Osbourne says no to currency union.

genuine q alert
Is it really the case they MUST?
For example the above says aims which can mean they aim to do it but do not meet the criteria and still join? I am not trying to wiggle I honestly dont know the answer here and I am intrigued.
your link also starts with

Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) represents a major step in the integration of EU economies. It involves the coordination of economic and fiscal policies, a common monetary policy, and a common currency, the euro. Whilst all 27 EU Member States take part in the economic union, some countries have taken integration further and adopted the euro. Together, these countries make up the euro area.

Not all EU members are in the euro – is there a definite treaty or law that means all new ones must join?

I dont know the answer but I am interested.

NW – I assumed that you read your own sides documentation. It’s very clear in this case. As the Scottish Government present it

Under Article 140 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) makes clear, an EU Member State is only permitted to join the Eurozone and adopt the Euro as its currency when four economic tests have been met.

Apologies for previous abuse is not necessary. Education is a noble profession! 😉

Remember the best case for voting no is normally found in yS documentation.

THM, you’ve clarified nothing there, what are you getting at? we don’t want to join the euro so the relevance of your post is… I don’t know frankly. We’ll not be able to relocate Scotland to the mediteranean either. Telling us we can’t do things we don’t want to do is just odd.

ernie_lynch – Member

If you don’t want monetary union then don’t apply to be a member of the EU.

Jesus christ, have we really not debunked this often enough? It is incredible.

So why does the Scottish Government put such “incredible stuff” on THEIR website. Is it a joke?

Note, I a quoting the Scottish government – ask them what they are getting at? Seems pretty obvious to me….

EDIT: LOL you are stating their position 8O…is this your famous neutrality again? Your taking some information out of context at best and wilfully misleading at worst. It does not support the claim they have to join the Euro now does it ?
Still you accuse AS of smoke and mirrors lies and distortions

His point was they do not want to join. you have not even remotely answered that question
Education is a noble profession and it involves answering questions

the actual article you quote is available HERE
is pretty clear on the issue that they dont have to….lets just take the preceeding pre amble to that quote eh

Notwithstanding the clear economic case supporting the retention of sterling as Scotland’s currency following independence, critics of independence have claimed that under EU rules an independent Scotland would have no choice but to become a member of the Eurozone and adopt the Euro as its currency following independence.

This assertion is incorrect on two counts.

First, the simple fact that eleven EU Member States do not use the euro as their currency[78] – only two of which formally have an opt-out from the relevant articles in the Treaty – itself demonstrates this is a wholly misleading claim. The Member States that do not use the euro include Sweden, a member since 1995, along with many of the countries acceding to the EU in 2004 and 2007.

Second, as explained in detail below, it ignores both the prerogatives Member States retain in determining whether, and when it is appropriate – in terms of their economic self-interest – to adopt the Euro, and the economic pre-conditions that Member States must satisfy (under EU law) before being allowed to join the Eurozone. It is simply not in the interests of individual Member States or of the Eurozone as a whole to encourage a country to adopt the Euro against its own economic self-interest or the economic interest of the Eurozone as a whole.

As already noted, the decision of the Scottish Government that an independent Scotland will retain sterling is one based on economic considerations and economic evidence. The analysis of the FCWG demonstrates that adopting the Euro immediately following independence would weaken the Scottish economy and, by extension, weaken the wider Eurozone economy.

The Euro was adopted as the EU single currency in 1999, with Euro notes and coins being introduced into circulation and replacing the national currencies of the participating countries on 1st January 2002. The legal base for the introduction of the Euro, and the rules governing Member States’ eligibility to adopt the Euro as national currency, was set out in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) which entered into force in 1993. Both the UK and Denmark secured an “opt-out” from the Treaty provisions relating to the Euro, and neither are under an obligation to participate in the single currency arrangement. Both countries can, however, “opt-in” to Euro membership if they wish, assuming they meet the strict pre-requisites for membership.

Since 1993 successive UK Governments have maintained the position that while membership of the Eurozone is not entirely ruled out, this would only be contemplated if a number of economic “tests” demonstrated this was in the UK’s best economic interests and providing the majority of the public endorsed adopting the Euro as the UK currency in a referendum. In 2003 the Treasury published results of the five economic “tests” deemed appropriate to determining if Eurozone entry was economically desirable, and found these tests were not satisfied. Since then, and particularly against the backdrop of the financial and economic crisis, official and public opinion in the UK has significantly hardened against Eurozone membership under any circumstances.

Under Article 140 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) makes clear, an EU Member State is only permitted to join the Eurozone and adopt the Euro as its currency when four economic tests have been met. These are generally referred to as the “convergence criteria” and are designed to ensure a new Eurozone member will avoid any significant domestic economic disturbance upon entry. The four tests are:
My Bold
Given it in its entirety its pretty hard to use this as supporting your case that they have to join the euro zone.

Now what is it you call AS again when you accuse him of this? I forget…what was that about taking a fact and then smoke and mirrors

Obviously the documentation of EUs treaties is bobbins!

Another odd reason to join – they waste money on lawyers and documentation that is total bobbins. brilliant. It gets better and better.

