to wonder how Scotland's decision will affect england?

[LEMmingaround]

Just that really? If they do go their ownway how will it affect england?

Also will it open a can of worms with wales and northern Ireland?

Much as - if Scotland votes for independence I would be pretty pissed off if the contracts our city lost to Scotland (military related) didn't come back to the UK - giving our city a chance to regain those lost contracts. I can't see that as vindictive (as suggested somewhere on this thread). I expect my government to act in the interests of its citizens.

saintly That's fair enough, but it's the way in which it is being done. We seem to be getting so many MPs coming out with the whole "you're not getting to keep the currency! We forbid you!" Okay, noted, but then it's used as repeatedly in anti-independence speeches. They don't seem to realise that they can't veto it, especially as MPs can't control what the BoE does.

Apparently it would be beneficial, according to Darling before he backtracked. I still want to hear him explain this.

I'm no expert numanoid but I don't think you're right there. This (especially annexe A) is a good explanation www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/279454/CM8815_2901849_SA_SterlingUnion_acc.pdf

The conclusions of annexe A are:

^As Professor Adam Tomkins has made clear in evidence to the Scottish Affairs Committee, the UK pound is Scotland’s currency now precisely because Scotland is currently part of the UK.11 Although certain UK assets could become subject to negotiation between the continuing UK and an independent Scottish state, there is no rule or principle in international law that would require the continuing UK to formally share its currency with an independent Scottish state.
A.21 The status quo would remain for the continuing UK; the UK pound would continue to be printed and the Bank of England would continue to fulfil its current functions as a continuing UK institution. However, the position would be quite different for an independent Scottish state. Independence means leaving the UK’s monetary union and leaving the UK pound^

elsewhere in the document it concludes On the basis of the scale of the challenges, and the Scottish Government’s proposals for addressing them, HM Treasury would advise the UK Government against entering into a currency union. There is no evidence that adequate proposals or policy changes to enable the formation of a durable currency union could be devised, agreed and implemented by both governments

A currency union (although obviously the terms would be important) would be beneficial and logical for Scotland. It would not be beneficial neither logical for the rUK and thus they have rejected the idea.

Your sense of persecution is ridiculous.

Numanoid, I think you need to distinguish between using the £ currency and a having a formal currency union post independence. They're quite distinct things.

No one is going to stop Scotland using the £, but rUK is well within its rights to not sign up to a formal currency union with iScotland.

It's a shame they have no way of stopping it

Can you explain please? I'm pretty sure the BoE does not have the authority to take us in to a currency union. I certainly can't find anything that suggests it's within their remit.

Re Darling - I think it's pretty obvious what he was saying, that a currency union would be the desirable and logical option for Scotland. But it also doesn't matter if it's desirable or logical. The last poll in England/Wales that I saw showed massive opposition to a currency union, and there is a general election smack in the middle of the negotiation period. Assuming those opinion polls stayed the same in the event of a Yes vote then surely no party is going to take a pro currency union stance?

Have you read Darling's comments in full?

"“Of course it would be desirable to have a currency union but you also have to understand there are consequences because a currency union means you’ve both got to agree your budgets, you’ve both got to agree how much you can tax, spend and borrow. And the point I’m making is that’s not freedom.

Can you imagine in the Eurozone, when Portugal sits down with Germany to discuss their budget, who is going to make the decisions? Who is going to call the shots? If you decide to separate a currency union is desirable but what I am drawing attention to is the objectionable terms and conditions and the fact that no longer would this be something that we would all agree on, you have got two partners who have to agree Scotland’s budget. “Of course if you have independence or separation of course a currency union is logical, and do you know why? Because a currency union ultimately leads to an economic and then a political union which is what we have got now. I believe in the political union….

“I think using someone else’s currency as they are now suggesting with the Bank of England, a foreign bank fixing your interest rates, with no lender of last resort, no central bank, so no one to stand behind our financial institutions would be mad. That takes you to a currency union and you know what? A currency union as we see in Europe takes you to an economic union and ultimately a political union. And guess what? You are back where we are. Why go through all this rigmarole, all this trauma as the nationalists are suggesting to end up at the very place you started out from? So I’m entirely consistent. I want first of all, I don’t want to go through all that mess, if you like, to ultimately end up where we started from, but if you are going to do it of course it is logical to do that, but understand where you end up, understand your budgets have to be agreed by England, Wales and Northern Ireland and ultimately you end up with a political union.”"

Thanks for calling me ridiculous Santana. I won't respond in kind as I respect your view, even though it differs. I don't feel persecuted, I don't like the way certain politicians make their point. I disliked it long before the referendum, and will doubtless do so long after.

Also, could someone please explain why Darling, the all-knowing leader of the No campaign, would have made the above statement then nearer the referendum, said the opposite? I genuinely want to understand the reasoning behind it is all.

