To think Alex Salmond is in his own private dream world?

[SpineInABap]

Ok so Alex Salmond wants an independent Scotland, and sets out his ideas.

Then all three Westminster parties tell him - "no you can't share the pound and be independent as well, it would be too unstable. Did you see what happened in Europe when they tried to share a currency between different countries with different economic policies? And those countries were trying to become more united, and in this case the two countries would be trying to split apart!"

Then a guy from the European Union remarks that it won't be plain sailing for an Independent Scotland to join the EU, as all the other members will have to agree - and many won't as they don't want to encourage their own splinter states to start asking for independence as well.

So two fairly serious problems. And what is Alex Salmon's reaction? Basically to go "Ner ner ner, you're all being mean and nasty and you don't really mean it. I think that if we all vote yes for an independent Scotland, then you will change your mind and let us share the pound, and let us join the EU. You're bluffing, and so I'm not coming up with a plan for what would happen if Scotland voted yes and we realised that, oops no...you weren't bluffing".

How can anyone think this man does not sound a bit bonkers? I'm English, but if I was Scottish I would be very worried about voting for someone who thinks nothing of destabilising a whole economy just to make a Political point.

Would guess they would be an asset of the UK in which Scotland would be entitled to a share

This is wrong. International law on secession says that State property remains the property of the continuator State (the rUK) unless it was located in the territory of the new State (Scotland).

Here

“the legal position is clear: the bodies that support the UK now … would continue to operate on behalf of the remainder of the UK on the same basis as before Scottish independence. If an independent Scottish state wanted to continue to receive services from UK institutions or utilise them to carry out functions in relation to Scotland, that would be a matter for negotiation and would have to be agreed with the continuing UK”

We will not be out the EU come independence anyway so no problem there.

Oh look at that flying pig!

Of course we would not be booted out the EU, there is no precedent to do so and it would more than likely be against EU laws.

Quite like this article I read today from Robin McAlpine, think he used to be a Green Party MSP.

bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/02/20/the-anglosphere-media/

It wouldn't be booting out Scotland though, would it? As far as the EU is concerned, Scotland as an independent country doesn't exist, so can't be booted out.

If it was the rest of the UK booting Scotland out of the UK, that would be different, but if Scotland chooses to leave they are no longer part of the EU, as it's the UK that's a member.

Of course, I imagine EU rules don't necessarily always make sense, so I may be wrong.

but in order to avoid the resentment and divides that John talks about, we have to be accepting of others view points - unless you're suggesting we should all have fistycuffs and winner takes all? It's a polarised issue, there's no getting away from that. Personally I'm lucky that my family and friends are all willing to agree to disagree, but I know there are others that are not in that position. There's no middle ground on this one, all we can do is to encourage calmer heads and refuse to debate on the topic with those who are unreasonable or unable to debate appropriately.

We all have the right to our opinion and our decision; we don't have the right to force others (same as most things really, it's just that for once everyone's passionate and involved - and actually on a side note: I think that's great, I wish we saw this more often over politics, it should be like this for every election rather than the apathy that's become the norm).

On a separate but previously brought up point, did everyone realise that the so called impartial civil servant advising Westminster over currency's second role is to co-ordinate the no campaign? How can they keep straight faces while claiming it's neutral advice? lol.

Oh and for anyone who's interested, I've finally found the link to order a hard copy of the white paper (personally I've been struggling to absorb everything in a digital format and have only looked up specific points to date): scotgov.theapsgroupinscotland.com/

But Scotland's citizens are members.

m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-barroso-incorrect-on-eu-1-3313437

m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26278237

Former EC director general says Scotland would have a right to EU membership.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/henry-mcleish-slams-claims-independent-3157395

Former labour first minister says joining EU will be straightforward

ericjoyce.co.uk/2014/02/why-independent-scots-would-remain-eu-citizens/

Eric Joyce MP on why Scots can't be stripped of their citizenship

Of course we would not be booted out the EU, there is no precedent to do so and it would more than likely be against EU laws.

Language language language. Booted out puts the active role on the EU, when a Scottish vote for independence means that we'd be removing ourselves.

it would more than likely be against EU laws.

Oh really?

[http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2004:084E:0422:0423:EN:PDF EU law] actually says that When a part of the territory of a Member State ceases to be a part of that state, e.g. because that territory becomes an independent state, the treaties will no longer apply to that territory. In other words, a newly independent region would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the Union and the treaties would, from the day of its independence, not apply anymore on its territory.

Under Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union, any European State which respects the principles set out in Article 6(1) of the Treaty on European Union may apply to become a member of the Union. An application of this type requires, if the application is accepted by the Council acting unanimously, a negotiation on an agreement between the Applicant State and the Member States on the conditions of admission and the adjustments to the treaties which such admission entails. This agreement is subject to ratification by all Member States and the Applicant State.

UK citizens are members. Scotland is an area of the UK unless they choose to leave the UK.

I think this is a big part of the whole discussion actually. If Scottish people already see themselves as belonging to a different country, being Scottish citizens rather than UK citizens, then the decision is already made.

