New Currency for a new Country

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

CLAPTON wrote: »

many of these problems would disappear if canny Scots put all their savings in RoUK banks and let their own banking sector disappear.

The Scottish banking system will disappear on 19th September in the event of a Yes vote.......capital flight...the only people saying "Thanks a million" will be the City

Buzby

CLAPTON wrote: »

actually, Scottish pounds aren't legal tender in England and no-one has to accept them

And boy are some of us looking forward to doing the same with a Bank of England notes down the line after independence if no CU is agreed.

:A:rotfl:

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

It's political brinkmanship and let me tell you , both sides are at it.



We've been over this time and again.
How can you decide on what will happen until the negotiations have concluded?
This is why there is a time period post referendum to negotiate the details.
I would have preferred for this to have happened earlier, but again, back to brinkmanship, there's a reason why better together want to cloud this issue in order to create confusion and doubt.



Actually I think it's the contrary, it's the better together that doesn't want the issues clarified, because they know that outcome would convince more to go independent.

If it was as you inferred, the better together should have been screaming to conclude the negotiations in the last 2-3 years to slam shut the door on Independence. but alas, that's not the case.

I think the last televised debate showed that the audience was apathetic to bettertogethers one trick pony attack on currency.
The audience realise there will be a viable option in the end



That is not going to happen, because I am not a politician and will not be part of the negotiating team.

It's interesting that Alasdair Darling and Alastair Carmichael have both agreed they would join the Yes negotiating team to argue for the mandate put forward by the people of Scotland

alex is lying to the Scottish people


UK does not have to discuss any option except currency union: indeed it has absolutely no role in what option Scotland adopts except it has ruled out currency union.


the other option have nothing to do with RoUK: uncle Alex can discuss those honestly with the people of Scotland
instead he lies to them


all three parties have ruled our currency union: maybe this is real, maybe not but uncle alex can discuss the other options except he thinks this may be a vote loser.




I accept you personally have no problem with uncle alex lying to the Scottish people because you don't care about anything other than separation from the English.


There is no clouding of the of the currency option :


ALL THREE PARTY LEADERS HAVE SAID NO CURRENCY UNION


how is that clouding the issue?


yes I know in the double speak that passes for SNP debate anything can mean anything but there is no clouding here except from the SNP

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Whatever currency Scotland finally decides on, we will still be able to run the country effectively.

To paraphrase Clinton "It's the Euro, stupid!"



[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]

Olli Rehn, currently one of the vice-presidents of the European parliament, said yesterday in a letter to HM Treasury that Scotland could not apply for EU membership while informally using the pound sterling because it doesn’t have its own monetary authority and would not have the necessary monetary instruments to prepare for entry to EMU.

[/FONT]

Olli Rehn, a former European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs and the euro, warns a separate Scotland could not join the EU if it adopted sterlingisation

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11070773/Alex-Salmonds-currency-plan-B-incompatible-with-EU.html

Mr Salmond, who has previously admitted that sterlingisation would merely be a stopgap, insisted the former commissioner was “wrong”. However, he refused three times when challenged by the Telegraph to say what currency would be adopted in the long term.

Why does anyone trust Alex Salmond?

Mr Salmond has claimed an independent Scotland would start life in the EU thanks to a fast-tracked membership process that would see the European treaties tweaked to include the new member state.
But Mr Rehn rejected this in his letter, dated today, saying Scotland would be forced to apply using the “normal well-known procedures” and meet all the necessary criteria.
A “core” requirement is that “any candidate country must be committed to the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU)”, he wrote, and applicant states must also have “a competent monetary authority in the form of an independent central bank.”

Ruling out sterlingisation, he said “this simply would not be possible, since that would obviously imply a situation where the candidate country concerned would not have a monetary authority of its own and thus no necessary instruments of the EMU.”

CLAPTON

Buzby wrote: »

And boy are some of us looking forward to doing the same with a Bank of England notes down the line after independence if no CU is agreed.

:A:rotfl:

You must be a YES supporter as most on this board seem to lack any understanding of the currency issues.


But certainly an independent nation might indeed have its own currency and would not accept GB pounds as legal tender.


Whether those canny Scots shop keepers / hoteliers etc would refuse my generous offer to pay in pounds, would be up to them and have nothing to do with pounds being legal tender.

IronWolf

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

It's political brinkmanship and let me tell you , both sides are at it.



