An Independent Scotland?

Moadib said:
Whether it does or not, that was the ruling. Any debates can be taken up with the European Journal of International Law - they cited the ruling, coming after a long legal study. The theoretical map they cited is below

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bm6d9rfy19477s0/iPXZSOElxQ#lh:null-UK_Sea_Rights_EJIL.jpg
Click to expand...


You're using the median line to illustrate your point which came about as a result of the treaty signed between the UK and Norway and that could potentially change if independence goes ahead, possibly in Scotland's favour. It was put in place to define the UK continental shelf and as such the islands that were part of the UK. A change in status for Scotland's does not mean that the islands of Shetland and Orkney would remain in that position should they decide, unlikely though it is, that they wanted independence.

You seem to be saying that its ok for Scotland to be an independent nation but not anyone else.

I work with lots of Scottish guys and I understand the passion that some of them have for independence but a lot of them have the attitude that everything they want will come about because they want it. It will never be that simple and compromises will have to be made by both sides.

As far as I'm concerned if its a yes vote then the remaining part of the UK should try and keep as close a tie with Scotland as possible because I'm sure that it will benefit everyone.
 
Last edited:
Nothing missed. The story is that they'll be offered a choice to remain in Scotland, or to seek independence of their own. Third option might be to remain in the UK. Throughout that process they will have the right to a 12 mile limit. Given the importance of fishing, that alone could be a disaster, but as with the Scotland discussion it's all theoretical, and even further down the road.
 
Gaz J said:
You seem to be saying that its ok for Scotland to be an independent nation but not anyone else.
Click to expand...
if you believe so, I assure you that you don't know me at all. I support greater localism and self-determination for everyone. Ultimately that's the way the world is likely to go, as globalism peaks along with the decline in nett energy per person. Whatever we do to advance the process is good. I'd have no issue with Orkney, Shetland or my neighbour being independent, if that's what they consider best.
 
Steep said:
So in the event of a yes vote, Scotland would have only those 129 MSPs, Westminster would no longer be a governing body in Scotland so the 650 MPs who currently have a say in Scottish affairs would not any more. As I said, a whole strata of government we would be saying goodbye to.
Click to expand...

What about Europe? Do we need more MSPs there? How many MEPs are going to have say or should that be dictate to Scotland in Scottish affairs? They already have rights on fishing as has been discussed. We might say goodbye to a layer of governance but we will be saying a big hello to the bloated fiasco that is the European Parliament.

That is of course on the fanciful presumption we are allowed to automatically join.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
Moadib said:
This is the same scaremongering that was raked up in the seventies debate (look up Anthony Crosland, Bernhard Ingham on google) - "Scotland under attack from the North!!!". They called it the Shetland card. And people say there's no fear mongering from Westminster....

The 12 mile limit comes from a European ruling. Shetland and Orkney would be consider ed island enclaves of a foreign state (i.e. England (or Norway...?)), and as such permitted a claim to 12 mile territorial waters (plus perhaps an access corridor between). Scotland (as an independent nation) would have the rights to full territorial waters.

Against that is Blair's movement of the territorial waters between Scotland and England (no doubt in anticipation of this debate). That shifted "England's" waters far north, and would claim a lot the territory. Indeed if you stand on the beach at St. Andrews and look east, after a certain distance you are looking at English waters, not Scottish. But the Shetland thing is raked up from the seventies to again cast doubts, and drive a wedge between people (as politicians have been doing since time immemorial - divide and rule, recorded in Roman times, and goes back earlier than that).
Click to expand...

Fear and scaremongering? Sorry speak for yourself, we are Scots (and like the rest of our courageous cousins in the UK against either invasion, Nazism and Communism) we don't do fear; Cybernats know your history!

Just for clarity is this blog what you mean?
http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/12/12/the-shetland-card/

I understand the islanders are voting for independence. Do you have the link that defines them as becoming an enclave - it would be good to read it.

What is the wedge being driven by Westminister? The blog states
Whether the playing of the Shetland card by Westminster and its acolytes had any effect on the eventual outcome of the devolution referendum is hard to say. But it may well have done. When the votes were counted in March 1979 Shetland and the Orkneys were the only parts of the Highlands and Islands to vote against a devolved Scottish parliament. And they both voted `no’ by thumping majorities (5,466 to 2020 in the case of Shetland: 5439 to 2104 in the case of Orkney). No doubt Tavish Scott and Liam McArthur are hoping for a repeat performance in September next year.
 
Steep said:
Allen, the reason the referendum date was set for September is because it's a huge thing. There has to be plenty of time for everyone to get to grips with the issues involved because this is not a vote for the next four years government, it's a vote for a lifetime!
Click to expand...


