Effect of Scottish Independence Vote

TCA

planteria wrote: »

there is no more chance of 'remaining in' than there is 'getting in', whatever Alex Salmond tells you.

TCA wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/08/independent-scotland-would-be-ejected-from-eu-mariano-rajoy

"The territorial integrity of Spain is a key issue for Rajoy's rightwing government, and his renewed comments on Scotland are a proxy for his views on the potential breakaway of Catalonia. "[Scotland] would have to join the queue [to enter the EU]," he said. But Rajoy would not commit himself on whether he would use Spain's veto, as an EU member country, to prevent it from rejoining. In the case of Scotland voting for independence "we would be in a different story. Let's not get ahead of ourselves," he said.

Covering his bases in case of a yes vote, Rajoy was also keen to argue that Scots and Catalans do not have a shared history or trajectory. "The cases of Scotland and Catalonia are very different."

When you do find proof of a veto from anyone, just one, please post it here.

DCodd

TCA wrote: »

Precise scenario upon request from a Member State. Emphasis on the latter. It's pretty clear. So you're saying Westminster (or even Holyrood) are incapable of articulating the situation should Scotland vote Yes? Don't think so.



.

Have you read the White Paper? That's evidence enough that "articulating the sitution" is way beyond them.

ColdIron

It was inevitable with the upcoming IPO

Lloyds to domicile TSB in England as Scottish fears mount

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10650071/Lloyds-to-domicile-TSB-in-England-as-Scottish-fears-mount.html

TCA

DCodd wrote: »

Have you read the White Paper? That's evidence enough that "articulating the sitution" is way beyond them.

Thanks for another constructive comment. Regardless of what you think of the White Paper, for many it's refreshing for someone to come up with a vision of how things might be. Large leap of faith granted. And yet again I'll say that it needn't be the SNP in power in an independent Scotland.

The status quo isn't an option any more and the unionists are now scrambling to offer scraps of increased powers to appease those tempted to vote Yes but wary of full independence. Comments like yours above in tandem with the unionist politicians' consistent responses of "that won't work", "you can't have that", etc....ad nauseum, are getting extremely tedious. Especially given they have no vision (or blueprint, articulate or otherwise) of their own to offer, just "the UK is wonderful and we're better together" platitudes.

DCodd

TCA wrote: »

Thanks for another constructive comment. Regardless of what you think of the White Paper, for many it's refreshing for someone to come up with a vision of how things might be. Large leap of faith granted. And yet again I'll say that it needn't be the SNP in power in an independent Scotland.

.

But can't you see that it is exactly for this reason why there can be no "precise scenario" provided.

What is Scotland going to do about currency?
What will be the relationship with rUK?
Will Scotland accept the Euro?
Etc etc

How can the EU give an answer if the potential Scottish Government in waiting can't give a straight answer to those and many more questions.

TCA

DCodd wrote: »

But can't you see that it is exactly for this reason why there can be no "precise scenario" provided.

What is Scotland going to do about currency?
What will be the relationship with rUK?
Will Scotland accept the Euro?
Etc etc

How can the EU give an answer if the potential Scottish Government in waiting can't give a straight answer to those and many more questions.

Scotland would have to theoretically accept the Euro at a future date of at least 2 years down the line, and then satisfy the euro convergence criteria, if it chose to accept the euro. Sweden still don't use it (and Scotland wouldn't have to either) and the likes of Romania (who joined in 2007) still don't meet the criteria. So the EU won't be making demands that bar entry to membership on that front and I would doubt it's bothered about the relationship with rUK given all parties have signed up to the Edinburgh Agreement, which paves the way for a negotiated settlement in the event of a Yes vote.

The question to be asked of the EU is, in the event of a Yes vote on 18th September, what would be the process for admitting an independent Scotland to EU membership?

I think you're over-reading the meaning of precise scenario. The fact that the UK government has now accepted the will of the Scottish people and will negotiate a consensus for secession, makes it pretty clear what the issues would be.

Namely, what is the process for application for a state seceding from an existing EU member state?

That question could be asked by the UK government at any time.

jamesd

TCA wrote: »

This is all about applying from outside the EU (as a non member) versus Salmond's "fast-track" approach of continued membership and meeting the criteria from within.

That fast-track breaches international law.

TCA wrote: »

Rajoy is opining that an independent Scotland would no longer be part of the EU and therefore could not avail of EU Treaty laws. The SNP position is that there is no provision in EU Treaty laws for a secession state to be expelled ... No mention of any veto.

Rajoy is correct. There is no need for a provision in EU Treaty laws because the expulsion is automatic under international law.

What governs is the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties. As a separating part of a state it automatically ceases to be a party to all of the treaties that its former parent was part of.

Scotland would automatically cease to be a member of the EU, with no action required by any EU member state to cause that to happen. To admit Scotland would then take a unanimous vote of the existing treaty participants, with any participant able to exercise a veto.

The fast-track might serve to fool some voters into thinking that it could happen, though.

If an independent Scotland wanted to stay within the EU without a gap it would need to arrange to meet the new EU member requirements in the time between a yes vote and separation. One of those is adopting the Euro as the currency.

TCA wrote: »

Sweden still don't use it (and Scotland wouldn't have to either)

The treaty provisions that allowed member states not to use the Euro no longer exist. Scotland would have to comply with the current requirements, which do not provide for a currency opt-out like those of the UK, Sweden and Czech Republic. Scotland would be required to adopt the Euro or persuade all EU members to create a special exemption for it.

Mr Salmond is in the unfortunate position of having made two mutually exclusive promises: EU membership which mandates the Euro and retaining the Pound which blocks EU membership. The main question is whether he'll be able to fool enough potential yes voters or whether they will realise this before the vote.

atush

Gosh that means they are out of Nato too?

jamesd

Yes, it would automatically case to be party to the NATO treaties, just like every other treaty the UK is party to. I assume it would seek admission.

Alternatively, Salmond could try to argue that Scotland is currently a colony of Britain and Northern Ireland, so it would automatically have a right to be a party to the treaties - and would be automatically bound by them whether it wanted to be or not. There are certain historic problems with that claim, though, so it doesn't really seem like a credible claim to make.

moneyfoolish

TCA wrote: »

Thanks for another constructive comment. Regardless of what you think of the White Paper, for many it's refreshing for someone to come up with a vision of how things might be. Large leap of faith granted. And yet again I'll say that it needn't be the SNP in power in an independent Scotland.

The status quo isn't an option any more and the unionists are now scrambling to offer scraps of increased powers to appease those tempted to vote Yes but wary of full independence. Comments like yours above in tandem with the unionist politicians' consistent responses of "that won't work", "you can't have that", etc....ad nauseum, are getting extremely tedious. Especially given they have no vision (or blueprint, articulate or otherwise) of their own to offer, just "the UK is wonderful and we're better together" platitudes.

I just think it's very sad that so many people in Scotland don't consider themselves to be British. I'm English but consider myself British first and English second. I would want the union to remain whether it had any economic benefits for the English or not. From what I've read in the newspapers and heard on radio and TV, I'm pretty sure that Scotland will not be able to use the pound in the event of seperation and neither will it have any chance of joining the EU for some considerable time. It seems to be yet another case of a politician pushing a policy for the purpose of giving himself the power he could otherwise never attain.