Scottish Referendum question(s)

Fretwired

UnclePsychosis said:

Fretwired;332195" said:

One question that's not been debated is nationality. A yes vote will mean separate Scottish passports and border controls between England and Scotland. .

What, like between Northern Ireland and the Republic? No border controls there.

Or between Germany and Netherlands? No border controls there either.

Or like the border between non-EU member Switzerland and EU-member France? No border controls there either.

The only reason to put border posts between Scotland and England would be some kind of weird sense of spite.

The Republic of Ireland is part of the EU. There are no border controls between EU countries. Switzerland is not an EU member but is a member of the Schengen Area (an area consisting of most countries on the European continent, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Iceland. However, it does not include the UK or Ireland). It is doubtful that Scotland will be a full EU member from day one nor a member of the Schengen Area. I merely pose the question as Westminster may be forced to have border controls under EU rules. I wonder why nobody has debated this ... I don't know the answer ..

From the BBC website:

The suggestion that border controls might be needed in the event of an independent Scotland is also contested.

The first minister argues an independent Scotland would not need border checks as it would continue to be a member of the current Common Travel area with the rest of the UK, Republic of Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.

Home Secretary Theresa May has said she envisages "some sort of border check", while Ed Miliband says a Westminster Labour government would consider building border posts if Scotland voted for independence.

The concern is that immigration rules for both sides of the border would not be the same, so people might travel to Scotland to move south.

There is also some uncertainty around the Schengen Agreement.

Neither the UK nor the Republic of Ireland is part of the Agreement - which allows passport-free travel between many other EU countries. However, all new EU member states are now required to join, so if an independent Scotland has to re-join the EU as a new member - as some suggest it would - it may have to sign up.

As the UK has no intention of joining the Schengen area, border controls between Scotland and the UK might be needed to meet EU rules protecting the security of the Schengen area.

Immigration often ranks second only to the economy in UK voters' concerns, with recent Ipsos-MORI polls showing it is now their top priority.

And the MP for Berwick-upon-Tweed, Sir Alan Beith, has also weighed in, arguing that he expects there to be border controls in his constituency if Scotland votes for independence.

The Liberal Democrat claimed his seat, which is on the border with Scotland, could become a place of "currency exchange kiosks and smugglers".

Fretwired

UnclePsychosis said:

The Swiss have their own currency and central bank. I keep going back to this I know but the whole thing really is about money, everything is tie to that, the defence budget, the North Sea oil, the pound. How will Scotland control it's own destiny in terms of its financial future or are people really am just winging it with the best intentions?[/quote]

Scotland maybe better off going with the Euro which it will end up with when it joins the EU.

RaymondLin

UnclePsychosis said:

The theory is that the pound is already controlled from London and Scotland has bugger all influence at the BoE anyway. We wouldn't really be much worse off in that respect but at least we could choose where our money goes. Using the pound may not be "true independence" in the literal sense but surely independence means running your country the way you want, not running your country in isolation. France, Germany and the Netherlands and all the other countries in the Euro don't have "true" independence either, but they're all more independent than Scotland currently is.

Regardless, most of the Yes voters I know support the idea of a short term use of the pound (five to ten years) as a stepping stone to floating our own currency.

And yes, there are also a lot of people who are aware that the whole enterprise may involve a degree of "winging it" but who believe that it's fundamentally better to make your own decisions, and that Scotland is a vibrant, well educated country which is well placed to meet the inevitable challenges that will arise. Whether you accept that is really the fundamental question.

Take Ireland, for example. Ireland's independence hasn't been straightforward and they've had tough times (and good). However, a "let's return to London rule" referendum would get laughed out of town.

I haven't yet decided which way to vote (I keep swinging from one belief to the other). I can't help but worry that if we do go independent the remaining UK would make our lives difficult, not for any practical reasons but purely out of spite for us having the cheek to leave!

It's hard to compare Scotland to Germany....Germany's GDP dwarf Scotland by miles and I think France just went back into recession?

 

As for Ireland, they went bankkrupt? or had to be bailed out by Brussels.

 

This is why the Scots want to stick with the pound, which goes back to what i am saying, have your cake and eat it.  Which brings me to the question that if the pound is such a security blanket, what is the reason for leaving (or plan to) in the first place?

