To want to keep my UK passport if Scotland votes YES in the 2014 referendum?

[SittingBull1]

If the majority of people actually voting votes YES in the 2014 referendum, Scotland will leave the UK. As Scots living in Scotland, will my family and I lose our UK passports? Along with a very large number of NO voters, my family and I will want to retain our UK passports, and I'm sure that a huge percentage of the non-voters will also want to keep theirs. I think that the UK government should offer to allow Scots living in Scotland to retain their UK passports. Is that unreasonable?

Is there much Spanish fishing in Scottish waters? Genuine question.

I'll get you the link tomorrow, I'm using my phone now.

Yes, a Scottish delegation would be focused on Scotland, but what are they going to negotiate with? What power will Scotland have when taking part in international negotiations? Is it going to be a bad idea to fall out with Scotland?

^So Salmond is opting for separation? But he's likely to be faced with C&S

I think so. But not having to take on any of the debt might make up for a harder time getting into EU^

Not with you on this

I have no doubts at all that Scotland would be welcomed into the EU. It's a rich country in comparison to some former communist state countries that could be potential applicants. All they need to do is to throw enough money at the EU and they'll be let in. Plus they have the fishing grounds, oil, gas etc to negoiate with.

I'd like to see the country attempt to go it alone. It could be another Norway. Why throw off one set of 'shackles' and immediately replace it with another?

santanalopez there is a lot of Spanish fishing in Scottish waters. The common fisheries policy is hated by the fishing community.

As i said before the eu poses a quandary for an independent Scotland. If we apply for membership they will naturally negotiate a better deal for their existing member states which could mean even worse terms on things like the fisheries policy and you can bet there will be no rebate on agriculture.

Do you think a Tory Govt would be very tempted to hammer Scotland if there is a No vote - reduce the formula etc?

Little risk in doing so with hardly a Tory MP there and no chance of them re-running the vote for a decade or so?

Do you think a Tory Govt would be very tempted to hammer Scotland if there is a No vote - reduce the formula etc

I like to think the best of people, and I don't think the Tory party are deliberately spiteful. They are doing what they genuinely thinks is best in line with their world view. Unfortunately that tends to mean that a lot of their policies may inadvertently hurt Scotland and the rest of the UK

What the Spanish government has said is quite correct. There has to be agreement amongst all EU members if an independent Scotland is to remain part of the EU. It is a treaty requirement that all existing member states agree to allow a new state to join.

This is entirely consistent with the legal advice obtained by the UK government, and also with the advice that the Scottish government obtained from the Lord Advocate. It is only inconsistent with the "advice" the Scottish government got from a retired non-lawyer diplomat.

Salmond, Sturgeon etc have no basis for continuing to claim that Scotland has a right to remain in the EU. It doesn't.

They also have no basis to claim that the correct people to ask is the EC. It is a matter of legal interpretation of treaties, not something in the gift of Brussels bureaucrats.

They have no basis to claim that Scotland would be entitled to use some currency other than the Euro.

Although I doubt that will stop them carrying right on..

wetaugust

An independent Scotland would have less than half of Norway's proven oil reserves. This is yet another matter that Salmond has been a bit less than accurate about.

On a related point: it is common for people to look at Norway and say that Scotland could have built up a similar oil fund had it been independent. I doubt it. It is more likely that the money would have been used up demolishing every last tenement in Glasgow and building lots of shiny tower blocks. And propping up Fairfield. And Upper Clyde Shipbuilders, Ravenscraig, Linwood and the rest of Scotland's crumbling manufacturing base. And on a related point to that, why is Thatcher accused of being anti-Scottish, when she dealt to Scottish manufacturing no differently to manufacturing in the rest of the UK?

SantanaLopez

Speaking as a resident of a small country with a population of 4 million, the answer is that you get buggered about. You have to involve yourself in wars on behalf of your powerful allies. You have to enter into unequal trade treaties. You have to change your laws for their benefit, lowering tariffs and providing their companies with tax breaks. Compared to NZ, where I now live, the UK is comparatively immune to this.

It is true that in the UK, Scotland has no independent voice of its own, but it is wrong to say that it has no voice. It gets it as part of the collective might of the UK.

That is what my concern is Toadinthehole , its all very well saying, we'll negotiate our way into/remaining part of the EU, we'll negotiate a currency union etc. But what are the bargaining chips that they are prepared to give away in order to get those things that we already have.

Just off the top of my head, things like:

• an agreement that Trident continues to be stationed on Scottish soil
• Scotland takes on a per capita share of UK debt
• Scotland provides a share of North Sea oil proceeds
• probably various deals relating to cross-border trade and residency rights.

I have to say that I had thought that Scotland, while having to reapply, would have got membership with no big issues, but it seems that various EU members are sufficiently worried about separatist movements in their own countries to make this far from clear. It only takes one member to say non.

