Is tripartisanship over the SNP's bid to retain the £ bullying?

[aeolium]

From thinking that the Euro was a wonderful idea (so easy for travelling round Europe) I now think that it has been a disaster for most countries that have adopted it, from the conditions imposed on those wishing to join to the impact on those members whose have had economic problems. My main worry with regard to Scotland becoming, or remaining, a member of the EU on independence would be that it was obliged to join the Euro.

I agree (though being a member of the EU does not oblige you to join the Euro, it seems). On the other hand, why replicate that situation with a sterling currency union lacking a political union? All currency unions which lack political union, at least in the modern age, seem disastrous to me. So the best bet for independence is an independent currency.

[Flosshilde]

Yes, currency union without political union would seem awkward if not impossible (I'm not sure about the position of the USA, in that it has a currency union with some degree of political union but with individual states still able to set their own taxes & expenditure). To return to the original question, were Osborne et al bullying? I don't think I'd go that far, but I don't think it's their place to say yes or no at this stage; by the time real negotiations, assuming there's a 'yes' majority, the situation will be different - independence will be a reality & pragmatism rather than political posturing would be the order of the day.

[Serial_Apologist]

Yes, currency union without political union would seem awkward if not impossible (I'm not sure about the position of the USA, in that it has a currency union with some degree of political union but with individual states still able to set their own taxes & expenditure). To return to the original question, were Osborne et al bullying? I don't think I'd go that far, but I don't think it's their place to say yes or no at this stage; by the time real negotiations, assuming there's a 'yes' majority, the situation will be different - independence will be a reality & pragmatism rather than political posturing would be the order of the day.

As a shot across the bows, bullying is exactly what I would have called it. Lording it is the new Tories' naturally assumed birthright, if you will, and, leaving side Salmond, as such, knowing the Scottish people, will badly misfire for the anti-independence brigade. From the Scots' perspective the comparative political success of devolution offers positive lessons unlikely to be negated by the practicalities of this or that currency.

[Barbirollians]

Tactically it may be unwise as Salmond likes to play the martyr and put on his William Wallace impression.

The economic arguments however stand up . It is unheard of for a currency union without political union being successful and the rest of the UK is right to be wary considering the conduct of Scottish banks before the crisis.

If Salmond tries then to walk away from Scotland's share of the debt then interest rates for the Scottish Govt will be sky high. In reality Salmond wants independence but secured by the Bank of England . That is just an unsustainable position.

[Serial_Apologist]

Tactically it may be unwise as Salmond likes to play the martyr and put on his William Wallace impression.

The economic arguments however stand up . It is unheard of for a currency union without political union being successful and the rest of the UK is right to be wary considering the conduct of Scottish banks before the crisis.

If Salmond tries then to walk away from Scotland's share of the debt then interest rates for the Scottish Govt will be sky high. In reality Salmond wants independence but secured by the Bank of England . That is just an unsustainable position.

I dare say you're right, Barbirollians. From the English pov, Scottish independence, with or without a separate currency, would focus the popular mind. I for one would welcome Westminster becoming a parliament for England and Wales, initially, bringing government closer to home, then re-offering Wales the option of independence, which in the changed circumstances they would probably welcome, rather than being shackled to us. But the questions remaining in any independence situation concern the practicalities of separate currencies; even with border fences and guards any frontier would invevitably leak like a seive, for starters.

[aeolium]

But the questions remaining in any independence situation concern the practicalities of separate currencies; even with border fences and guards any frontier would invevitably leak like a seive, for starters.

I don't see why there would be any leakage if Scotland had a separate currency - what would be the point? Switzerland has its own currency and is flanked by countries which use the euro. Eire and Northern Ireland are neighbours yet use different currencies.

The main arguments for independence ought not to be based on whether Scotland would be economically better off as an independent country. They ought to be based on whether Scotland would be better off by virtue of being able to have control over its own policies, especially on tax and spending and foreign policy (and things like having Trident nuclear submarines based in its waters). Given that Scotland has in recent history been extremely hostile to the domestic policy practised under Thatcher's government (which was to some extent continued under New Labour, hence the collapse in support for Labour in the Scottish Assembly elections) and is still thought to be predominantly anti-Conservative, the prospect of ending the imposition of unattractive UK policies on Scotland ought to be attractive to many people there.

[Beef Oven!]

Surely the problem with the Euro is the way that some countries have been allowed to break the rules for political reasons.
The ability to work anywhere in Europe and to have a system that allows people from the UK to be paid is a great thing and we have been at a considerable disadvantage by being outside , Inspite of the mess that some countries have made of the Euro it remains a good idea if you want to be able to work in the rest of the EU particularly at a time when the margins for whether something is financially viable or not are so small.

Which countries do you think 'have made a mess the Euro'?

What rules have been broken by which countries?