All this time planning for Independence, the vote in September and yet they still don't have a clue about currency or Europe.

Alex Salmond, the man without a plan, the dope without a hope!
 
Moadib said:
if you believe so, I assure you that you don't know me at all. I support greater localism and self-determination for everyone. Ultimately that's the way the world is likely to go, as globalism peaks along with the decline in nett energy per person. Whatever we do to advance the process is good. I'd have no issue with Orkney, Shetland or my neighbour being independent, if that's what they consider best.
Click to expand...

You seemed to be quite clear in your post that the islands would be no better than an enclave of another nation.

If that's what they did consider best then a redrawing of the median line would throw a serious spanner into the finances of Scotland. Probably better to get them on board with you now.
 
AndyB1976 said:
All this time planning for Independence, the vote in September and yet they still don't have a clue about currency or Europe.

Alex Salmond, the man without a plan, the dope without a hope!
Click to expand...

Personal attacks do nothing for your case.

As for your first points I'm getting tired of pointing out the flaws in those, if you're interested, go read the many responses to them earlier in this thread.
 
On the point about the Northern and Western Islands 'demanding' a referendum of their own, they're NOT. They are being asked to sign a petition to send to the Scottish Parliament requesting one but so far not many have signed (some 800 out of 70,000) and the leader of the Orkney Islands Council has said it's just mischief making. So lets put that red herring to bed until something actually occurs.
 
andy0306 said:
They speak a different language we have different accents
Click to expand...
Not so! Belgian French and the French of northern France are almost identical. It's much more of an accent change than a language.

By contrast, my grandfather had to learn English at school. Ciamar a tha thu?.....

I don't have much Gaelic, but I speak a fair bit of 'doric' when I want to. Although this is classed as a dialect, it is totally incomprehensible to those in the south. Possibly even south of Aberdeenshire!!

I'd venture that a Belgian would understand almost any French, but an Englishman wouldn't understand any Gaelic and only a little of Doric.

In other words,........ gawa min, ye divnae ken fit yer spearin aboot.;)
 
FourRingCircus said:
Not so! Belgian French and the French of northern France are almost identical. It's much more of an accent change than a language.

By contrast, my grandfather had to learn English at school. Ciamar a tha thu?.....

I don't have much Gaelic, but I speak a fair bit of 'doric' when I want to. Although this is classed as a dialect, it is totally incomprehensible to those in the south. Possibly even south of Aberdeenshire!!
Click to expand...

Yer a barkit Tory quine:eek:
 
Aye, an thon loon stickin up twa fingers (wi his heid in a dingy orifice) is ane o thon feel gipes fae Kincorth!
 
I really hope that there would be a currency union John but from reading that link its going to be a "you can have this if we can have that" type of deal if/when it happens.

I think its time everyone realised that no one will get everything they want without some compromises along the way.
 
FourRingCircus said:
Back on topic, here's some news........

Government minister at the heart of the No campaign (allegedly) says there will be a currency union........

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

Still think we need PlanB, C & D? :whistle:
Click to expand...
The point is both the people who are likely to make the decision, ed balls or George Osborne, together with the person who will advise them, Mark carney, have said no. I don't know about plan b,c, or d, seems to me you have yet to come up with a reasonable plan a. Furthermore the failure of the SNP to properly address these issues is undermining the earnest hopes of those that want an independent Scotland.
 
FourRingCircus said:
Back on topic, here's some news........

Government minister at the heart of the No campaign (allegedly) says there will be a currency union........

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

Still think we need PlanB, C & D? :whistle:
Click to expand...

<sarcasm>Of course not, the misreported briefing of an unnamed minister clearly tilts the balance in favour of the Yes campaign. Its now a done deal. It goes without saying that this briefing is of far more substance and importance than anything Osborne/Balls/Alexander have to say. After all, who are they in relation to this unnamed minister?</sarcasm>

Really, this is little more than grasping at straws by the Yes campaign. They will be quoting pro-independence graffiti on toilet walls next...

Regards...
 
Steven I think you'll find that is a Guardian article, it didn't come from anyone in either camp.
 
Steep said:
Steven I think you'll find that is a Guardian article, it didn't come from anyone in either camp.
Click to expand...

Sturgeon is using the article as proof that Obsorne/Balls/Alexander are wrong. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

Regards...
 
FourRingCircus said:
Back on topic, here's some news........

Government minister at the heart of the No campaign (allegedly) says there will be a currency union........

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

Still think we need PlanB, C & D? :whistle:
Click to expand...

Osborne and Alexander issued a joint statement this afternoon that seems to somewhat spoil the Yes camp's delight at the alleged "ministerial" comment yesterday.

Osborne and Alexander said:

"There will not be a currency union in the event of independence.

The only way to keep the UK pound is to stay in the UK.

