Law Society asks some questions....

[AUFC90]

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)

You're voting no regardless.

[Blaven]

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?

Astounding.

What level of probability do they expect to get answers to these questions?

[boabinoban]

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)

I answered yours. Time for you to answer mine

[ayrmad]

We will use the pound because Scotland can not be stopped from using a freely tradebale currency. Are people too thick to understand this?

YES, even Eric has me wondering at times when I read his posts.

[Casual Bystander]

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?

It would be lovely to get an answer to all of those. The second one is a bit of a fluff, as the UK government refuses to even acknowledge there may be an independent Scotland and thus refuses to engage in any discussion about it. Four and five would be lovely to get an answer from but when pushed Jim Murphy and Alistair Carmichael have both said that they could not give any specifics, then when asked "so there is no guarantee" the answer, and I paraphrase, went along the lines of "oh, yeah, we are definitely going to do something, just that we don't know what and we can't promise it because we aren't guaranteed to be in power in the next election". Which is a really shitty attitude considering they are happy to tell us about all the stuff they will do if they get in and yet the same situation applies to those policies.

As for the last, I doubt the Yes campaign will answer. It's a shame as I would personally like to see Scotland have an independent currency. This worked well for Slovakia in a very similar situation. Sure, they use the Euro now but at separation that wasn't the plan.

[H_B]

Astounding.

What level of probability do they expect to get answers to these questions?

You'd need to ask the Law Society.

Several of them aren't very difficult to answer. Just the Scottish Government and the UK government are choosing not to.

[Baxter Parp]

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?

Why did they not just ask you?

[Blaven]

You'd need to ask the Law Society.

Several of them aren't very difficult to answer. Just the Scottish Government and the UK government are choosing not to.

Give us a wee clue which ones on either side, you would at this stage be willing to answer.

[Double Jack D]

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?

IMO these have all been answered, it just depends who you believe.

Clever bunch this Law society....

[H_B]

IMO these have all been answered, it just depends who you believe.

Clever bunch this Law society....

Yeah, except they haven't.

[Colkitto]

Yeah, except they haven't.

I answered them.

[milhouse]

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.

On 18/9/14, just answer the simple question on the ballot paper, which is:

"Should Scotland be an independent country?"

Answer the question

If you believe in it, you must vote for it, there will not be another chance.

EU/currency/oil/tax - these get sorted out after the result.

[Double Jack D]

Yeah, except they haven't.

Typical no voter who hasn't done their research.

I'm happy that there are answers to each of the questions out there from both sides of the debate.

It is a myth to suggest there is any ambiguity on the intentions of either side.

[printer]

I answered them.

I'm sure that will satisfy the Law Society.

[H_B]

I'm happy that there are answers to each of the questions out there from both sides of the debate.

Uh huh.

What are the answers to each question, with sources.

Your fantasy land alternative reality, doesn't count.

[Thumper]

A few threads ago Tryfield came out with quite a long story explaining why he was voting No, basically due to the general uncertainty of what happens with exports post-indy. A bit sad that this has now boiled down to "youse cannae promise me the pound", as if there's any practical possibility of an alternative (presumably the Scotia Ruble, stamped with Salmond's face). Somewhat erodes the credibility of the earlier discussion.

[Double Jack D]

Uh huh.

What are the answers to each question, with sources.

Your fantasy land alternative reality, doesn't count.

Erm my sources are Better Together and Yes Scotland.

There are different answers to each question from both sources but I have listened to both and formed my opinion.

[H_B]

Erm my sources are Better Together and Yes Scotland.

There are different answers to each question from both sources but I have listened to both and formed my opinion.

So provide the answers to each question raised by the LS.

This should be entertaining.

Note, to save you the trouble, I'll type this for you and you can cut and paste - "I don't have the time/inclination to provide these answers...use Google... sniff....I'm leaving this thread now"

[Double Jack D]

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?

1. Yes Scotland - Scotland would continue to be members of EU but would require to renegotiate terms. Scotland would have increased representation at EU and terms would be more directly related to what Scotland provides and recieves from EU. Overall this would benefit Scotland.

BT - Scotland's membership of EU is at huge risk and terms of iScotlands membership would be substantially worse than what Scotland currently receives from the combined UK deal.

2. Yes

3. None, The timetable is adequate for concluding negotiations.

4. Following a No Vote and the 2015 UK General Election.

5. Prior to Referendum there will be no joint agreement on further devolution.

6. Yes Scotland - We will continue to use the pound as it is our currency. Independent Financial experts have advised that the best scenario for all is a formal currency union which, in the event of a yes vote, will be the most attractive option for both rUK and iScotland.

BT - There will be absolutely no chance of a currency union and Scotland, if it continues to use the pound iScotland will be like Panama. It will need to set up it's own currency or use the Euro.

[ayrmad]

1. Yes Scotland - Scotland would continue to be members of EU but would require to renegotiate terms. Scotland would have increased representation at EU and terms would be more directly related to what Scotland provides and recieves from EU. Overall this would benefit Scotland.

BT - Scotland's membership of EU is at huge risk and terms of iScotlands membership would be substantially worse than what Scotland currently receives from the combined UK deal.

2. Yes

3. None, The timetable is adequate for concluding negotiations.

4. Following a No Vote and the 2015 UK General Election.

5. Prior to Referendum there will be no joint agreement on further devolution.

6. Yes Scotland - We will continue to use the pound as it is our currency. Independent Financial experts have advised that the best scenario for all is a formal currency union which, in the event of a yes vote, will be the most attractive option for both rUK and iScotland.

BT - There will be absolutely no chance of a currency union and Scotland, if it continues to use the pound iScotland will be like Panama. It will need to set up it's own currency or use the Euro.

I'm sure the brains of The Law Society could have googled them themselves, as the wage thief proves every day on here, a law degree makes you lazy.