Sorry Statistically, didn't see your post! I've switched to mobile and it's not great for MN, my model. I'll be on the laptop later for a proper read. :)

I gave up on the MN app and just look at it on the browser - the app drove me batshit crazy!

poster StatisticallyChallenged

I would not vote for any party that would take us in to a current union

The junior partner of any breakaway counrtys is always poorer for it

Poutugal , Cyprus ECt

I didn't call you ridiculous. I said you were demonstrating a ridiculous viewpoint.

What is so hard to grasp? Good for Scotland, bad for rUK. That's all.

Note that Prof Tomkins' evidence to the Scottish Parliament's European and External Relations Committee that SaintlyJimJams mentions on the issue of currency and other issues (he also concluded that the Scottish Parliament had taken no legal advice on the preparation of the White Paper) has turned into a huge row as the Professor's evidence was repeatedly interrupted by the SNP chairperson and the whole thing descended into a farce which was cut short and which Prof Tomkin is demanding an apology for:

at 7.15 minutes

A sign of things to come in the Scottish Parliament?

Professor Tomkins is a Professor of Law at Glasgow University and specialises in British Constitutional Law.

Yep, can only write short messages using my mobile, and it just seems to make the site so glitchy!

Statistically The BoE have voiced no opposition to a currency union - they have said they have no objections to it. DP has read it in a past edition of i, and has said he will find the exact copy if anyone wants a source, he kept it somewhere in the office. :)
If I haven't answered everything btw let me know, I'm bad at keeping up with all the posts and end up cross-posting a lot (slow typer).

No worries Santana, and I don't find anything difficult to grasp, just like hearing both sides of the debate.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/09/alex-salmond-refuses-currency-plan-b-independent-scotland

So he's threatening to not take his share of national debt

Well if he's dose let's see if he will be able to borrow money from anyone apart from WONGa

again you seem to be wrong Numanoid.

This link www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25930075 quotes the governor of the BoE who said Mr Carney stressed arrangements for a currency union in the event of independence would be a matter for the Scottish and UK parliaments He may not have any objection to it in theory, but he doesn't get to decide.

An if you read on - he doesn't sound that into the idea...

Carney clearly explained how a currency union required ceding of national sovereignty from both sides. He finished by saying that “decisions that cede sovereignty and limit autonomy are rightly choices for elected governments and involve considerations beyond mere economics."

It's not the BoE's job to okay a CU, and they actually didn't okay it. They said it could work and the Yes campaign ran with this. What they didn't do was look at the context he put it in.

I wasn't saying they'd objected Numanoid, I was saying that I'm pretty sure it's not their decision to take rUK in to a currency union and that their powers don't extend that far.

Darling's comments (as you'll see from the longer version once on laptop ) are being taken out of context IME.

I watched Mark Carney's speech (ok, I didn't see all of it but I did. read the entire speech afterwards) and watched the Q&A session in its entirety. My recollection of the Q&A was that he reiterated that he could make it work if there was the political will to do so, got stroppy (in his polite technocrat way ) with those that interpreted what he'd said as being anti-currency union but mentioned some of the pros & cons of currency unions in general.

It would appear that there is currently no political will to make it work but there are consequences both for Scotland and the rest of the UK if it doesn't go ahead - which may or may not be acceptable to the respective countries.

I remain cynical about how much the statements (on both sides) are just negotiating positions. If Scotland votes Yes, I "hae ma' doots" that rUK will take such a black and white position against currency union, but conversely, I'm not so convinced that Salmond won't give up on currency union and pursue a "pegging against the £" approach as advocated by the Adam Smith Institute.

I think thought - reading the govt document I linked to above, the UK govt has made such an issue about currency union being bad for the rUK I can't see me voting in the next GE for a party that would seek it. They would surely have to persuade the rest of us it was a good thing?

Pegging currency is...difficult. Not impossible, but tricky. It becomes particularly difficult if the economies of the two countries start to diverge, which there is a fair risk of.

It's a better option IME than just using the £ without a union, but it would be hard to sustain in the long run.

There's no way rUK can go for a currency union now.

58% of English and Welsh adults opposed it in a poll this February.

Labour and the Lib Dems are rejecting it in their manifestos. The Herald reported the Tories will do the same.

Then there's the reams and reams of government sponsored evidence which basically says it's a bad idea.

Even the Young article the Yes campaign are so fond of only suggests that rUK should allow a CU because it would limit catastrophic events filtering through to their own economy.

What's in it for the UK if an independent Scotland asks for a currency union? Feck all as far as I can see. Why would the rest of the UK choose to be the lender of last resort for an independent Scotland?

I would expect a UK govt to act in the interests of the UK, not other countries

Quite. Apparently Scotland should be independent because it gets such a raw deal from the UK but apparently when it is independent the rest of the UK should still have Scotland's interest at heart.