 

 

UnclePsychosis

Fretwired;332352" said:

UnclePsychosis said:

Fretwired;332195" said:One question that's not been debated is nationality. A yes vote will mean separate Scottish passports and border controls between England and Scotland. .

What, like between Northern Ireland and the Republic? No border controls there.



Or between Germany and Netherlands? No border controls there either.



Or like the border between non-EU member Switzerland and EU-member France? No border controls there either.



The only reason to put border posts between Scotland and England would be some kind of weird sense of spite.












The Republic of Ireland is part of the EU. There are no border controls between EU countries. Switzerland is not an EU member but is a member of the Schengen Area (an area consisting of most countries on the European continent, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Iceland. However, it does not include the UK or Ireland). It is doubtful that Scotland will be a full EU member from day one nor a member of the Schengen Area. I merely pose the question as Westminster may be forced to have border controls under EU rules. I wonder why nobody has debated this ... I don't know the answer ..



From the BBC website:



The suggestion that border controls might be needed in the event of an independent Scotland is also contested.



The first minister argues an independent Scotland would not need border checks as it would continue to be a member of the current Common Travel area with the rest of the UK, Republic of Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.



Home Secretary Theresa May has said she envisages "some sort of border check", while Ed Miliband says a Westminster Labour government would consider building border posts if Scotland voted for independence.



The concern is that immigration rules for both sides of the border would not be the same, so people might travel to Scotland to move south.



There is also some uncertainty around the Schengen Agreement.



Neither the UK nor the Republic of Ireland is part of the Agreement - which allows passport-free travel between many other EU countries. However, all new EU member states are now required to join, so if an independent Scotland has to re-join the EU as a new member - as some suggest it would - it may have to sign up.



As the UK has no intention of joining the Schengen area, border controls between Scotland and the UK might be needed to meet EU rules protecting the security of the Schengen area.



Immigration often ranks second only to the economy in UK voters' concerns, with recent Ipsos-MORI polls showing it is now their top priority.



And the MP for Berwick-upon-Tweed, Sir Alan Beith, has also weighed in, arguing that he expects there to be border controls in his constituency if Scotland votes for independence.



The Liberal Democrat claimed his seat, which is on the border with Scotland, could become a place of "currency exchange kiosks and smugglers".

There are no border posts between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Given that Irish Republicans have a history of committing terrorist acts in the UK, and that Ireland actually uses a different currency, but that there are no border controls, there is absolutely no sane explanation as to why on earth a peaceful separation between Scotland, which will be using sterling in some form regardless, and the rUK would require border posts.

Better Together just weaken their realistic arguments with this tripe.

UnclePsychosis

Fretwired;332363" said:

UnclePsychosis said:



The Swiss have their own currency and central bank. I keep going back to this I know but the whole thing really is about money, everything is tie to that, the defence budget, the North Sea oil, the pound. How will Scotland control it's own destiny in terms of its financial future or are people really am just winging it with the best intentions?

Scotland maybe better off going with the Euro which it will end up with when it joins the EU.[/quote]

The current EU president has already said that Scotland will be a "special case" that will be treated differently to new members because we're already in the club.

We'd only know 100% for sure on Europe if the UK would officially ask the question, but they won't because they're thriving on uncertainty.

RaymondLin

UnclePsychosis said:

The current EU president has already said that Scotland will be a "special case" that will be treated differently to new members because we're already in the club.

We'd only know 100% for sure on Europe if the UK would officially ask the question, but they won't because they're thriving on uncertainty.

Nothing stopping Alex Salmond to come out official to say Plan A is with the Pound, Plan B is the Euro though.

 

So why not come out and just say it?  Because he will alienate a lot of people that's why.  I would argue that he is thriving on the uncertainty more

chrispy108

It's not that simple though is it.

The current uncontrolled borders between all the countries you've listed as examples are based on negotiations between the countries involved and the EU. (Ie, non EU countries in the Schengen area - Norway and Switzerland, and EU countries not in it - Ireland and the UK). The default EU position is new members must be in the Schengen area. There is no guarantee Scotland could negotiate not to be.

