Unionist Propaganda Surge 78

George Osborne is all over the media warning that an independent Scotland must follow Tory foreign policies if it wishes to stay in the pound. In fact the pound does not belong to the English – it was a new, shared currency created in 1707.

The problem of all liars is consistency. Keeping today’s lies straight with yesterday’s. My favourite bit of today’s attempt to bully the Scots is this:

“The UK government believes that a newly independent Scottish government would be required to formally commit to joining the euro as a condition of its EU membership”.

They seem to have forgotten their last big lie, which was that an independent Scotland would be kicked out of the EU and unable to join. Oh dear. They can’t both be true.

What is most amusing is the fact that an independent Scotland would, according to the official GERS report acknowledged by the Treasury, actually have a smaller fiscal deficit as a percentage of GDP than the current UK, so Osborne’s admonitions should better be addressed to the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer who is … err…

As for Osborne’s warnings that the oil price may be volatile (presumably along with the whisky price), I am happy to take our chances on that one. A commodity in finite supply for which demand continues steadily to increase seldom suffers devastating and permanent price plunges.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

78 thoughts on “Unionist Propaganda Surge

1 2 3
  • pictishbeastie

    Fred, you say you live in the Highlands but I’m curious as to which of Alasdair Gray’s categories you fall into? Settler or Colonist?

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Sjb : yes, that’s correct. It could in fact “delay” achieving a couple of the other criteria as well. But since those criteria are in fact no more than sound economic sense, it would not be a very clever course of action. Legally, Scotland would be a Memeber State “with a derogation” (=temporary) unless it managed to negotiate an exemption (= permanent).

  • Juteman

    Sweden has been a member for years, without joining the Euro, and has no intention of doing so.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Juteman :

    that’s correct as well**, but note that Sweden has no formal Treaty exemption, it has merely been treated (from the beginning of Stage 3 of EMU) with a certain “leniency”, let us say.

    **I wouldn’t be so sure that it has no intention of joining the single currency in due time.

  • Kempe

    Sweden has no opt-out and is expected to join the Euro at some stage. All EU members except the UK and Denmark, who have opt-outs, are required to join the Euro. Before they can do so their existing currency must spend at least two years in ERM II. So ERM II is voluntary but at the same time compulsory for any nation wanting to join the Eurozone.


    If, as seems to be the case, an independent Scotland has to apply to join the EU as a new member it will have to join the Euro unless it can negotiate an opt-out and I’m not sure that’s an option anymore. Before it can adopt the Euro it will have to have it’s own currency to put in ERM II.

  • Fred

    “Fred, you say you live in the Highlands but I’m curious as to which of Alasdair Gray’s categories you fall into? Settler or Colonist?”

    Did you want to know if any of my Grandparents were Jewish as well?

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    Kempe (and the link he provided) confirm what I have been saying. An independent Scotland would be in exactly the same position as the Member States which acceded recently (and as Croatia, which will accede at the end of the year)

    Accordingly, it is clear that the Chancellor, as quoted by Craig, was telling the truth and not just putting out a frightener.

  • Komodo

    Will the Euro even exist in five years’ time? Maybe not.

    Re. Kempe: suppose Scotland adopted the Euro for its two-year probation? Cat among pigeons time, surely?

    OK. There’s not much help coming from Euroland, and Osborne is going to oppose anything looking like Scottish independence until he chokes in his gimp mask (credit Steve Bell). Why? Ultimately, at the end of the chain of causation, this will be to keep the bankers and multinationals happy and rich. If Scotland is as bad a deal as the Unionist press incessantly tells us, why the hell wouldn’t you want to cut it loose? The truth is, Scotland is probably perfectly viable on its own, and if that is the case it can get by without using the pound or the Euro. These would make life easier in the short run, but ultimately would not affect the outcome.
    1. Scotland exports more than it imports
    2. Doesn’t engage in silly wars in Asia
    3. Doesn’t rely 100% on its financial sector to create money out of nothing.

    PS – in the event of a referendum ‘yes’ vote, don’t expect to be basing your WMD’s in the Clyde any more, Osbo…

  • sjb

    If Scotland is as bad a deal as the Unionist press incessantly tells us, why the hell wouldn’t you want to cut it loose?

    Perhaps England is concerned about what alliances an independent Scotland might form with foreign powers.

  • Komodo

    Like the EU? Well, yes. I’m pretty sure Salmond will be able to form some sort of relationship with all those foreign countries – probably a better one than England seems capable of having. Then there’s America. You mean Scottish troops would perhaps be serving US interests rather than England’s? That would be terrible…but, just a minute – they already are.

    On the other hand, Scotland is, of course, well-known for its adherence to fundamentalist Salafism…Yemen is a distinct possibility, though I believe a splinter group within the SNP favours Shi’a Iran. Bloody hell. England’s markets will be flooded with prototype nukes, carpets and pistachios, and not a damn thing we can do about it.

    And then there’s China. Actually, I wouldn’t altogether discount that…circumstances make strange bedfellows, and England’s reluctance to recognise the aspirations of the Scottish nation could well be a pertinent circumstance.

  • Komodo

    PS – Iranian and Turkish pistachios are absolutely the best- accept no substitutes.

  • Juteman

    I’ll try again.

    Sweden has been a member for years, without joining the Euro, and has no intention of doing so.

  • Fred

    “I’m glad everyone accepts that Scotland can’t be forced to accept the Euro.”

    Salmond wants to join the euro and he intends to join the euro.

    Only problem is it takes time and loses votes.

    So he lies to the people and tells them an independent Scotland would keep sterling then in a year or two ditches the pound and joins the euro.

    I think if Westminster thought the deal would be permanent and that the SNP could be trusted they would certainly agree to monetary union between Britain and Scotland.

  • Fred

    “No it doesn’t. Like Sweden does, you only have to say you will.”

    Lying and cheating you mean.

    That would fit nicely with SNP policy so far.

  • Craig P

    The Scottish and rUK economies will start out very similar in economic profile, GDP and indebtedness, and a currency union would work perfectly well under such circumstances (different circumstances apply in the Eurozone). A shared pound would also be underscored by hard revenues from oil, so it is hardly like rUK would be doing the Scots a favour – it is in the interests of both sides to co-operate. However, as and when economies diverge, a Scottish currency will make more and more sense.

    There is also a long history of Scottish banks printing their own money, not tied to any central bank. Some of that would be interesting, though I don’t know if in a good way, or a Chinese curse way!

    Fred – ‘The SNP seem to be attempting to turn this into a Scotland vs England battle’ Only in your imagination. Plenty English people (including MSPs) active in the SNP. Though I have a certain sympathy for you if you rely on the BBC or mainstream press for your news.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.