Will you vote for independence?

[JTG]

No, but I'd be interested to see not just the knee jerk, but also the next one once ideas have been allowed to brew. I think different people will react differently. It's hard to tell what the trend might be.

Yeah, was just thinking along the same lines

 

[weepiper]

I'm looking forward to the next couple of polls with interest too.

Radical Independence on twitter tells me they're having a 'mass canvas' in Easterhouse in a couple of weeks. I can't imagine anyone from the No campaign bothering to go into places like Easterhouse and find out what people there think about the indyref.

 

[Quartz]

They may do but I can't imagine the EU or UK being happy about Scotland being permanently excluded and both parties (particularly the EU) could put considerable pressure on Spain not to. However if the UK were to threaten to veto as a bargaining chip until a deal on the debt was sorted I am not sure it would be such a problem.

Could the rUK veto membership of EFTA?

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

Sorry, I'd missed this. Yes, it could. However, there would be pressure from France and Germany for energy security reasons to allow Scottish oil and gas reserves back into the EU.

I don't understand this point. The North Sea oil and gas producers will sell to France and Germany anyway, I don't see what being in the EU has to do with it. Does it offer some level of supply protection by treaty or something?

 

[Quartz]

I've spent the day unpacking my parents' house and the dust has laid me too low to engage my brain. I'll read the links tomorrow.

 

[gosub]

Could the rUK veto membership of EFTA?

not a member so very unlikely

 

[danny la rouge]

I don't understand this point. The North Sea oil and gas producers will sell to France and Germany anyway, I don't see what being in the EU has to do with it. Does it offer some level of supply protection by treaty or something?

The EU is heavily reliant on gas and oil imports. The vast majority of these are from Russia, which is building a gas cartel. The EU’s energy dependency rate causes concern because of the shortfall between production and consumption; the EU’s increasing dependency on energy imports from non-member countries. In 2007, the EU was importing 82% of its oil and 57% of its gas.

Expelling Scotland, an EU oil and gas producer, means that dependency rate is worsened. A higher percentage of oil and gas needs to be imported. This strengthens Russia’s hand, even if Scotland doesn’t join the Russian gas cartel.

The point of the EU is that it is a single market. Barriers to trade, such as trade tariffs (import and export taxes), import quotas, and so on are eliminated, and so there is a free trade area for goods. The EU has a common external tariff; the same duties and tariffs etc apply to all imports into the EU, no matter which country is importing them. A similar agreement exists for the Customs Union of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia.

If some of those goods are no longer inside the EU but outside it, then not only are the single market trading advantages lost, but the overall energy dependency balance is tipped further to the advantage of the Russian Customs Union. Even if Scotland doesn’t join the Russian Customs Union.

Germany is EU’s biggest net energy importer, but France, despite its large nuclear sector, is also high in the table of oil and gas importers. Although the euro crisis has put strain on the Franco-German relationship, they are still major drivers of the EU.

The EU energy security policy concentrates on how to produce more energy within the single market, and necessarily focuses on nuclear and renewable, since further gas and oil reserves cannot be manufactured. (Russia also has a strong hand in solid coal exports). Expelling an internal gas and oil supply will multiply the renewables or nuclear generation needed, and given the proportion, the effect would be greater than if the EU had a lower dependency rate. Since renewable are already struggling to achieve quotas, and nuclear is politically sensitive, this makes expelling an oil and gas supply even more critical.

In short, it will be a strong driver for Germany and France to want to keep Scotland in the EU.

 

[danny la rouge]

Could the rUK veto membership of EFTA?

No, the UK left EFTA to join the EEC in 1973.

 

[Quartz]

Here's a round up of websites and blogs relevant to the currency debate.

All good stuff and interesting reads. I disagree with the BLEU example as Belgium is small and Luxembourg tiny, BTW.

 

[danny la rouge]

All good stuff and interesting reads. I disagree with the BLEU example as Belgium is small and Luxembourg tiny, BTW.

What are you disagreeing about, though? (For those who haven't read the links, it's Box 7.03 from the Fiscal Commission Working Group - Macroeconomic Framework link).

