilst this is likely to be true it does negate my point. not every constituency wins an election – well perhaps in North korea and China 😉

2 They are in the EU now and after so that is no change
If once you

I do not live in scotland.
I do agree there will be negotiations, and the outcome unlikely to be IDENTICAL to now but i doubt there will be massive changes tbh. However the only ones who can ask at present are the UK and they will not ask. It is definitely not because they fear the answer and is certainly because they are honourable people unlike wee eck etc.
The EU wish to expand not loose territory , Scotland currently complies so joining will be a political decision that requires rubber stamping. Personally I think it will end up in the EU if they wish to – rUK can veto it but will they? Would make the bullying case clear cut so I doubt they will tbh. Like much of this we are all just guessing.

It’s becoming clearer where these concepts of fighting with fear, the 3Bs and negativity come from. No wonder these words slip so readily off AS’s tongue.

You remind me of swiss tony from the fast show – there is nothing you cannot twist in to a slagging off of AS. It’s worse than any I blame thatcher knee jerk reaction I have ever seen 😉

It’s in the letter linked below, in direct response to the official request for information from Christina McKelvie.

Yes but it’s not very clear cut is it, I mean what do they mean by this ?

When part of the territory of a Member State ceases to be a part of that state, e.g. because that territory becomes a independent state, the treaties will no longer apply to that territory.

Its just a negotiating position

😆

However the only ones who can ask at present are the UK and they will not ask. It is definitely not because they fear the answer and is certainly because they are honourable people unlike wee eck etc.

Really? because as proved above, when a SNP MP asked a direct question about an iScotlands position within the EU, the EU supplied a direct answer.

and as you well know the Yes campaign have stated in their own document that the right time to negotiate with the UK and the EU is following a yes vote,

“Following a vote for independence in 2014, agreements will be reached between the Scottish and UK Governments, in the spirit of the Agreement, setting the parameters for Scotland’s transition to independence. These agreements would establish:

the process and timetable for the negotiation and conclusion of the agreements which will form the final independence settlement”

(my bold)

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00413757.pdf

the EU supplied a direct answer.

Well that’s the problem – why have a direct answer when what we really want is an ambiguous answer which fudges the issue and leaves everyone guessing ?

You can never trust the EU to do anything properly.

Article 2 The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail

Article 49 U*** Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union. The European Parliament and national Parliaments shall be notified of this application. The applicant State shall address its application to the Council, which shall act unanimously after consulting the Commission and after receiving the consent of the European Parliament, which shall act by an absolute majority of its component members. The conditions of eligibility agreed upon by the European Council shall be taken into account. The conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the Union is founded, which such admission entails, shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State. This agreement shall be submitted for ratification by all the contracting States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements

so that’s article 2 and 49. Where’s the article stating that an independent state that becomes independent with the consent of the larger state needs to re apply? The above does not cover the break up of an existing state through consent.

Ernie, you are on a roll today!

and as you well know the Yes campaign have stated in their own document that the right time to negotiate with the UK and the EU is following a yes vote,

you mean we are going over the same issues again and again 😉
Yes both sides are playing the same game but it was bit pointless them going we should negotiate first when rUK had said no. I though the no negotiation was a UK position initially and yes wrote everything with that as the assumption – is this not the case? [ genuine question BTW ]

Actually on reflection they both probably like it as it allows one side to play fear/uncertainty/change and the other to promise the moon on a stick if they think it will win votes. The beauty of it is none of know so we can easily debate it for at least a year possibly two

Looking into what the European journal is wiki suggests

Only legal acts published in the Official Journal are binding.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Journal_of_the_European_Union

I can’t find the euro journal. But anyone know if the extracted quote from it forms part of a legal act?

If it is I’m willing to accept it. But if not. Well that letter doesn’t prove much.

Anyone know?

Only AS can answer the clarion call for truth now 😀

Well how else will we ever get to 100 pages?

Junkyard – lazarus
Only AS can answer the clarion callfor truth now

or someone that knows if the euro journal extract legally means anything? 🙂

It is still the case that only member states can apply to the EU commission for its definitve advice as opposed to the offices of the president or the various vice presidents. From the eu journalism fellowship blog

A European Commission spokesman said the matter could only be discussed with an EU member state, which in this case would be the UK Government as Scotland is an EU region.

Then there is this from the FT of Feb 16th.

Mr Barroso’s comments are not a definitive judgement on the issue of EU membership, since the union’s response to Scottish independence would be decided by member nations rather than the commission.
The president also did not comment on the legal and political implications of denying EU membership to Scotland, which would be likely to have far-reaching effect on EU citizens studying, working or doing business there.

only member states can apply to the EU commission for its definitve advice

So why is an SNP politician requesting advise then – of what possible use is it to her ? Specially as she must have read the EU journalism fellowship blog which you quote – I take it SNP politicians do their research on matters concerning independence and the EU ?

And why is the EU Vice-president and commissioner responsible for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship, giving advice which isn’t for her to give ? Why is the EU tolerating this ?

It all smacks of serious incompetence on the part of the SNP, the EU, and EU Vice-president and commissioner.

Unless of course the advise given was sound ? Which I suspect it probably was.

I think it comes down to there being no precedent for the EU to follow,for a current member state seperating.
Prof Michael Keating

But why is an SNP politician asking for advise which you claim is useless ?

Or is it only useless because the EU Vice-president and commissioner responsible for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship, gave the “wrong” answer ? And had she given the “correct” answer then it would have been very useful indeed ?

Article 21 1.Every citizen of the Union shall have the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in the Treaties and by the measures adopted to give it effect. X** 2. If action by the Union should prove necessary to attain this objective and the Treaties have not provided the necessary powers, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may adopt provisions with a view to facilitating the exercise of the rights referred to in paragraph 1

be interesting to see how they manage to reconcile my rights as a European citizen with the act of kicking my country out of the EU.

I dont claim that seeking advice from legal experts is useless, nor indeed that seeking endorsement from the likes of Barroso is useless. I just find it curious that the formal official position of the EU commission could be made available to the UK govt as the member state and they have chosen not to get that advice.

with the act of kicking my country out of the EU.

Nobody’s kicking you out

You’re leaving!

No country will be kicked of the EU, the UK will remain a member state. If however Scotland withdraws from the UK and forms a separate sovereign state then a new country will exist. This new country will need to apply for membership. All fairly obvious I would have thought.

No country will be country will be kicked of the EU, the UK will remain a member state. If however Scotland withdraws from the UK and forms a separate sovereign state then a new country will exist. This new country will need to apply for membership. All fairly obvious I would have thought.

read the bit I quote. Well within the powers of the EU to change existing treating to accommodate citizens.

Interesting documents those treaties. Wonder if they have anything to say about stripping 5 million people of their EU citizenship that you seem so confident they can do?

ninfan – Member
with the act of kicking my country out of the EU.
Nobody’s kicking you out

You’re leavingits the English that want an EU referendum. Not us. Our referendum is only to do with leaving the union of the united kingdom.

Our referendum is only to do with leaving the union of the united kingdom.

Which is part of the EU.

You leave us, you leave the EU

Thats how it works

do you get it yet?

Its like leaving your job, but expecting to keep your free BUPA membership and access to the company gym 😆