We've been over this time and again.
How can you decide on what will happen until the negotiations have concluded?
This is why there is a time period post referendum to negotiate the details.
I would have preferred for this to have happened earlier, but again, back to brinkmanship, there's a reason why better together want to cloud this issue in order to create confusion and doubt.



Actually I think it's the contrary, it's the better together that doesn't want the issues clarified, because they know that outcome would convince more to go independent.

If it was as you inferred, the better together should have been screaming to conclude the negotiations in the last 2-3 years to slam shut the door on Independence. but alas, that's not the case.

I think the last televised debate showed that the audience was apathetic to bettertogethers one trick pony attack on currency.
The audience realise there will be a viable option in the end



That is not going to happen, because I am not a politician and will not be part of the negotiating team.

It's interesting that Alasdair Darling and Alastair Carmichael have both agreed they would join the Yes negotiating team to argue for the mandate put forward by the people of Scotland

The reason the SNP will not move from their position that they will stay in the GBP is that they know the mere hint of not doing so will lead to people moving all their money to England.

There is nothing to stop Scotland using its own currency, in fact I'd say this is probably the best option, but likewise there is nothing to stop people moving their assets to guaranteed GBP or out of Scotland altogether during the negotiating phase, something that would be quite damaging to the country.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

IronWolf wrote: »

The reason the SNP will not move from their position that they will stay in the GBP is that they know the mere hint of not doing so will lead to people moving all their money to England.

It's already happening! This from Goldman Sachs this morning

"Even if the sterling monetary union does not break up in the event of a 'Yes' vote, the threat of a break-up would provide investors with a strong incentive to sell Scottish-based assets, and households with a strong incentive to withdraw deposits from Scottish-based banks."

Sell everything Scottish!

And this from Lloyds

(Reuters) - Lloyds Banking Group is considering having its registered office in London rather than Edinburgh should Scots vote for independence, banking industry sources told Reuters.
Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, has finalised contingency planning ahead of the Sept. 18 vote. The chances of secession have increased with support for Scottish independence rising dramatically in August.
Banking industry sources said Lloyds executives are considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.
Most of Lloyds' senior executives are based at the company's headquarters in London but the bank's registered office, its official legal address, is in Edinburgh, meaning it would be classed as a Scottish bank in the event of independence.
Lloyds has warned that Scottish independence would impact its cost of funding, taxes and compliance costs

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/02/uk-lloyds-scotland-idUKKBN0GX20920140902

"The scale of potential change is currently unclear, but we have contingency plans in place," Lloyds told Reuters on Tuesday in an emailed statement.
"In the event of a 'yes' vote in the referendum, there would be no immediate changes or issues which could affect our business or our customers. There will be a period between the referendum and the implementation of separation, should a 'yes' vote be successful, that we believe is sufficient to take any actions that we believe necessary," Lloyds said.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I've yet to hear an argument of why a prosperous nation of similar size has become defunct on currency issues.

Prosperous?

"Scotland, with a geographic share of oil, raised £53bn in taxes in 2012-13. Yet the state spent a staggering £65.2bn, running up a fiscal deficit of over £12bn, or around £5,000 for each household. Government spending represents just over 50 per cent of Scottish GDP, some 5 percentage points higher than in the rest of the UK. A deficit of that magnitude is not sustainable in the long term"

Seriously, when I read this I think "Off you go then!"

.string.

I think this has been mentioned before elsewhere but one reason that Salmond won't embrace a separate currency is because it would, as has already been admitted some time ago, require a new Scottish Parliamentary election to do that. There is some doubt, I would have thought, that he would win such an election.

So - strategy is

• Ask formally for currency Union
• Haggle for a bit to show you are trying
• Claim the the UK is obstinate and obstructive
• Declare that in that case Scotland will not honour its debts
• Decide that a new currency is needed and start to set it up.

All very predictable and cynical.


But it won't work out quite like that.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

Buzby wrote: »

And boy are some of us looking forward to doing the same with a Bank of England notes down the line after independence if no CU is agreed.

:A:rotfl:

Guess you're looking forward to this then too

Economist. Alas, Mr Salmond, your retort that Scotland could continue to use sterling informally is incredible. In that scenario, all Scottish banks would move their headquarters to the RUK to maintain their access to the Bank of England’s lender-of-last-resort facility and to a strong government backstop. Not only would Scotland lose most of its financial sector: it would be left without either the benefits of euro membership or the ability to control its own currency.