Scotland intends to pay debts accumulated by the UK, we don't have to as we are not the continuing state, but to do that the rUK will have to negotiate on assets, works both ways.

And of course if Scotland becomes independent then rUK will have to renegotiate their position in the EU (assuming they choose to stay)...

Scotland intends to pay debts accumulated by the UK,

Oh does it? Sturgeon threatened the opposite. It doesn't even matter what she says, because there would have to be a general election. We don't know what an iScotland govt would 'intend' to do.

the rUK will have to negotiate on assets, works both ways.

Indeed.

Oh does it? Sturgeon threatened the opposite. It doesn't even matter what she says, because there would have to be a general election. We don't know what an iScotland govt would 'intend' to do

Ideally the negotiations would be complete prior to "independence day" so things like assets and debt would have been negotiated prior to the first iScotland general election.

And of course if Scotland becomes independent then rUK will have to renegotiate their position in the EU

evidence?

Ideally the negotiations would be complete prior to "independence day" so things like assets and debt would have been negotiated prior to the first iScotland general election.

Ideally? Oh super. Ideally I'd look like Monica Bellucci and win the Euromillions tonight.

All those negotiations in 18 months? Rather quick, no?

And it would be the SNP doing the negotiating then?

No evidence just common sense. Every country negotiates its own bits and pieces in the EU in terms of what subsidies etc they recieve and what they pay.

rUK will have lost 10% of its populations (so less MEPs), it will have lost most of its fishing geounds, most of its oil, lots of its hill farming land... So with a lower population, less assets, and less things that attract subsidies obviously there would be changes

Oh, this is interesting r.e. embassies.

An independent Scottish state would not be entitled by right to any UK diplomatic premises, equipment or staff. As set out in Scotland analysis: Devolution and the implications of Scottish independence, the legal position is clear: the bodies that support the UK now, for example the Bank of England, would continue to operate on behalf of the remainder of the UK on the same basis as before Scottish independence.12 If an independent Scottish state wanted to continue to receive services from UK institutions or utilise them to carry out functions in relation to Scotland, that would be a matter for negotiation and would have to be agreed with the continuing UK.

from here.

No evidence just common sense.

Common sense? Seriously? The rUK would of course make changes to its status in the EU. This does not equate to being suspended/ expelled from the EU and having to reapply.

All those negotiations in 18 months? Rather quick, no

EU within 18 months realistic - honorary director general of EC who negotiated UKs entrance to EC

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independent-scotland-can-become-eu-3093713

18 month negotiations reasonable UK government commisoned Professor Crawford

m.scotsman.com/news/uk/scottish-independence-treaty-deadline-realistic-1-2785400

And it would be the SNP doing the negotiating then?

The Scottish Government will invite representatives of other parties and wider civic Scotland to negotiate and agree the independence settlement.

www.yesscotland.net/answers/how-will-scotland-become-independent

The rUK would of course make changes to its status in the EU. This does not equate to being suspended/ expelled from the EU and having to reapply

Apologies. I did not mean to suggest that rUK would be expelled from the EU. I was stating that the rUK would be required to renegotiate opt outs/ subsidies etc.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine there are numerous conflicting articles about EU membership - including the text someone has quoted above. The simple fact is NOBODY KNOWS, there is no definite answer on if, when, or how we could be EU members. It's a gamble.

Avery worked in the 1970s- you surely can't take his word as 'law'.

The Crawford article said that 'Scotland would need to apply to join organisations such as Nato, the UN, the European Union and World Trade Organisation as well as look at 14,000 treaties the UK is a signatory'.

That is a hell of a lot of work to take on in what, 800 days?

It's a very short time frame, you've got to admit. It doesn't leave much room for difficulties.

This is also interesting re embassies

foreignaffairsreview.co.uk/2013/02/diplomacy-scotland/

*The Crawford article said that 'Scotland would need to apply to join organisations such as Nato, the UN, the European Union and World Trade Organisation as well as look at 14,000 treaties the UK is a signatory'.

That is a hell of a lot of work to take on in what, 800 days?

It's a very short time frame, you've got to admit. It doesn't leave much room for difficulties*

The article says:

"While the UK government and pro-UK campaigners claimed this would make it difficult for Scotland to be independent by March 2016, as laid out by the SNP Scottish Government, Professor Crawford said it was “realistic”.

In a broadcast interview Professor Crawford said that rejoining the EU would not “necessarily going to be difficult” as he indicated that Scotland’s admittance to the United Nations in the wake of independence would be “straightforward”.

Speaking during media interviews, Prof Crawford also said the renegotiation of international treaties was “not going to be a major issue” as he accepted that the EU negotiations would take place from within the European Union."

Thanks for that, ItsAllGoingtoBeFine, I'd not seen estimated running figures before.

100-200million a year and higher start up costs! I'd also disagree with the point that they would get a sizeable chunk of that out of negotiations, with the document I posted above, and of course the Lisbon Treaty might not apply if EU membership hadn't been sorted.

Anyway. My little monster's nap is over- back after bedtime!