"Walking out of the UK means walking out of the UK pound. A currency union will not work because it would not be in Scotland's interests and would not be in the UK's interests."
Click to expand...
 
AndyB1976 said:
All this time planning for Independence, the vote in September and yet they still don't have a clue about currency or Europe.

Alex Salmond, the man without a plan, the dope without a hope!
Click to expand...

you are assuming that the SNP will be in power again - its not going to happen overnight but that's so typical of the NO people. A vote for independence is not a vote for the SNP, its a vote to change our country for the better. the no's just can't seem to grasp that idea
 
Dave1 said:
Osborne and Alexander issued a joint statement this afternoon that seems to somewhat spoil the Yes camp's delight at the alleged "ministerial" comment yesterday.
Click to expand...
There's a huge difference between a press conference 'statement' and dropping a clanger in private.

The 'word on the street' is that it's either Danny Alexander or Gideon Osborne himself who have let it slip!
icon_eek.gif


They (No Campaign) shot themselves in the foot with the 'No Currency Union' stance. Only the economically illiterate now accept that this is the only sensible way forward post a Yes vote. They are now trying to un-shoot the bullet. Using the pound is actually more certain than Salmond leading negotiations on Sept 19th!

Danny is in a lot of trouble. He is going to be left without a seat in the next UK election and there's a rumour that he's ready to jump ship to the Yes camp. Let's face it, a politician is nothing if he's not self-serving first. Either he moves to Yes and keeps a position in his homeland, or he continues to suck-up to Osbourne and is left with the option of moving south for a slot in a safe-seat to continue as a Westminster rent-boy.......
 
FourRingCircus said:
The 'word on the street' is that it's either Danny Alexander or Gideon Osborne himself who have let it slip!
icon_eek.gif
.
Click to expand...

Wishful thinking on Yes Street I think, if it was anyone of importance the paper would have published the name, the fact it's probably some unknown junior minister (if it was even said) is why it's just an anonymous "minister".
 
The Guardian isn't the Daily Mail and the source quoted is one of the UK Ministers at the centre of the 'negotiations'......
 
I think it was a mistake to go with the statement without first confirming the source and it's veracity, however politicians will be politicians and Nicola Sturgeon is no different to any other in that respect. In the long run it makes no difference who says what now, post a yes vote is when these decisions will be made, anything said before is just political bumper cars.
 
FourRingCircus said:
The Guardian isn't the Daily Mail and the source quoted is one of the UK Ministers at the centre of the 'negotiations'......
Click to expand...

If it makes you happy to believe it, go ahead.

Common sense however, would point to it being a junior minister/ministerial aide/ministerial PPS, who isn't experienced enough to know not to make unguarded comments (or more likely, the Guardian is making it up just to stir the pot, an "unidentified minister" can't really sue or complain to the IPCC for incorrect attribution).
 
Dave1 said:
If it makes you happy to believe it, go ahead.

Common sense however, would point to it being a junior minister/ministerial aide/ministerial PPS, who isn't experienced enough to know not to make unguarded comments (or more likely, the Guardian is making it up just to stir the pot, an "unidentified minister" can't really sue or complain to the IPCC for incorrect attribution).
Click to expand...

Exactly, the pound will not be available to Scotland ............ end of !
 
arclight said:
Exactly, the pound will not be available to Scotland ............ end of !
Click to expand...
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Sorry Doug, but do you have any comprehension of the nonsense your statement makes?

Firstly, here's what we use and what people in the south won't accept:

scottish_hundred.jpg


Currency union aside, nobody can stop us using this currency. END OF! :rolleyes:
 
FourRingCircus said:
Firstly, here's what we use and what people in the south won't accept:

Currency union aside, nobody can stop us using this currency. END OF! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Of course you can use the Pound, just like Zimbabwe use the US$, there is no way a country can force another country to stop using their currency, but it will not be a formalised currency union and the BofE will not be the lender of last resort to Scotland.

It's a pretty bad place to be, financially speaking, though.
 
Dave1 said:
It's a pretty bad place to be, financially speaking, though.
Click to expand...
As is loosing £1.5 Trillion in oil reserves from your currency, whilst wrecking your balance of payments overnight......... Sterling would be at the bottom of the international tradeable currencies and the only option would be interest rate hikes to prevent meltdown. How many English mortages could cope with interest rates >5-10%?

Besides, if the three Westminster stooges continue with their bluster on the 19th September, you might find seven days notice to park-up a few nuclear subs in the Thames with nowhere else to go!;)

Still think there will be 'no negotiations'?..... Virtually all the international economic expert commentary agrees - only Osborne/Alexander & Balls are keeping their heads in a dark orifice with their failed attempt at fearing the Scots. So much for the no pre-negotiations clause in the Edinburgh Agreement signed by Cameron.:rolleyes:
 
FourRingCircus said:
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Sorry Doug, but do you have any comprehension of the nonsense your statement makes?

