Implications for the rest of us if Scotland votes yes

[butchersapron]

I'm just trying to be clear.

"trained wanker", is not in my professional vocabulary, admittedly...

(and again, these definitive positions that you refer to are from what you pretend them to be...)

Why does writing like a wanker lead you to think that you're being clear. You've twisted like a caught out bullshitter all day. Because you were clear originally. You said what you meant. Then when what you said was shown to be rubbish and you had to integrate what i was saying into your own view you started writing this wanker talk again. This deliberate attempt at professional exclusionary language - the one designed to re-confer authority. The authority i so cruelly took from you.

 

[free spirit]

I wouldn't want an independent scotland in the EU. So i couldn't give two shits about working out how it could stay in or regain membership.

No wonder that I couldn't work out. I'd naively assumed that you were in some way supportive of the arguments made in the articles you linked to when countering Diamonds assertions, not necessarily about what you'd want to happen, but about what you expect would happen.

 

[butchersapron]

No wonder that I couldn't work out. I'd naively assumed that you were in some way supportive of the arguments made in the articles you linked to when countering Diamonds assertions, not necessarily about what you'd want to happen, but about what you expect would happen.

His assertions were that no one could challenge his nana measuring authority to declare what would happen in the event of an independent scotland and its relations with the EU. Even his boss and his bosses mates agreed that no one could possibly disagree. So i posted some high level disagreement. That was 12 hours ago. No reply on the content as yet. Nothing.

 

[butchersapron]

No wonder that I couldn't work out. I'd naively assumed that you were in some way supportive of the arguments made in the articles you linked to when countering Diamonds assertions, not necessarily about what you'd want to happen, but about what you expect would happen.

I don't think anyone's climbed everest btw. My boss and some blokes who he knows agree. Have you an integral argument that contradicts this? Btw i have seen black narcissus so this is my specialist area.

 

[free spirit]

Diamond, or anyone else who is interested in discussing it....

Would you agree that the main political stumbling blocks to getting an agreement would be

1 - The assignment of voting rights at the European Council, which would either require rUK or Scotland to accept less voting rights than equivalently sized countries, or for the rest of the EU to accept an increase in overall voting rights to the combined Scotland and rUk so that each would have the same voting rights as equivalent countries.

2 - The issue of the UK rebate, which I understand to be a major bone of contention in the EU, and one that other big countries are likely to want to resolve as quid pro quo for sorting out the scottish devolution mess.

3 - The fear among other countries of it setting precedents that might lead to further areas / countries claiming independence.

4 - EMU membership opt out, and Euro opt out.

Salmond has also made noises about wanting opt outs to allow scotland to put living wage criteria into public contracts, but I suspect that one will end up being dropped as it probably is against WTO rules anyway (which I'd also want to get rid of).

anything other key stumbling blocks?

 

[free spirit]

I don't think anyone's climbed everest btw. My boss and some blokes who he knows agree. Have you an integral argument that contradicts this? Btw i have seen black narcissus so this is my specialist area.

I get that you have a problem with people claiming expertise in a specialist area, but it's a bit boring tbh.

I found it useful to know Diamond's field of expertise, it helped to put his input into context.

 

[Diamond]

Diamond, or anyone else who is interested in discussing it....

Would you agree that the main political stumbling blocks to getting an agreement would be

1 - The assignment of voting rights at the European Council, which would either require rUK or Scotland to accept less voting rights than equivalently sized countries, or for the rest of the EU to accept an increase in overall voting rights to the combined Scotland and rUk so that each would have the same voting rights as equivalent countries.

2 - The issue of the UK rebate, which I understand to be a major bone of contention in the EU, and one that other big countries are likely to want to resolve as quid pro quo for sorting out the scottish devolution mess.

3 - The fear among other countries of it setting precedents that might lead to further areas / countries claiming independence.

4 - EMU membership opt out, and Euro opt out.

Salmond has also made noises about wanting opt outs to allow scotland to put living wage criteria into public contracts, but I suspect that one will end up being dropped as it probably is against WTO rules anyway (which I'd also want to get rid of).

anything other key stumbling blocks?

On point 1, no idea, that will come down to traditional Brussels horse trading, although iScotland would be in a tremendously weak position vis a vis voting rights as a matter of course.

On point 2, the best outcome for iScotland would a be rebate proportioned according to population. This, I would suggest, would be a red-line in Brussels negotiations, though I could be wrong.

On point 3, this is the big one - to set a precedent for secession and readmission on any basis (be it fast track, or as seems likely through the normal process of admission) would be anathema. Not to flog the horse too hard - integration, not disintegration is the whole point of the EU.

On point 4, I can't see any viable way for admission to the EU without Euro membership.