No wonder yS get so angry. Trying to pretend this stuff makes sense would test anyone’s patience and credibility.

teamhurtmore – Member

So why does the Scottish Government put such “incredible stuff” on THEIR website. Is it a joke?

Are you feeling quite alright? The quote from the website doesn’t support what Ernie is saying.

I don’t know if it supports what you’re saying or not, right now I just have no idea what point it is you’d like to make.

See no evil etc…

Seems like a good idea, otherwise your sanity would be under threat.

Junky – To be fair we did that many, many pages ago: Any new applicant nation has to formally commit to joining the Euro in the future, although they may not fulfil the criteria to adopt the Euro at the time of their membership.

Pretending that you can successfully negotiate membership, including that commitment, whilst making public proclamations that you’re lying about it and have no intention of adopting it seems like getting off on the wrong foot a little, doesn’t it?

Ssshhhh, that’s nasty talk ninfan.

you mean like the bit where they said why it was wrong or just the bit you want to quote?
They have stated the criteria for joining the EU zone as laid out by the EU they also say pretty clearly why they wont have to join the euro zone

what about this from the same article

It is very clear that there are simply no conceivable circumstances in which an independent Scotland would be “forced to join” the Eurozone.

I do not know why you are taking it out of context and claiming it is confusing tbh or even more incredulously that it supports your view. Its the complete opposite of what you are saying.

Any new applicant nation has to formally commit to joining the Euro in the future, although they may not fulfil the criteria to adopt the Euro at the time of their membership.

link to this from EU treaties please- genuine Q I have seen nothing definitive so far despite the claims
It’s duplicitous to commit if you have no intention of doing this but he is a politician so I am not sure why we should be that surprised tbh.

Sorry THM – I’m sure that SNP’s team of crack negotiators, pumped with success after getting everything they wanted out of their meetings with Dave and Gideon without having to concede a thing, will fly straight out and bargain the best possible deal for Scotland – before flying out to Gaza, bringing peace to the middle east, and stopping on the way back to smooth things over in the Korean DMZ, and back in time for tea and biccies.

Edit:

Junky – Official line from the EU: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/euro/adoption/who_can_join/index_en.htm

THM’s finally snapped 😆 Are you going to read this in the morning, possibly with a really bad headache, and go “WTF does my post even say?”

Ninfan; agreed it is a somewhat uneasy tactic, but that’s the nature of the beast- it is the exact position occupied by Sweden, who have committed to join the euro, then held a referendum to rule it out, without ever renouncing their commitment to join.

The route to EU membership without the euro is a well trodden and accepted one- that’s why all new accession treaties include a commitment to join the euro but have absolutely no penalty or consequence for not doing so.

This is, to be blunt, a subject that we’ve done too many times to the exact same conclusion.

Here, have a lovely UK government link
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06110.pdf

Sober as a judge, hence able to read!

Any idea why the Maastricht criteria were out in place and why A140 exists?

You english FFS it will be Irn Bru and tunnocks
I dont think even AS thinks this will happen but he will say it if he thinks it will win some votes 😉

Sober as a judge, hence able to read!

So you wish to claim the linked article and quoted text supports the view that it has to join the Euro 😯

Northwind – Member

Jesus christ, have we really not debunked this often enough? It is incredible.

“Debunked” what ?

I’m not the messiah btw.

ernie_lynch – Member

“Debunked” what ?

See how I quoted your post, so you’d know what bit I was referring to? You’re welcome.

it is the exact position occupied by Sweden, who have committed to join the euro, then held a referendum to rule it out, without ever renouncing their commitment to join.

There remains a significant difference – they didn’t tell anyone till after they got membership – Scotland are announcing it before even entering negotiations 😆

See how I quoted your post, so you’d know what bit I was referring to? You’re welcome.

You’re in a right grumpy mood ain’t ya ?

You quoted this :

ernie_lynch – Member

If you don’t want monetary union then don’t apply to be a member of the EU.

So what’s been “debunked” ?

ernie_lynch – Member

So what’s been “debunked” ?

The thing that you said.

ninfan – Member

There remains a significant difference – they didn’t tell anyone till after they got membership – Scotland are announcing it before even entering negotiations

No, it’s not so significant- as borne out by all those recent accession treaties I also mentioned, whose commitment to join the euro is designed to be nonbinding and ignorable. It really is just a case of looking at the real world cases, the EU makes no attempt to enforce euro membership.

they didn’t tell anyone till after they got membership – Scotland are announcing it before even entering negotiations

So now you are criticising him for being honest rather than lying…its almost like you are going to criticise him whatever he does 😛

Poor man he can never get it right for you can he 😉

I think it’s would be very hard not to be angry having to defend such tosh. I think we need to be more sympathetic, perhaps.

JL still seems to be missing this is a solid LW position supporting independence. Damn puppets.

The thing that you said.

So it’s not true – if you don’t want monetary union then it’s fine to apply to be a member of the EU ?
Fair enough if that’s what you want to believe.