And given the wide-spread misery experienced by at least Greece, Portugal and Spain (particularly in terms of employment and pensions), how can the benefit of freedom and ease of enterprise for firms operating on close margins, be justified?

[Flosshilde]

The ability to work anywhere in Europe and to have a system that allows people from the UK to be paid is a great thing and we have been at a considerable disadvantage by being outside , Inspite of the mess that some countries have made of the Euro it remains a good idea if you want to be able to work in the rest of the EU

I wonder how many people resident in the UK do work in the Eurozone? The fairly minor benefits a few people might have are not worth the major disruption that entering the Eurozone would require. It's not a question of the mess some countries have made of the Euro (if they have), but the mess entering the Euro has made of their economic policies, funding public services, privatisation of public services, etc.

I don't see what disadvantage you might have had - you get paid in Euros, they go into your bank account & are converted into pounds at the relevant rate. Or you open a bank account in the Eurozone & they are paid into that (& you use that account for expences when you are in a country that uses the Euro)

[MrGongGong]

I wonder how many people resident in the UK do work in the Eurozone? The fairly minor benefits a few people might have are not worth the major disruption that entering the Eurozone would require. It's not a question of the mess some countries have made of the Euro (if they have), but the mess entering the Euro has made of their economic policies, funding public services, privatisation of public services, etc.

I don't see what disadvantage you might have had - you get paid in Euros, they go into your bank account & are converted into pounds at the relevant rate. Or you open a bank account in the Eurozone & they are paid into that (& you use that account for expences when you are in a country that uses the Euro)

So the number of people who work in the Eurozone ?

In my experience as a musician more or less ALL orchestras, ensembles and individuals some all the time.
Have a look at the Philharmonia's schedule? Many musicians I know spend their lives travelling (some on a weekly basis) from one EU country to another.
This also seems to be the case for many other professions as well.

If you are paid in Euros you have to pay to convert to sterling, makes it more expensive and sometimes uneconomic
You aren't allowed to open a bank account in Euros without an address in a Eurozone country so that's not an option
The whole process of currency conversion is tedious and expensive. If you have earnings in multiple currencies (as many of us do) it costs much more to get accounts produced and so on.

If you go to any UK airport or ferry terminal on a Sunday afternoon/evening you will find a huge number of folks going to other parts of the EU to work.


And to answer kipperboy

I'm not an economist BUT from what I read the Greeks weren't exactly playing by the rules

The whole "sovereignty" thing is a red herring IMV as we gave that away years ago to the likes of BP, Shell, Walmart et al

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I LOVE this one:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/19/scottish-independence-76-things-apologise

[aeolium]

The whole process of currency conversion is tedious and expensive. If you have earnings in multiple currencies (as many of us do) it costs much more to get accounts produced and so on.

Those really are miniscule inconveniences compared with the massive problems caused by creating a currency union between widely unequal economic states with no fiscal union, very different tax and spend policies and huge variations in balance of trade. See for instance this summary of the causes of the eurozone crisis. As you will see from this, none of the major eurozone economies "played by the rules" except Spain which also had the smallest debt relative to the size of its economy. But Spain got hammered just as much as Ireland, Portugal, Italy and Greece by the crisis. Playing by the rules didn't save them, because the rules were based on a shaky foundation and there was no-one to enforce them.

All this is slightly OT, but only slightly since a sterling currency union between an independent Scotland and England would be as bad as the independent Scotland joining the eurozone, particularly since none of the fundamental problems affecting the latter has been resolved, and these problems are a lot more serious than professionals and tourists exchanging money at the borders.

[MrGongGong]

I never suggested that we should run our economic affairs to be convenient for freelance musicians.
BUT as all politicians bleat on about how they are supporting small businesses and enterprise it's sometimes a bit annoying to have to put up with things getting harder and harder for those of us who DO work all over the EU.

What I do know is that some of the things that so many folks are enthusiastic about in terms of our relationships with the rest of Europe will have a potentially negative effect on musical life in the UK. For example the business of orchestral finance is very finely poised indeed and extra costs would lead to less new music, less rehearsal and probably fewer ensembles for us to listen to.

[Flosshilde]

What extra costs are there involved in payment in Euros havin gto be converted into pounds (leaving aside variations in the exchange rates)? Do banks charge for converting euros paid into your account into pounds?

[MrGongGong]

What extra costs are there involved in payment in Euros havin gto be converted into pounds (leaving aside variations in the exchange rates)? Do banks charge for converting euros paid into your account into pounds?

YES banks charge large amounts of money for doing this
and for every transaction, so if you get paid in lots of small amounts (if you do a tour with lots of small gigs for example) you can end up paying a separate fee for each amount.

That's one reason why banks make so much money :-(

[Beef Oven!]

so if you get paid in lots of small amounts (if you do a tour with lots of small gigs for example) you can end up paying a separate fee for each amount.

If you don't know how to run a business, I suppose.

You are over-doing this a bit, bruv!