Bearing in mind that the Telegraph is backing the No camp. I have just mentioned this above there are many such issues across Europe but the fact still remains the chances are that the EU will try to find some way to continue Scottish membership without too many problems. Otherwise they have the greater problem of losing the resources of Scotland to the EU, i.e. renewable energy, fishing, oil. 160,000 EU citizens currently working in Scotland being expelled, 60,000 students suddenly facing fees, 5.5 million current EU members being expelled. Not to mention the Scots working in the EU. It is highly unlikely that the EU would want to stir all those problems up. Plus all the business transactions in current operation. It's almost impossible to envision the EU expelling Scotland.
If the lack of organised unions and that interaction with profit levels is not understood then cloud cookoo has descended. firmly north of the border Yes voters of course are entitled to be keen but must look at the worst scenario in currency and isolation from markets when, not if EU membership is denied
Ps the EU does have to expel Scotland from the yes vote forward Scotland will be required to apply to join
There is clearly some disagreement on this subject. But I hardly think it's as cut and dried as you would like to make it seem. As Quinn says, this matter would have to be voted upon by the individual parliaments of the member states. As he also surmises, it is entirely possible that parochial concerns will mean that there will be dissenters. It is the United Kingdom that is the current member of the E.U. A newly independent state within a member state, I.e. A now separate entity, would surely have to apply for membership independently.
In that case so will the UK. We are the The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Great Britain includes Scotland. We are a different entity without Scotland - subsidies etc will all have to be renegotiated, grants that cover Scotland will be disrupted. They may need rUK to reapply.
Possibly. However, I doubt that would be any problem as the EU is very keen to maintain the UK as a member. The potential problem seems to lie with the possible political ramifications, and precedent setting, of admitting breakaway states who were formerly part of a member state.
I don't think it's cut & dried it just appears far more complicated to exclude Scotland then include.
The EU are put in a difficult position on this one. Considering all the eastern European nation states (some of whom are/were not so long ago themselves part of a larger combined nation) that got put thru the member joining process wringer to get onboard, there will be claims of favouritism etc if an independent Scotland get some rubber-stamped special status in the EU. "We are a different entity without Scotland - subsidies etc will all have to be renegotiated, grants that cover Scotland will be disrupted. They may need rUK to reapply." Possibly. UKminus may need a referendum on whether to maintain any currency link with Scotland (nations should have their own independent currency) .
Parochial concerns will come to bear. Spain are worried about renewed agitation in the Basque region and Catalonia. Belgium have their concerns too. Rightly, or wrongly, they could decide that the precedent of admitting a breakaway state from a current member are too much for them to risk. After all, if Spain were to vote to admit Scotland, the Catalonians, should they succeed in gaining independence, could then claim that Spain must vote to include them too, should they apply for membership.
"Parochial concerns will come to bear." Parliament should be in open and transparent discussion with the EU to evaluate whether UKminus still meets the all the pre-requisites for an EU member. And if not, what needs to be done. Similarly for an independent Scotland. And what UKminus needs to do if Scotland is not granted membership.
The Conservatives should they be elected have promised a referendum on EU membership for the whole of Britain in 2017, things could get chaotic if there is and we vote to leave. Suppose Scotland votes yes to independence and gets into the EU and we vote to withdraw.
I'm sure it's a potential problem that Salmond is all too aware of. However, he is not liable to raise any concerns ahead of the referendum. He's hardly going to start rocking his own boat, is he?
"Suppose Scotland votes yes to independence and gets into the EU and we vote to withdraw." Not a problem. UKminus has its own currency. Scotland will have theirs. Scotland will have to comply with whatever edicts the EU lay down about the relationship witn a non-EU member (border/visa controls etc) .
People are getting carried away by the William Wallis syndrome and crying out Freedom!!! But they should beware that once they leave the umbrella of the UK then there is no coming back and if things get tough which they will do when taxes,cost of living and many many other things go through the roof then Scotland's poverty will get worse......It's a nice idea but wont work and instead of following William Wallis they should follow the safer bet of the Musketeers in one for all and all for one....It is too much of a risk for the Scottish people who will suffer hardship if it goes pear shape...
Wallace has its origins in Wales and is in fact a Welsh name, De Wales originally. I wish the Welsh would go independent and be ruled by their Plaid Cymru, we need them even less than we need the Scotch.
Apparently the life expectancy of men who live in Glasgow is 69, which could explain why King and Spurf are keen to vote yes.
