Jump to content

Andrew Marr Show - EU Immigration etc


Quillan
 Share

Recommended Posts

[quote user="Quillan"]

Interestingly from a business point of view Shell has put its north sea assets up for sale.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-26187875

What do they know?

[/quote]Reading the report it seems to me that Shell are raising capital to develop their other interests in the North Sea. Nothing sinister about that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Frederick"][quote user="Frederick"][quote user="idun"]I heard a scottish MP or a bloke with some such post on the telly this afternoon saying that Scotland had been a member for the EU for 40 years and so should not be treat like a newcomer.

I am sure that even in Scotland, people know what divorce entails and that, for better or worse, it is a new start with new rules. So if they want a divorce so be it. Ofcourse, if the £ no longer exists as daily currency in Scotland and Scotland is not a member of the € either they will have to have a new currency.  Would we have a proper border again at Berwick and would there be a new Hadrian's Wall, maybe a very new Cameron's Wall............oops, that sounds rather scottish to be honest.
[/quote]


Which raises the point .....If your money is with a bailed out bank with its HQ in Scotland..............Would you close your account and switch to one with its HQ in England if they vote yes ? 

Then there is this ..................... another thing the SNP say  "will never happen "    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-rbs-would-quit-edinburgh-1-3295676
[/quote]

The link is not opening for some reason


THE Royal Bank of Scotland and the 3200-strong workforce at its Gogarburn headquarters were today at the centre of the latest row over independence after Business Secretary Vince Cable claimed the bank would “inevitably” relocate its HQ to London after a ‘Yes’ vote.

Mr Cable told a committee of MPs that RBS, founded in Edinburgh in 1727, would want to be in the same country as the lender of last resort – the Bank of England.

But the SNP has branded his comments “ridiculous”.

RBS was bailed out by taxpayers after it came close to collapse in the 2008 banking crisis and is still 80 per cent publicly-owned. It employs 12,000 staff in Scotland,

At Westminster’s business innovation and skills committee, Glasgow North East Labour MP Willie Bain asked what RBS might do if the Bank of England was no longer its “lender of last resort”.

Mr Cable replied: “I think if you were managing RBS you would almost certainly want to be in a domicile where your bank is protected against the risk of collapse.

“I think they already have a substantial amount of their management in London and I would have thought that inevitably they would become a London bank.”

Edinburgh Western SNP MSP Colin Keir dismissed the comments as “another example of the usual scare stories”.

He said: “Even once the UK Government in finished with it, RBS will be a global player. Its headquarters are here, it does a lot of business in London and all around the world. There is no reason for it to shift its headquarters.

“Vince Cable is a Liberal Democrat and a unionist – he will paint the darkest picture possible for anything. But their doom and gloom stories are one of the reasons the ‘Yes’ campaign is picking up momentum.”

Edinburgh West Lib Dem MP Mike Crockart said if an independent Scotland were able to agree a full monetary union with the rest of the UK, there would be no reason for RBS to move headquarters.

But he said different banking regulations north and south of the border could force its hand.

Mr Crockart said: “There would be a pull for banks in Scotland to move their headquarters south, where they will gain from the stability of the regulatory system that’s already in place.”

An SNP spokesman said: “Vince Cable’s ridiculous comments are at odds with the common sense remarks from RBS’s chief executive, who last week said that if they had to operate in 39 countries around the world rather than 38, that is exactly what they would do.

“Mr Cable has unwittingly highlighted exactly why polls show the vast majority of people in the rest of the UK would expect the Westminster Government to agree to a currency union with Scotland.”

RBS said: “We don’t support political parties or political movements. We will respond to what voters decide and governments agree.”



[/quote]If RBS do move their head office to England that would mean that it would no longer be Scotland's responsibility. Nothing in the report suggests they are going to pull out of high street banking in Scotland.