Its a bit of a blooper though, referring to the ECJ instead of the European Commission. Or they could have safely referred to the EU as a whole. Its very novicey, or not accurate enough, as any recent law student has been compelled to study a year's course in EU law for quite a few years now.

Its very novicey

That statement hits the nail on the head for me.

You would have thought that, given all the years of preparation, that Salmond might actually have sounded out the EU re continuing membership before making his pronouncements.

Very amateurish indeed.

Exactly toad! I really understand the domestic poltical gains, but the international ones really worry me.

You would have thought that, given all the years of preparation, that Salmond might actually have sounded out the EU re continuing membership before making his pronouncements

Unfortunately I dont think he can, at least not in any official capacity. As far as I know this needs to be initiated by the member state eg UK.

This is worth a watch

Its Sturgeon vs Carmichael ( when did Michael Moore get given the boot?)

One of the panel made an interesting observation, he reckoned the average Scot wasn't fussed about things like the EU/currency as they were more worried about the immediate impact on them, would it be easier or harder to put food on the table etc.

Scotland can't initiate formal discussions because it isn't a state. None of that stops the Scottish Government from sounding things out at a high diplomatic level informally. They've probably tried and I'm sure if they had a better response we'd have heard it by now.

I notice today that Salmond has produced a letter saying that it is legally possible for Scotland to remain in the EU. OF course - provided that all existing members agree. It also turns out that Salmond's aides got it via Newsnet Scotland from a Brussels bureaucrat.

Remind me - where's that legal opinion again?

Itsallgoingtobefine

I mentioned earlier that if you live in a small country, you get buggered about diplomatically. If your small country has its own currency, it bobs around like a cork and so do prices as a result. What currency Scotland ends up having to adopt is very much an everyday question that ought to concern anyone.

What currency Scotland ends up having to adopt is very much an everyday question that ought to concern anyone

I completely agree. The questions is though whether people care that much or are more interested in things like childcare.

I see this morning that the B of E has said it is willing to talk about a currency union...

Remind me - where's that legal opinion again
Published in the White Paper following advice from the Lord Advocate...

I'm sure they're willing to talk and drum out a deal. That is what negotiation and diplomacy is all about. It doesn't follow that Scotland will get what it wants.

As for the legal opinion, I meant the legal opinion that Salmond turned out not to have. The (later) advice from the Lord Advocate (which I mentioned myself earlier) is entirely consistent with the views provided to the UK government and evidently the Spanish government too. Unfortunately it is not consistent with the message that Salmond et al have been conveying.

Legal opinions means diddly squat. Is they dont have legal authority in court. The ECK, like most of Europe, also operates on inquisatorial not adversarial procedure, ie you dont have counsel for two sides 'arguing' in court but simply pleading their case to a judge.

Im really uncomfortable with the way the White Paper asks whether the European Court of Justice 'supports' 'this'. Its not the courts job to support the political ambitions of individual member states. Its job is to remain neutral and issue decisions on cases brought to it.

This part of the white paper is deliberately badly written to create the impression that the court supports the policy of an independent Scotland on tuition fees.

I find it really shocking that any semi formal document could be produced in this way. Its completely improper.

Its also the Ruropean Commission, not the court, which deals with enforcing treaty obligations.

I have to say it would be very interesting from an academic perspective if the self obsessed, attenion seeking SNP re caused a major falling out in European member states.

Equally interesting to see a northern European country implode under a corrupt self serving regime, as nothing like that has happened in recent history.

I dont think there are enough people in Scotland unwise enough (particularly in the powerhouse of the central belt as opposed to the public se for dominated Highlands) to vote for independence.

But just in case it happens, its probably best to be aware that if you want to work in any other European country, you would require a working visa, temporary residents permit, etc..while it applies for EU membership.

ie its easier to move now, while you still can, than later.

Already had an Eastern European friend employed in the Edinburgh finance market arrange a transfer outwith Scotland because of the independence issue. Expect plenty of others to follow suit.

Equally interesting to see a northern European country implode under a corrupt self serving regime, as nothing like that has happened in recent history

Oh dear

*But just in case it happens, its probably best to be aware that if you want to work in any other European country, you would require a working visa, temporary residents permit, etc..while it applies for EU membership.

ie its easier to move now, while you still can, than later*

And another for the scaremongering. You are seriously telling people to leave now before there is even a vote! :) If Scotland votes Yes it does not immediately become independent. There is plenty of time between the referendum and "independence day" for people to flee to another EU country (although not rUK as on your logic that would be a pretty risky proposition too, what with the promised in/out referendum)

Or are you suggesting that if Scotland votes Yes, the EU will somehow remove EU membership from part of an EU country.

The EU will not take membership away in a yes vote. The yes vote automatically does that by making Scotland a new country.

I mentioned upthread, my DH's firm have made plans to leave ASAP if there is a yes vote.

What is your opinion on the 'google letter'?