Firstly, here's what we use and what people in the south won't accept:

scottish_hundred.jpg


Currency union aside, nobody can stop us using this currency. END OF! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That is not 100 pounds sterling. It is the equivalent of a promissory note that agrees to pay the bearer on demand 100 pounds sterling. It even says so on the note itself which proves it is not 100 pounds sterling.

Regards...
 
FourRingCircus said:
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Sorry Doug, but do you have any comprehension of the nonsense your statement makes?

Firstly, here's what we use and what people in the south won't accept:

scottish_hundred.jpg


Currency union aside, nobody can stop us using this currency. END OF! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The people of Scotland could use dried deer poo with currency markings carved into if they wished. Pound Punt Pint. the name is immaterial.

At this point what has been made clear by consensus of the 3 maim parties is that the pound sterling will not be available as legal tender in Scotland as it's currency. Effectively the Government of Scotland can create it's own pound and print as much of it as it wants (suicidal strategy but has happened). However, unless it is recognised by the traders on the world markets as a reliable currency underwritten by trust and substance (eg The German Government) it is pretty bits of paper.

Scottish bank notes are used in England and I have, over the years, used them many times. My bank (RBS) swap then for UK bank notes without a fuss when needed.

So will that be the same when (hopefully) Scotland leaves the union? Given the statements by the leaders of the political parties in power at Westminster now, it is the true unknown.

All paper currency is based on trust and the Governor of the Bank of England contracts that trust on "his" bank notes.

The current producers of the Scottish notes were required, historically, to lodge the equivalent amounts of 'English' bank notes in trust so that the Scottish notes had the 'trust" element needed to male the legal tender requirement real.

After the vote and the machinations that a successful Yes vote will bring, it can be predicted that chaos in the market must be avoided so Day 1 nothing changes, Day 364, however, could be a different matter. The remainder of the rUK will have gone through a general election and. given the potential UKIP spoiler vote, the dynamic could change.

Would I care to predict what 'may' happen, or be certain what will happen, as a should do? Not a chance..

As a whole now, the UK is a net importer of goods, including food, and payment for those goods is in Sterling or US Dollars

By using a siege mentality and not aligning the UK pound with a new Scottish pound then IMHO there is a huge risk for BOTH sides of the border to find imported goods only being supplied when a stable currency ($US) is used for payment. The ramifications of which could destabilise the "pound".

So could my musings really happen? Well it's another possibility but who really knows. If, however, we move to Scotland as planned, we will have a stash of Greenbacka for any eventuality BUT if all goes well DisneyWorld here we come (2017? 2018? 2019?,..…)

There is no value in Westminster destabilising the currency of an independent Scotland.

S
 
Last edited:
Finste said:
That is not 100 pounds sterling. It is the equivalent of a promissory note that agrees to pay the bearer on demand 100 pounds sterling. It even says so on the note itself which proves it is not 100 pounds sterling.
Click to expand...
:confused:

So, please tell me what's different with this note (aside from the amount):

british_old-banknote-50-pounds-sterling-obverse.jpg


"I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of Fifty Pounds Sterling"

Using your logic(?), That is not 50 pounds sterling. It is the equivalent of a promissory note that agrees to pay the bearer on demand 50 pounds sterling. It even says so on the note itself which proves it is not 50 pounds sterling.
 
FourRingCircus said:
:confused:

So, please tell me what's different with this note (aside from the amount):

british_old-banknote-50-pounds-sterling-obverse.jpg


"I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of Fifty Pounds Sterling"

Using your logic(?), That is not 50 pounds sterling. It is the equivalent of a promissory note that agrees to pay the bearer on demand 50 pounds sterling. It even says so on the note itself which proves it is not 50 pounds sterling.
Click to expand...

Where does it say Sterling on that note? It says "I promise to pay the bearer on demand Fifty pounds". That word "Sterling" makes all the difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_the_pound_sterling#Scotland_and_Northern_Ireland

and, just in case that isn't authoritative enough for you

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/about/s_ni_faq.aspx

Clear enough now?

Regards...
 
Last edited:
Steep said:
The Bank Notes (Scotland) Act was passed in 1922, three Scottish banks retain the right to issue their own sterling banknotes in Scotland.

Also Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_the_pound_sterling
Click to expand...

or from the same source

Scottish and Northern Irish banknotes are unusual, firstly because they are issued by retail banks, not central banks, and secondly, as they are not legal tender anywhere in the UK – not even in Scotland or Northern Ireland – they are in fact promissory notes

Regards...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top