The context is that it's an example given during a section headed "Frameworks of successful Monetary Unions". The point of interest is the "considerable disparity of size (Belgium's population is roughly twenty times Luxembourg's)". The relevance being that rUK is 10 times the size of Scotland. "Whilst both countries were in a monetary union, there were significant differences in the particular spending and tax policies adopted", it says.

Belgium is twice the size of Scotland, with a population of about 11 million people. In GDP per capita, it is ranked 18th in the world by the IMF. The UK comes 23rd.

I'd say it was at least relevant to the discussion.

 

[MikeMcc]

Should have two more options in he poll for those living elsewhere in the UK that are denied the vote but could vote either yes or no. Personaly I would vote no, I think it's un-necessary and potentially disasterous (more for Scotland than the rest of the UK).

 

[danny la rouge]

Should have two more options in he poll for those living elsewhere in the UK that are denied the vote but could vote either yes or no. Personaly I would vote no, I think it's un-necessary and potentially disasterous (more for Scotland than the rest of the UK).

ska invita , when he started the thread over 2 years ago, specified "Please only vote here if you'll get a vote in the real thing..." to take a measure of how those of us with a vote would vote, I suppose.

 

[geminisnake]

Should have two more options in he poll for those living elsewhere in the UK that are denied the vote but could vote either yes or no. Personaly I would vote no, I think it's un-necessary and potentially disasterous (more for Scotland than the rest of the UK).

You are entitled to your opinion but I am glad you don't get a vote

 

[gosub]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/16/independent-scotland-extremely-difficult-join-eu

 

[gosub]

Just been thinking about the we've got oil, Germany and France will make Spain buckle counter danny la rouge put forward. Is access to oil trumps the will of a sovereign state a route people want to go down. I mean anybody can play that game.
Though to go back to Germany who aren't particularly happy that their own previous experience of Riechmarks means they don't want to let go of the kill switch on money printing has already led to effigies of a Nazi Merkel being burned in Med coast EU . Is she she really going to further destabilize the EU for access to asset that won't be hers?

 

[danny la rouge]

Not sure I follow that.

On Spain, though, remember that if Scottish waters leave the Eu , then effectively the fisheries policy ends. Spanish fishing fleets would kick up quite a fuss about that.

 

[danny la rouge]

I reiterate, though: I don't think Scotland should join the Eu. My point is only that it isn't straightforwardly obvious that we'd be trumped by Spain due to Spain's autonomous regions.

 

[gosub]

Not sure I follow that.

On Spain, though, remember that if Scottish waters leave the Eu , then effectively the fisheries policy ends. Spanish fishing fleets would kick up quite a fuss about that.

As long the big guy has access to oil who gives a fuck what the the little guy thinks, is a fucking dangerous argument, that is fractal

Spain's position is more complicated than what its fishing fleet do, and quite well known

 

[andysays]

There are clearly arguments on both sides as to whether the various EU member states would want an independent Scotland in or out, and we could argue those out here.

But the very fact that the argument is going on here suggests that none of those engaging in it seriously accepts the position which the SNP has been attempting to put, which is that a newly independent Scotland would simply assume membership of the EU, without any question and on whatever terms the people of Scotland (or more likely the SNP) wanted.

From the Guardian piece that gosub linked to

Scotland's Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon branded Barroso's stance "preposterous". Sturgeon said: "This is a preposterous assertion - as the ridiculous comparison with Kosovo illustrates. Scotland is already in the EU and has been for 40 years.

Whether the specific comparison with Kosovo is helpful or not (and I don't read Barroso's comment as saying that the two situations are directly comperable), the fact remains that the various existing EU members will each have their own opinions, and they may not simply fall in line with what the SNP or the Scottish electorate want.

It's dishonest (and also risky) for anyone to pretend otherwise.

 

[gosub]

I reiterate, though: I don't think Scotland should join the Eu. My point is only that it isn't straightforwardly obvious that we'd be trumped by Spain due to Spain's autonomous regions.

The independence position you advocate makes far more sensethan the SNP one (at least to me) Theirs is however the majority position within Yes, so that's the one that will be argued against. The alternative, is well, how much time to do you think opponents should spend explaining that making Condalissa Rice President for life or whatever is a bad idea. Answer v little until it loks like it might stick

 

[danny la rouge]

As long the big guy has access to oil who gives a fuck what the the little guy thinks, is a fucking dangerous argument, that is fractal

What? Is that supposed to be a condensation of my argument. It's nothing like what I was saying.