 

[Diamond]

Why does writing like a wanker lead you to think that you're being clear. You've twisted like a caught out bullshitter all day. Because you were clear originally. You said what you meant. Then when what you said was shown to be rubbish and you had to integrate what i was saying into your own view you started writing this wanker talk again. This deliberate attempt at professional exclusionary language - the one designed to re-confer authority. The authority i so cruelly took from you.

Writing like a "wanker".

I'm pretty sure that you have used the same terms that I have but which you took unusual offence to...

Again, I ask, what do you think will happen?

 

[Diamond]

His assertions were that no one could challenge his nana measuring authority to declare what would happen in the event of an independent scotland and its relations with the EU. Even his boss and his bosses mates agreed that no one could possibly disagree. So i posted some high level disagreement. That was 12 hours ago. No reply on the content as yet. Nothing.

The bananas again (missed that)...

Seriously?

 

[Diamond]

You do understand the difference between product regulation and the destruction of barriers to trade, butchers?

 

[newbie]

Diamond, or anyone else who is interested in discussing it....

Would you agree that the main political stumbling blocks to getting an agreement would be

1 - The assignment of voting rights at the European Council, which would either require rUK or Scotland to accept less voting rights than equivalently sized countries, or for the rest of the EU to accept an increase in overall voting rights to the combined Scotland and rUk so that each would have the same voting rights as equivalent countries.

2 - The issue of the UK rebate, which I understand to be a major bone of contention in the EU, and one that other big countries are likely to want to resolve as quid pro quo for sorting out the scottish devolution mess.

3 - The fear among other countries of it setting precedents that might lead to further areas / countries claiming independence.

4 - EMU membership opt out, and Euro opt out.

Salmond has also made noises about wanting opt outs to allow scotland to put living wage criteria into public contracts, but I suspect that one will end up being dropped as it probably is against WTO rules anyway (which I'd also want to get rid of).

anything other key stumbling blocks?

Schengen.

tbh though listing possible sticking points could go on all day, not that that matters, we've got a bit less than 24 hours before this round of bickering ends and the next round can begin.

Anyway, the list will resolve itself with each of the fingers in the EU pie asking "what's in it for me?". All of those fingers will notice with interest that there's no Scottish foreign office with a diplomatic staff ready and able to deal with all of them simultaneously, and that it will take some while to set one up and equip it with even preparatory powers to negotiate. So they'll content themselves in the meantime with making life difficult for the UK so that when the time comes rUK can be cut down to size.

 

[weltweit]

There should be a thread:

Implications for the rest of us if Scotland votes No

 

[newbie]

... meanwhile the UK diplomatic effort will want to ensure no-one questions whether rUK should keep its seat on the Security Council. Swapping the UK seat for an EU seat is a huge prize for 26 of the other 27, leaving France in a problematic position.

 

[newbie]

There should be a thread:

Implications for the rest of us if Scotland votes No

I almost started one alongside this, but thought it would die after .c said "nothing will change" in post 2.

 

[frogwoman]

nah, if Scotland votes no nothing's gonna be the same again either.

 

[likesfish]

... meanwhile the UK diplomatic effort will want to ensure no-one questions whether rUK should keep its seat on the Security Council. Swapping the UK seat for an EU seat is a huge prize for 26 of the other 27, leaving France in a problematic position.

We has the nukes hence we keep the seat along with france and th ability to go annoy anyone else on the planet.

 

[Diamond]

We has the nukes hence we keep the seat along with france and th ability to go annoy anyone else on the planet.

Yep, while they're keen on certainty and continuity in the EU, the UN is rather more keen on it altogether, especially when backed up with a nuclear arsenal.

 

[Diamond]

Schengen.

tbh though listing possible sticking points could go on all day, not that that matters, we've got a bit less than 24 hours before this round of bickering ends and the next round can begin.

Anyway, the list will resolve itself with each of the fingers in the EU pie asking "what's in it for me?". All of those fingers will notice with interest that there's no Scottish foreign office with a diplomatic staff ready and able to deal with all of them simultaneously, and that it will take some while to set one up and equip it with even preparatory powers to negotiate. So they'll content themselves in the meantime with making life difficult for the UK so that when the time comes rUK can be cut down to size.

This is a good point - how large are iScotland's negotiating teams going to be to deal with exiting two unions in conjunction and then negotiating (i) a readmission to the EU and (ii) a currency union with rUK?

It will be a mammoth task.

Perhaps the "yes" camp thinks that they have some right to use the UK's Brussels machine on the first one, but that would be pretty tendentious at best and one would hope that they have a pretty good independent team briefed and ready to go right now, this morning.