Although I don’t understand why anyone who enthusiastically supports the EU should be so strongly opposed to one of its central aims.

ernie_lynch – Member

So it’s not true – if you don’t want monetary union then it’s fine to apply to be a member of the EU ? Fair enough if that’s what you want to believe.

You could, of course, read my posts explaining why we know this is the case, with precedent and real world examples. Or any of the huge number of commentaries on the subject, including that one I posted from the House of Commons research library. Just sayin’.

Although I don’t understand why anyone who enthusiastically supports the EU should be so strongly opposed to one of its central aims.

Isn’t it worse than that? YS recognises that the €-zone is basically a fudge but then claims bizarrely that this represents something that is more in the interests of Scotland than the alternative. Forget Derren Brown, it’s more Tommy Cooper.

At least les francais are waking up and smelling le cafe if today’s FT is anything to go by.

This is, to be blunt, a subject that we’ve done too many times to the exact same conclusion.

Same old chuff was spouted 80 pages ago and more. God knows how many times since, and presumably a few more times before September.
Repeat it enough times and it WILL be true!

read my posts explaining why we know this is the case, with precedent and real world examples. Or any of the huge number of commentaries on the subject, including that one I posted from the House of Commons research library.

Well you’re obviously convinced by your own point of view, that’s excellent.

Let’s have someone else say it then, that nice Herman Von Rumpoy that we keep hearing from:

“At this stage the Czech Republic is not meeting all the criteria, so the problem is not a problem today. But even if you meet the criteria, then of course the Czech Republic has to make its own decision in its own constitutional order. So I will not interfere in this internal debate; it’s up to the Czech Republic to make up its mind.“

So suburbanreuben, why do you believe it’s not true? What part of my argument do you think is false?

I’ll ask the same question of Ernie, with no expectation of success.

Is the CZ about to apply for Euro membership? Your right I must have been drinking if that’s the case.

I’ll ask the same question of Ernie, with no expectation of success.

Listen mate, you’re clearly in no mood for rational debate – I can see that you’re far too angry for that.

I am somewhat surprised that AS is so willing to negotiate joining the EU without getting his fair share of its assets – i.e. its currency.

Scotlands 18 month timescale looks somewhat less realistic when you look at those numbers!

It doesn’t when you consider that – with the exception of Iceland, which is a village sitting in the middle of fishing rights it didn’t want to share with the EU followed by an economic crisis – the applicant countries were all basket cases with weak institutions and the occasional insurgency. The amount of preparation and transition work that Scotland would have to do to accede to the EU is nothing in comparison to Macedonia or Turkey.

Is the CZ about to apply for Euro membership? Your right I must have been drinking if that’s the case

you mean they have joined the EU but not the Euro zone and they dont have to – it counters your claim . Why is this having to be explained to you?

YS recognises that the €-zone is basically a fudge but then claims bizarrely that this represents something that is more in the interests of Scotland than the alternative

what are you talking about here? they want a union with rUk they do not recommend joining the euro and state they do not have to.
IIRC you made some point about him having no plan B.

Listen mate, you’re clearly in no mood for rational debate – I can see that you’re far too angry for that

And that is rational debate eh rather than a goad 😆

I am very chilled tonight but clearly I’m not going to get to engage in any sort of debate, because you’ll ignore anything you don’t feel like responding to and make odd personal comments instead…

and THM is still largely speaking in tongues. I mean really, can anyone translate this for me? “JL still seems to be missing this is a solid LW position supporting independence.”

On that subject btw,

teamhurtmore – Member

Is the CZ about to apply for Euro membership?

Nope, they’re choosing not to despite having committed to joining, exactly as Scotland would have to- that’s kind of the entire point. And the european council president confirms that adopting the euro is purely an internal matter for the Czech Republic, into which the EU will not interfere. So it is a fine real world example of the EU’s position on making new members joining the euro.

And that is rational debate eh rather than a goad

Well quite a rational comment. Although I can tell that you probably don’t agree.

Obviously not a “debate” though, I don’t think there’s really much point trying for a rational debate. Specially with you throwing in the laughing emoticons for good measure.

Northwind – Member

I am very chilled tonight..

Now that has made me smile 😀

you’ll ignore anything you don’t feel like responding to

Luckily you’re “very chilled” so you won’t be bothered by that.

JL – apparently some Westminster labour stooge, rather than a democratically elected and worthy leader of S labour
LW – apparently a political persuasion that is united in favour of a yes vote

Both tosh obviously, but spouted with enough regularity that I though abbreviations would suffice. You may recall the rather fanciful hypothesis posted about 10 pages back, that support for/against was spilt along political lines and that there was near unanimity among LW (left wing) politicians in favour.

Nah, I don’t remember that tbh, I ignore most of the drivel. So is it Johann Lamont then? Even knowing what the abbreviations are supposed to mean, I still can’t really see how it all fits into the subject at hand, bit random?

ernie_lynch – Member

Luckily you’re “very chilled” so you won’t be bothered by that.

Bothered? Course not. Nonplussed, I suppose, since apparently posting dry facts makes me look angry. Is it my accent?

Specially with you throwing in the laughing emoticons for good measure.

I would find it helpful if you did the same , it took me a while to realise.