H_B Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Quite interesting to see the LS enter into the fray and ask some pretty valid questions, of all parties involved, HMG and SG. In its own paper on Scotland's future, the Law Society argued that many questions remain to be answered by all sides in the debate, including: What would independence mean for Scotland's membership of the EU and international organisations? Would the UK government support an application by an independent Scotland to join the EU? What contingencies does the Scottish government propose if negotiations are not concluded by their proposed independence day of 24 March 2016? What timescale for further devolution would be proposed by the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties? To what extent are the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties prepared to agree a joint programme for additional powers? What contingency plans exist if the UK government does not agree to share the pound with an independent Scotland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colkitto Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Quite interesting to see the LS enter into the fray and ask some pretty valid questions, of all parties involved, HMG and SG. In its own paper on Scotland's future, the Law Society argued that many questions remain to be answered by all sides in the debate, including: What would independence mean for Scotland's membership of the EU and international organisations? Scotland would be fully represented in it's own right rather than being a region of a larger country Would the UK government support an application by an independent Scotland to join the EU? Cameron has sated he would support this What contingencies does the Scottish government propose if negotiations are not concluded by their proposed independence day of 24 March 2016? We remain part of the UK until negotiations are completed What timescale for further devolution would be proposed by the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties? To what extent are the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties prepared to agree a joint programme for additional powers? What contingency plans exist if the UK government does not agree to share the pound with an independent Scotland? We use the pound regardless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Going by Colkottos post the Law Society seem like an absolute bunch o fannies. I take it you're a member H_B? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 14, 2014 Author Share Posted July 14, 2014 Going by Colkottos post the Law Society seem like an absolute bunch o fannies. I take it you're a member H_B? 1) Why? Colkitto's claim about using the pound regardless is for example, not SNP policy, that I've ever read. I'd be happy to look at a link to the SNP confirming what the backup plan is, shuold a currency union be rejected. 2) No. I'm not a lawyer of any description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Colkitto didn't answer the first question. It is not Scottish Government's gift or indeed the UK Government's, to state that Scotland will be a member-state of the EU or of other organisations. The correct answer to that question is that negotiations, in consultation with the organisations, their treaty signatories, the Scottish government and the UK government would have to take place, with a view to establishing whether Scotland should become, or should be permitted to become, participants therein. The complexity and timescale of the negotiations with respect to each international organisation is wholly dependent upon how cooperative all the respective parties are in relation to the terms of membership available to Scotland and any corollary effects there might be on the operation of those organisations. Some of them will comfortably be completed before the March 2016 independence day deadline, but some may not, and the Scottish Government may have to make contingencies in case no transitional arrangements can be agreed and implemented. As for the second question, the current UK Government has stated that it would support an application for Scotland to become a member-state of the EU. It has passed no comment on whether it would support the terms of membership being equivalent to those of the UK rather than of a new member-state or something in-between. It has not, for instance, indicated that it is prepared to yield some of its rebate to an independent Scotland. Question 3 is very important. Colkitto has made an interesting claim here, that we would remain part of the UK until these negotiations are completed. This is not stated in the White Paper. I know of no Scottish Government official to have stated this. It is the most sensible approach, but it is not what they have said will happen. The question follows: why haven't they said this will happen? It would, at a stroke, eliminate all time pressures on post Yes negotiations and would actually mean Scotland is in a stronger bargaining position to negotiate more favourable terms, if there is no prospect of it becoming independent without securing membership of the EU. Question 6, of course, has been presumed, but never stated by the Scottish Government. This prompts the question: why haven't they just said this? It should be pointed out that their own fiscal commission said that would be a dreadful idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTJohnboy Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Shouldn't Question 5 have included UKIP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 14, 2014 Author Share Posted July 14, 2014 Shouldn't Question 5 have included UKIP? No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Shouldn't Question 5 have included UKIP? Why would it? They don't have any seats at Westminster. Even the Green party are more relevant at Westminster, for the time being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliche Guevara Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 The Law Society needs to focus on its primary responsibility, which is looking after its members. Something it seems to have forgotten quite some time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 14, 2014 Author Share Posted July 14, 2014 The Law Society needs to focus on its primary responsibility, which is looking after its members. Something it seems to have forgotten quite some time ago. One of the questions it is raising relates to the consequences of Independence on the legal profession in Scotland and its members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Never mind the Law Society, I have questions, as do others, that need answered before we dish our votes out willy nilly on the 18th Sept 2014. What currency will I be using on 01/01/16? There's one for kick off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Never mind the Law Society, I have questions, as do others, that need answered before we dish our votes out willy nilly on the 18th Sept 2014. What currency will I be using on 01/01/16? There's one for kick off. I don't think it really matters what currency is used at the toss up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Never mind the Law Society, I have questions, as do others, that need answered before we dish our votes out willy nilly on the 18th Sept 2014. What currency will I be using on 01/01/16? There's one for kick off. Unless you leave this island, the pound. Scotland will not be independent on 1st January 2016! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamaldo Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 We will use the pound because Scotland can not be stopped from using a freely tradebale currency. Are people too thick to understand this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Never mind the Law Society, I have questions, as do others, that need answered before we dish our votes out willy nilly on the 18th Sept 2014. What currency will I be using on 01/01/16? There's one for kick off. You don't need any answers mate. You're voting no regardless of answers because of those nasty Europeans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Unless you leave this island, the pound. Scotland will not be independent on 1st January 2016! I know that, you know that and everyone else who knows about the 18 month transaction process will know an iScotland with [new currency] wont come to be until after March 2016. Stop being pedantic and soporific Exuberant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabinoban Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Never mind the Law Society, I have questions, as do others, that need answered before we dish our votes out willy nilly on the 18th Sept 2014. What currency will I be using on 01/01/16? There's one for kick off. The pound. Here's some questions for you: 1. Are you happy with paying for Trident - yearly upkeep £2.4bn? 2. Are you happy having the UK plunged deeper into debt by at least £130bn to replace Trident? 3. Are you happy that further oil exploration in the Firth of Clyde was stopped due to the MoD saying it would interrupt a passage for submarines? 4. Plans to build an oil refinery in Ayrshire were stopped due to the same thing 5. Are you happy that the MoD stated that if there was an accident with the Trident fleet that the collateral damage would be acceptable if it happened in Faslane compared to if it happened in Portsmouth? 6. HS1, HS2 and HS3 helping London and the Midlands at an estimated cost of £80bn, and that's only at the planning stages, all this will come at a double cost for Scotland where we have to pay for it plus there will be an economic drain of millions of pounds per year 7. Are you happy with the Elm Guest House cover up that implicates the entire establishment, with the royal family secrecy act being rushed through before they are implicated further And that's just for starters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 There's a lot of fuss about the Pound. If the rump UK says they're keeping their ball, then we can do what Ireland did, and peg their Punt to the pound for 50 years, until they went off the idea.* We have next to no influence over the Treasury and Bank of England's monetary policy as it is, very little would change. And we already have our own printed banknotes. There's nothing rUK could do about it. * can't be bothered checking the exact dates or details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 What a fucking idiot you are (leaving aside what Ad Lib has already covered) you know fine well the preferred option of the SG - to keep the pound in a currency union. You know fine well the only folk who can scupper this is the UK government. Nobody believes you're voting no because the UK government might/might not like this branch of unionism. Regardless the answer is the pound. The Pound in a currency union, the pound without a currency union, or a New Scots pound. Ye got that in writing? Ach, I'll joost stick tae voting Naw. At least then I'll ken am using the pound in 2016. (for definate) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.