I thought both options prohibited you from making your own deals with rUK. Could you refer me to the exemption you think might apply? In any event, Scotland would not be able to set rUK's tariffs. RoI is an existing member state with a veto. Scotland has no such bargaining power within the EU or EEA. NI is lucky the RoI will effectively sponsor it, is there a similar sponsor you might consider is available to Scotland?
No, it was someone on the tv. Basically if we were a member of EFTA then we would have freedom to set up our rates with non EU countries. This is not too different to what I have already heard at least one of the Brexit leaders saying - that they are going to be able to set up no taxes with people. In monetary terms England gets more money from what it sells to Scotland. Unless they are off their heads they would agree. If not, hey, we can always go somewhere else or people will just quietly make agreements. No idea what you are talking about here. It does not make sense with what I was saying. Some sort of a deal is going to be set up so that there is no hard border between NI and the Republic. Similar things have been done with other countries, I think Denmark and Greenland but going to back to the situation in Ireland, given they are going to find some way round the problem, I see no reason the same would not be done here. It is not a problem. You do not need to bargain to do this in EFTA, A documentary on the BBC a few weeks ago said with no ifs or buts that that would be what Scotland can do if it joins the EU.
As I see it Scotland may be more advantaged by setting it's own tariffs vs Rest of UK. To set a better trade balance. Only one way to find out...
The UK is definitely going for it, but it would be breaking new ground if it were successful. Think about it, if the UK [or in this case Scotland] can import tariff free from say, Botswana [or in this case, rUK], then it would have an advantage over an EU company that had to pay tariffs to import the same thing. I don't think they'll get it, what they might achieve is exemptions for specific line items. Really? OK, BYE!!!! Because Republic of Ireland is already in the EU. Same with Denmark. Therefore they have influence. Scotland would be joining the EU. That will be a different negotiating position. I'll need to see the underlying reference.
Your the one interested in this. No problem for me. Look back through the thread and you will find where you can find it. You'll also find other things. Like I said it has been discussed twice before.
I saw the documentary and skimmed the thread, but could find no reference to the ability to make independent bi-lateral FTAs from within the EFTA.
No sorry, it was just on the tv a day or two before the documentary. I thought oh that's good then. That will get over that problem. Things are very different for Scotland this time. She has a lot more support. http://thenational.scot/news/152093...d_have__relatively_speedy__entry_into_the_EU/ I can't read the rest as they are wanting me to pay. The bottom line is I am not worried. One way or another that issue will be sorted.
Possibly this is what you are looking for Latherty https://www.commonspace.scot/articl...a-and-eea-scotlands-post-independence-options Basically I am happy with the expert who made it clear that the EFTA would allow Scotland to set its own taxes outside of EU countries.
No really what I needed but this is a good source doc: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/580918/EPRS_BRI(2016)580918_EN.pdf It seems the EFTA membership will allow you to make bi-lateral third-party arrangements. Access to the "Single Market" is by separate arrangement with the EEA, but that does not mean you have to join the Customs Union and so restrictions over third-country FTAs is limited to rule conformity. However, to join the EEA Scotland will have to contribute to EU budget (until 2016 Scotland was a net recipient of EU funding and in any event a net recipient of rUK funding via its deficit) and accept free movement. So as I see it, rUK will be highly accommodating to Scottish independence and EFTA membership. However, Scotland will get a rude shock financially as it moves from a fiscal net recipient to a net payee. Its generous welfare system will therefore come under two pressures: some EU migration that is no longer bound for rUK will instead go to Scotland (along with other rEU and EFTA, although Scotland is English-speaking and may seem preferable to some), and at the same time fiscal responsibility will be hit with the loss of rUK funding and new payments obligations out to the EEA.
So your first two claims have come to nothing and you are now just fishing for more. Latherty we, Scotland, played this game all the last time when by the way it was accepted we would be a net contributer to the EU where we would have had to pay probably about twice as much as we will under EFTA. 1. Scotland is not full. 2. I refer you to post 12, my reply to your first post in this thread http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ifference-a-day-makes.499703/#post-1067217148
Not quite, I've found out a bit more about the EFTA (thank-you), which does not provide the economic support mechanisms that the EU would provide to a country like independent Scotland. So the EFTA is an option, but it is an option that would require a basket-case economy to make radical changes. I'm surprised that the conclusion that there would be net contribution "was accepted". I think maybe it wasn't understood, when added to the deficit that rUK is currently funding.