Further, Spain is itself a huge energy importer, and as much a part of the energy security policy as France and Germany. More than France, as it happens.

The point is that there are more concerns at play than just "Spain has autonomous regions". Including for Spain.

 

[gosub]

i am not the only one saying Spain will block this, its all the way up to Barrosso, and entry is by unanimous agreement of the European Council -the regions don't decide. You seem to think oil will top this. I infer my own conclusions

 

[danny la rouge]

i am not the only one saying Spain will block this,

I know: it's been being rolled out for years. I don't doubt it's a factor. I just think it's simplistic to say that would be the end of it. Even for Spain. Energy and fisheries would play a role. As would the Democratic will of the Scottish people.

Were Salmond to negotiate entry to EFTA at the same time, tunes would quickly change.

 

[gosub]

 

[danny la rouge]

What's that meant to mean? (I remind you that I don't want Scotland to join the EU. I'd be quite satisfied were we to be denied entry).

My point is this: keeping on saying that Spain has autonomous regions and will veto Scottish membership is not proof that they actually will. (And it has been said since the 80s, when the SNP first came up with the "Independence In Europe" policy).

Given Spain's energy needs and fisheries needs, they are going to be faced with the same realities as the rest of the EU. Will Spain really want to expel waters their fishing fleets fish, or oil and gas their people and industries use. And what of the pressure they'll come under on the energy front from France, Germany, Italy etc?

The case is far from made just by repeating Spain would veto.

 

[RedDragon]

Given the double-barrelled blast this week, if I were an undecided I'd be swinging towards the yes vote.

Is Spain the only other country with regions wanting to break free?

 

[danny la rouge]

And just to show what always happens: one expert says no, the next says something different:

Sir David Edward says Jose Manuel Barroso 'wrong' on EU

A senior legal expert has challenged the opinion of the European Commission president over the status of an independent Scotland in the EU.

But Professor Sir David Edward, a former European Court judge, believes that Scotland and the rest of the UK would be in a comparable position.

There would be no need for a new accession treaty, he argued.

Instead, negotiations prior to independence would result in amended EU treaties.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20757450

(Furthmore, Jose Manuel Barroso's term in office expires in October this year. 16 months before the proposed Scottish independence day).

 

[danny la rouge]

Given the double-barrelled blast this week, if I were an undecided I'd be swinging towards the yes vote.

That has been the general feeling I've been picking up. But that's only anecdotal, and may not be Scotland-wide.

Is Spain the only other country with regions wanting to break free?

No, there are many, with differing degrees of public support. Barroso's eye may well be on the Azores as he speaks (he's Portuguese).

 

[Pickman's model]

That has been the general feeling I've been picking up. But that's only anecdotal, and may not be Scotland-wide.

No, there are many, with differing degrees of public support. Barroso's eye may well be on the Azores as he speaks (he's Portuguese).

this would be the azores with no significant group calling for independence?

 

[gosub]

What's that meant to mean? (I remind you that I don't want Scotland to join the EU. I'd be quite satisfied were we to be denied entry).

My point is this: keeping on saying that Spain has autonomous regions and will veto Scottish membership is not proof that they actually will. (And it has been said since the 80s, when the SNP first came up with the "Independence In Europe" policy).

Given Spain's energy needs and fisheries needs, they are going to be faced with the same realities as the rest of the EU. Will Spain really want to expel waters their fishing fleets fish, or oil and gas their people and industries use. And what of the pressure they'll come under on the energy front from France, Germany, Italy etc?

The case is far from made just by repeating Spain would veto.

It was went to mean that you are now arguing that in the event of Scots govenrment doing things that they aren't planing on then a position might emerge that might enable them to get in the position that they want. Only you are being definitive. and mentioned a tune. I could have posted the journey by small faces "if tommorrow was today it would be yesterday.."

For Spain submission leads to non existence that's a big deal, and if the oil is such a game changer why is the UK even allowing a referendum.