Effect of Scottish Independence Vote

Archi_Bald

zagubov wrote: »

It works fine for Luxembourg, whose banking assets are 16x the size of their GDP.

It didn't work for Iceland and Cyprus.

zerog

Can someone explain whether the proposal is for Scotland to leave the UK, or whether it is for Scotland and EWNI to split into 2 countries, with sources, and if this distinction means anything in practice?

bigheadxx

rpc wrote: »

You seem to have marked off quite a bit of international waters (hint - all of the EEZ except for the 12 nmi territorial waters is international waters).

It probably is advantageous for NATO to accept iScotland. But there will be more than one factor to consider and the balance of that may not be what Scotland wants. It isn't all about "Stop the Ruskies" any more. They are in the Partnership for Peace, after all

Would iScotland get Rockall? I suppose so.

If they did get Rockall there is no guarantee to getting a claim on its seabed resources. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/30/who-owns-rockall-legal-history-hancock

Given the fact that the UK is in discussion with three other countries about its claim, UK sovereignty has not been recognised by any other state and UNCLOS declaration of 1982 stipulates that an EEZ would not apply, Scotland would have a hard job annexing the islet let alone defending a claim.

The best it could do would be to allow the UK to continue discussions on its behalf.

zagubov

lvader wrote: »

if it's on youtube it must be right!

Ah! I doubt you'd have said that if you'd watched it!:rotfl:

zerog wrote: »

Can someone explain whether the proposal is for Scotland to leave the UK, or whether it is for Scotland and EWNI to split into 2 countries, with sources, and if this distinction means anything in practice?

I'd be surprised if there's definitive sources anywhere.
Scotland aims to be an independent country and
The international community insists that at least one country must be a continuing one. The Westminster government insisits it will be running the continuing fragment the rUK.

The second one (in this case Scotland) may be new or may also be a continuing one.
I don't know how this is decided. There are advantages to both in terms of membership of organisations, continuity of debt etc.

Archi_Bald wrote: »

It didn't work for Iceland and Cyprus.

How long have they had banking as a major part of their economies like Scotland and luxembourg have?

planteria

zagubov wrote: »

How long have they had banking as a major part of their economies like Scotland and luxembourg have?

a fair question. Switzerland, Luxembourg, why not Scotland? i think Scotland could do well outside of the UK and EU. i'm not sure how being a very left-leaning country quite sits with being a country with a disproportionately high reliance on financial services, which are capitalist by definition, but good luck if that is how things work out.

linking back to the original question...[still just the single post from laser707;)] it will be interesting to see whether a Scotland leaving the UK can retain the custom of the English.

zagubov

planteria wrote: »

a fair question. Switzerland, Luxembourg, why not Scotland? i think Scotland could do well outside of the UK and EU. i'm not sure how being a very left-leaning country quite sits with being a country with a disproportionately high reliance on financial services, which are capitalist by definition, but good luck if that is how things work out.

linking back to the original question...[still just the single post from laser707;)] it will be interesting to see whether a Scotland leaving the UK can retain the custom of the English.

Depends what kind of a regulatory system Scotland brings in. I can't imagine they'd allow a repeat of the previous malarky the banks were up to.

Thrugelmir

Like North Sea oil, there's a decline in the value of financial services. Banking is moving away from an international to a domestic bias. Issue for Scotland is that a different currency will pose an exchange risk for UK customers.

planteria

zagubov wrote: »

Depends what kind of a regulatory system Scotland brings in. I can't imagine they'd allow a repeat of the previous malarky the banks were up to.

maybe not. and it will be interesting to see what currency Scotland winds up with, and which countries have customers who feel inclined to use Scotland for their corporate or personal banking. perhaps the breakaway will cause much more of the divide to be recognised South of the border too, with an increased desire of Englishmen to stash their cash in England from this year onwards.

Thrugelmir

maybe not. and it will be interesting to see what currency Scotland winds up with, and which countries have customers who feel inclined to use Scotland for their corporate or personal banking. perhaps the breakaway will cause much more of the divide to be recognised South of the border too, with an increased desire of Englishmen to stash their cash in England from this year onwards.

I can envisage "finance" becoming increasingly regional and local. An indication can be found in the fact that building societies are expanding their mortgage lending while the big banks are in decline.

planteria

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I can envisage "finance" becoming increasingly regional and local. An indication can be found in the fact that building societies are expanding their mortgage lending while the big banks are in decline.

we're into a different subject here...but there is a school of thought that 'the big banks' don't want the mortgages too much:) we are in the bizarre situation of the EU 'forcing' our biggest lender to reduce it's market share, don't forget.

my mortgage is with Barclays. when i remortgage i will certainly consider Building Societies. im a member of Scottish Building Society. but they won't bet getting my mortgage;)