That is a surprising and disappointing response. This is a complex area and there are many moving parts, as the diagram I posted before will attest. Further your own posts referred to, at best, vague references to TV announcements and I had to independently research your assertions. I would say I have kept an open mind in this debate and would appreciate if you would do the same. It appears that Scotland will either: i) face the EU tariffs and customs on its trade with the UK (EEA via EU); or ii) give up all EU funding as well as its UK deficit funding as well as make new contributions out to the EU budget (whilst having free movement) (EEA via EFTA).
You are a Brexiteer and you came on this thread in insult mode. There are issues concerning economics on this thread. Where I stand at the moment is that regardless of the difficulty during transition, which there will be, we will almost certainly be able to provide an economic situation at least as good as we would have had within the UK and will be free of being ruled by Westminster who currently seems on a power grab from the devolved powers. You however just keep coming out with accusations which were even dealt with in the last Indyref. It is over. We will either join EFTA or the EU. Who knows maybe we will take over London's financial position in the EU. Nicola will be giving full details of the financial situation either after easter when she is supposed to be saying how she will address May's refusal to allow Scotland the democratic right of a vote or possibly after. There are many considerations as to whether it would be better to join the EU or EFTA and some of them will not be resolved until more information is obtained. I am not interested in games on 'got you scotland'. As I say if you know someone else who wants to play with you then they are welcome.
I see no justification for Scotland to take a financial services lead over other EU cities, nor do I see much sign of Westminster "re-volving" powers. If you must know about my personal view, I am ambivalent of Scottish independence and think rUK did a poor deal to keep them within the Union, being as it was a high oil price environment at the time with considered opinion being that the oil price will only increase. There is some gain in critical mass with Scotland tied in, not to mention the cultural and intellectual contribution of Scottish people as well as embedding a natural currency hedge against oil prices, but if Scotland wants independence so be it. As a Brexiter it is hard to argue an alternative, in my view. My own view for some 15 years now has been that London and the Home Counties should secede into a financial city-state akin to Singapore and the former Hong Kong. I was half-expecting this as an outcome of the banking crisis. "Scoxit" will be an expensive shock for Scotland though. I don't think the EU would ordinarily be willing to carry them as the UK currently does. So now is the time to bargain. Or indeed, Brexit might yet provide a third alternative platform.
Then you are unaware of the negotiations which Nicola was having with May or indeed Browns take on it http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-18/gordon-brown-proposes-third-option-for-scotland/ There is a good article here which among other things discusses May's attitude to Scotland https://diem25.org/brexit-is-an-old-peoples-home/ English Progressives or left began to be interested in Independence in the last referendum. This has now become much more so in that both within Scotland and in England people who previously did not support Independence do - I am talking here about genuine support. In England there are some people who want to tell Scotland to go to hell and others who want to keep Scotland as they see her as the last colony of England's empire. You can read more about that in the link I already put in https://diem25.org/brexit-is-an-old-peoples-home/ Here is another good article on English interest in keeping Scotland as their last colony. http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/the-problem-with-the-english-england-doesn-t-want-to-be-just-another-member-of-a-team-1-4851882 Scottish oil and gas is I believe not going to be brought into talks in the next referendum as it will likely confuse those who do not usually keep in contact with things. However it is noted that while there has been a 55% drop in the price of oil, Norway only saw her income from this dropping by 40% while ours, which is about the same, dropped by 99% according to the English in charge of it. Clearly something fishy is going on here. We can still make money from oil and gas and massive new fields have recently been found but this, I understand, is not going to be used in ScotRef or Indyref 2. http://www.businessforscotland.com/norway-still-getting-much-tax-oil/ all this has already been spoken about in the thread. Hmm and you still voted for it. Brexit is going to destroy England imo. No that is not the name. Did hear some people suggesting some good ones the other day but my mind has gone blank. As I said it is currently being called ScotRef or Indyref 2 You are describing what is happening to England over Brexit and you have absolutely no knowledge of Scotland's finances. No idea what you are talking about here. edit fixed links.
Who has heard about these recent terrorist incidents in Scotland https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/ The article begins describing accurately how it is the Unionists in particular the Tories who have brought a nasty, vile divisiveness into Scottish Politics. Beware what you start.
Says the man supporting London becoming Independent to England! http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-leaving-the-eu.479390/page-5#post-1067392836
I think you may have me confused with the other guy you were talking to. I am happy for both London and Scotland to become independent political entities from the UK, should that be their wish. It is however my honest belief that neither Scotland nor London wishes for that. Hence I do not support either.