It's just another example of the uncertainty that independence would bring. As someone else said, there will be a certain amount of 'winging it'. It is totally unrealistic to expect the UK/EU to hypothetically negotiate every last detail before the vote. It's too much work, and it depends on so many external factors that could change between now and when independence starts.

I just can't help but think both sides have lost the plot somewhat, it should be about identify and beliefs of how you feel and what you want your country to be, not a few quid or a bit of faff during the transition.

chrispy108

Oh, and comparing a newly independent Scotland, to Switzerland, created as an independent state to allow international passage through the mountains a thousand years ago, is just silly. They're clearly not like for like comparisons.

UnclePsychosis

RaymondLin;332407" said:

UnclePsychosis said:





The current EU president has already said that Scotland will be a "special case" that will be treated differently to new members because we're already in the club.



We'd only know 100% for Si ure on Europe if the UK would officially ask the question, but they won't because they're thriving on uncertainty.









  I would argue that he is thriving on the uncertainty more

LOL, if you say so.

Fretwired

UnclePsychosis said:

Fretwired;332363" said:

UnclePsychosis said:



The Swiss have their own currency and central bank. I keep going back to this I know but the whole thing really is about money, everything is tie to that, the defence budget, the North Sea oil, the pound. How will Scotland control it's own destiny in terms of its financial future or are people really am just winging it with the best intentions?

Scotland maybe better off going with the Euro which it will end up with when it joins the EU.[/quote]

The current EU president has already said that Scotland will be a "special case" that will be treated differently to new members because we're already in the club.

We'd only know 100% for sure on Europe if the UK would officially ask the question, but they won't because they're thriving on uncertainty.

Junker did say that Scotland would be a special case and I'm sure Scotland will join the EU. But it will take time - about 5 years. And to join the EU Scotland would need to create a Scottish central bank [not a big issue] and the wouldn't be allowed to use the Bank of England which effectively rules out using the pound long term. Scotland would have to join the Euro zone.

RaymondLin

UnclePsychosis said:

 

LOL, if you say so.

Would you vote Yes if he join the Euro? Would all the people you know vote Yes if he comes out and say Plan B is the Euro?

ICBM

RaymondLin said:

The Swiss have their own currency and central bank. I keep going back to this I know but the whole thing really is about money, everything is tie to that, the defence budget, the North Sea oil, the pound. How will Scotland control it's own destiny in terms of its financial future or are people really am just winging it with the best intentions?

UnclePsychosis said:

The theory is that the pound is already controlled from London and Scotland has bugger all influence at the BoE anyway. We wouldn't really be much worse off in that respect but at least we could choose where our money goes. Using the pound may not be "true independence" in the literal sense but surely independence means running your country the way you want, not running your country in isolation. France, Germany and the Netherlands and all the other countries in the Euro don't have "true" independence either, but they're all more independent than Scotland currently is.

Regardless, most of the Yes voters I know support the idea of a short term use of the pound (five to ten years) as a stepping stone to floating our own currency.

I agree. I'm not sure why Salmond has not gone for an independent Scottish pound as 'Plan A' - probably linked to either the UK pound as Eire did for a long time, or linked to the Euro as Denmark does, and just to use the GB pound for a transitional period.

UnclePsychosis

chrispy108;332424" said:

I just can't help but think both sides have lost the plot somewhat, it should be about identify and beliefs of how you feel and what you want your country to be, not a few quid or a bit of faff during the transition.

If you get out and speak to Yes supporters - not the professional politicians, the actual grass roots supporters - this is exactly what the whole process is based on. All of the most interesting debates and most persuasive arguments have come from people outwith party politics.

Salmond has to talk finance and transition during these awful debates because if he just got up there and said "vote Yes because you think Scotland is a country in its own right, we should run our own affairs and forge our own relationship with the rest of the world" he'd just get accused of being vague and having no plan, just sentiment.

Fretwired

ICBM said:

I agree. I'm not sure why Salmond has not gone for an independent Scottish pound as 'Plan A' - probably linked to either the UK pound as Eire did for a long time, or linked to the Euro as Denmark does, and just to use the GB pound for a transitional period.