 

[frogwoman]

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...ireland-unionists-says-academic-30592093.html

 

[newbie]

who knows, I've not seen it discussed anywhere much. Some part of the UK diplomatic staff (& civil service as a whole) must be of Scottish origin, and of them, some will probably see the opportunity to jump from filing clerk to ambassador rather quickly, so they'll sign up to iS. Which will have the effect of weakening the rUK machine and providing some sort of foetal iSFO. But putting the rest of that in place, legislatively, organisationally and politically will obviously take time and involve getting stuff wrong. Then they have to find, equip and staff consular buildings in every capital in the world, with particular emphasis on the European capitals for immediate bilateral negotiation.

That's got to be in place and operating reasonably seamlessly before they become a country, but it's a necessary precondition of negotiating with each of the EU countries and institutions. Obviously that's their problem, and this thread is about us, people who aren't intending to make our future in iScotland. From our pov the UK diplomatic leverage will be weakened a bit, and there will be vultures circling looking for anything they can get.

 

[killer b]

This is a good point - how large are iScotland's negotiating teams going to be to deal with exiting two unions in conjunction and then negotiating (i) a readmission to the EU and (ii) a currency union with rUK?

It will be a mammoth task.

Perhaps the "yes" camp thinks that they have some right to use the UK's Brussels machine on the first one, but that would be pretty tendentious at best and one would hope that they have a pretty good independent team briefed and ready to go right now, this morning.

I don't imagine they'll have thought of that.

 

[newbie]

Yep, while they're keen on certainty and continuity in the EU, the UN is rather more keen on it altogether, especially when backed up with a nuclear arsenal.

for sure, but there's plenty of powerful players around the world who'd like to break the strongest bond on the security council, which is that between the US and UK. I can't see many countries with memories of Iraq not thinking an EU seat would be preferable to a UK one. How much that might translate into practical politics is pure guesswork.

 

[Diamond]

who knows, I've not seen it discussed anywhere much. Some part of the UK diplomatic staff (& civil service as a whole) must be of Scottish origin, and of them, some will probably see the opportunity to jump from filing clerk to ambassador rather quickly, so they'll sign up to iS. Which will have the effect of weakening the rUK machine and providing some sort of foetal iSFO. But putting the rest of that in place, legislatively, organisationally and politically will obviously take time and involve getting stuff wrong. Then they have to find, equip and staff consular buildings in every capital in the world, with particular emphasis on the European capitals for immediate bilateral negotiation.

That's got to be in place and operating reasonably seamlessly before they become a country, but it's a necessary precondition of negotiating with each of the EU countries and institutions. Obviously that's their problem, and this thread is about us, people who aren't intending to make our future in iScotland. From our pov the UK diplomatic leverage will be weakened a bit, and there will be vultures circling looking for anything they can get.

Maybe, but my bet is that they'll instruct external counsel, and, if they have deep enough pockets, seek out one of the American firms in Brussels (provided that they aren't conflicted) who are prepared to put their people through the wringer, day in day out.

White & Case and Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton would be the go-to-guys on this one IMO.

[Slaughter and May would be the obvious choice but they are almost certainly conflicted given their dealings with HMG]

 

[Diamond]

I can imagine that it's going to be chaos in quite a few firms' offices in Brussels this morning, actually...

Preparing for the beauty parade of their lives at the drop of a hat...

 

[newbie]

Is that what independence looks like, representation by American corporations?

 

[cesare]

It would be quite amusing (in the event if a yes) if Scotland don't jump through the expected immediate hoops.

 

[newbie]

knowing nothing I've just glanced at White & Case. They don't have offices in every European capital. Or in Scotland. So even if they are better placed than a proper diplomatic service (doubtful, their people are presumably busy already) they can't hit the ground running either.

 

[ska invita]

i'm curious what people think about the "even if its a No Britain will change forever" line - feels overly optimistic to me
yes theres a window of opportunity to get greater regional devolution back on the agenda but theres no reason why overall the genie wont go back in the bottle and things will remain much as they are
ive heard commentators pushing the line that its the notion that people are fed up with the lack of choice since new labour onwards, never mind before, that the situation cant continue...except it really can...
what do you reckon?

 

[dennisr]

i'm curious what people think about the "even if its a No Britain will change forever" line - feels overly optimistic to me

I guess that view is based on the likely nearness of the vote - if the yes's loose by only a coupel of percent...

 

[Diamond]

knowing nothing I've just glanced at White & Case. They don't have offices in every European capital. Or in Scotland. So even if they are better placed than a proper diplomatic service (doubtful, their people are presumably busy already) they can't hit the ground running either.

They're good, very good indeed.

They have Ian Forrester QC as a partner. He is an exceptional lawyer. Also, interestingly, he is qualified in Scotland, England and Wales, Brussels, and New York.

They also have some other outstanding lawyers, including James Killick, who is a genuinely intimidating guy to deal with.