I'm pretty sure Salmond will get the UK pound in some form for the short term. There will be lots of horse trading if there's a yes vote and he could easily extend the length of time Trident could stay in Scotland [saving the rUK tax payer billions and saving Scottish jobs] and do a deal on Scotland's share of the debt for a deal on the pound. Joining the Euro would be low risk for Scotland with the oil reserves and economy.

John_P

@chrispy108 ; wisdom.

I really don't understand why the no campaign keep harping on about plan B...   Salmond gave several options last night and although I don't know enough about hte detailed economics to know how realistic and good the the people of Scotland they might be, it feels very much like a red herring the no supporter will keep repeating over and over, ignoring what he said, hoping it will stick.
For me the bigger issues about national identity and a sense of who you are as a nation are more important in the longer term.

chrispy108

Interesting @UnclePsychosis, as that isn't really being shown down here, we just get the party line.

I agree that obviously some effort needs to be put into logistics by the Yes campaign, but I still wonder if they'd be better off publicly admitting that it's a bit of an adventure, but it's hardly like the country would instantly fall apart is it?

ICBM

Fretwired said:

I'm pretty sure Salmond will get the UK pound in some form for the short term. There will be lots of horse trading if there's a yes vote and he could easily extend the length of time Trident could stay in Scotland [saving the rUK tax payer billions and saving Scottish jobs] and do a deal on Scotland's share of the debt for a deal on the pound. Joining the Euro would be low risk for Scotland with the oil reserves and economy.

At last I can completely agree with you .

I'm not scared of joining the Euro, if that looks like the best final outcome - I'd probably rather not, and as Denmark and others have shown you don't need to, but it wouldn't bother me. I don't want Trident, but I would accept keeping it a bit longer if necessary - although not having it replaced with the next generation of submarines.

I doubt 2016 is a realistic date for actual independence even in the event of a Yes vote anyway.

UnclePsychosis said:

Salmond has to talk finance and transition during these awful debates because if he just got up there and said "vote Yes because you think Scotland is a country in its own right, we should run our own affairs and forge our own relationship with the rest of the world" he'd just get accused of being vague and having no plan, just sentiment.

In the end that is why I will be voting yes, nothing more and nothing less. The rest is all just details.

RaymondLin

John_P said:

@chrispy108 ; wisdom.

I really don't understand why the no campaign keep harping on about plan B...   Salmond gave several options last night and although I don't know enough about hte detailed economics to know how realistic and good the the people of Scotland they might be, it feels very much like a red herring the no supporter will keep repeating over and over, ignoring what he said, hoping it will stick.
For me the bigger issues about national identity and a sense of who you are as a nation are more important in the longer term.

That is voting with your heart and not your head.

 

National identity won't give you jobs and money.  Who you are is who you are, nothing a politician do or say can change that.  You are Scottish and whether you are a part of the United Kingdom or not.  No one will or can tell you otherwise.

UnclePsychosis

chrispy108;332449" said:

Interesting @UnclePsychosis, as that isn't really being shown down here, we just get the party line.

I agree that obviously some effort needs to be put into logistics by the Yes campaign, but I still wonder if they'd be better off publicly admitting that it's a bit of an adventure, but it's hardly like the country would instantly fall apart is it?

That's genuinely the position taken by many. In an era of soundbite politics though it will never be the official position.

I know I keep repeating this, but it's genuinely not all about Salmond. It's not even all about the SNP. If it were it would have been over before it started. I've never, ever voted SNP but I'm considering Yes.

Check out the likes of National Collective, Wings Over Scotland, Labour For Indy, BellaCaledonia, Common Weal, Scot Goes Pop and Radical Independence. Also, Patrick Harvie the leader of the Scottish Green party is for me a far more eloquent and likable advocate of Yes than Salmond is.

PS I don't necessarily endorse the views of any or all of those groups. Some of them I actively dislike and disagree with. Some of them put me off independence. I'm just trying to make the point that the Yes campaign is about far more than Salmond and the SNP and explain why accusing Yes supporters of being bewitched by Salmond is just nonsense.

PolarityMan

John_P said:

@chrispy108 ; wisdom.


For me the bigger issues about national identity and a sense of who you are as a nation are more important in the longer term.

If the goal is self determination then financial independence is surely a pre-requisite. Every option presented except an independent currency leaves Scotland with less control of their finances not more.