Lets remember that a lot of the money used to bail out the UK banks in 2008 came from the US. The financial world does not want banks crashing  because they are afraid of the domino effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rabbie, doing the ironing is an opportunity to go other a few things in ones mind. Now let us assume that what the guy said in the video you kindly put a link to is true. In that case Scotland has a better GDP ratio than the UK, borrows a lot less money, has more disposable income per head and with its assets a much stronger bet all round. Why then would you want to tie yourself to a currency from a country, which he pointed out, is in a pretty poor state compared to your own. Also you would be tied to interest rates from the B of E which would primarily be adjusted to help those south of the border as they have the biggest debt. Even worse if you simply took the currency (rather than form a currency union) the control of interest rates and your ability to borrow would be non existent and anything that affects the pound affects you and you have no control over it. You money supply is being controlled by another country the very country you are trying to be independent from. I understand you are in the No camp but I thought I would mention it to see what others who watched it thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article from the Guardian suggests that the EU membership issue is not as clear cut as Barroso suggested. There is also the fact that it is by no means certain that the residual UK would not need to seek new membership. Certainly after losing Scotland I am sure the UK government would want to reduce its contributions in light of a lower income.

Indeed given the present popularity of UKIP would the residual UK still want to be in the EU 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/17/barroso-scotland-ludicrous-remarks?CMP=twt_gu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine that, should the EU impose upon the residual UK the need to seek new membership, they'd be a little worried that the residual UK wouldn't bother. As we're currently the 4th largest contributor to the EU budget, it's not really in their interests to make too many waves, is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="You can call me Betty"]I imagine that, should the EU impose upon the residual UK the need to seek new membership, they'd be a little worried that the residual UK wouldn't bother. As we're currently the 4th largest contributor to the EU budget, it's not really in their interests to make too many waves, is it?
[/quote]Given the Anti-EU sentiment at present in England there is no guarantee that the UK will remain in the EU regardless of the Scottish vote. Cameron has promised a referendum on this in 2017 and at present it seems that the Out side will win.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rabbie"][quote user="PaulT"]Are you sure that Salmond wants to be President - I thought we would be seeing King Salmond I.[/quote]By all accounts Salmond is in fact a strong monarchist and a Great fan of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth[/quote]

The little *rick is a fan of himself and himself alone. King Salmon is about right. Offer him q knighthood and have the sword slip is the best way to deal with the little bloodsucking tick.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rabbie"][quote user="You can call me Betty"]I imagine that, should the EU impose upon the residual UK the need to seek new membership, they'd be a little worried that the residual UK wouldn't bother. As we're currently the 4th largest contributor to the EU budget, it's not really in their interests to make too many waves, is it?

[/quote]Given the Anti-EU sentiment at present in England there is no guarantee that the UK will remain in the EU regardless of the Scottish vote. Cameron has promised a referendum on this in 2017 and at present it seems that the Out side will win.[/quote]

Well, as the Scottish referendum is THIS year, that gives us a three year hiatus, and most probably a change of UK government before anything happens. I'm sure that some of the key players may not want to sit around for three years waiting for everyone to make their minds up. Unless it all degenerates into some sort of adolescent romance where "I dumped him before he could dump me" comes into play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Mr Salmond wants to keep the Queen, keep the pound, keep the BBC, one has to ask why the need for independence. Scotland has all of these things already. Certainly, if an independent Scotland keeps the pound, then its economic policy will be determined by a foreign power and its Parliament in Westminster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched Salmonds reply to the issues of keeping the pound and staying in the EU last night. It is not so much what he is saying it is how he is saying it which I think is what is getting up peoples nose as are some of his condescending comments.

It seems to me that seeing that coupled with the comments in Rabbies link earlier that what he is saying is that he has decided to keep the pound to help the rest of the UK out because will be better for them when it comes to trade. He can 'prove' that it will be better because his experts, like the one in Rabbies link, who are saying that Scotland has a better and more efficient economy than the UK. Personally if I were in his shoes and believed what my experts were saying the last thing I would want is to keep any ties with the UK economy. Actually I would be more looking for ties with countries like Iceland who as his experts say have recovered and growing at an incredible rate. Of course that is a myth in that Iceland owes so much money which it is trying to sell its assets to repay, has attracted no external investment and stopped paying its debts in Oct 2013 (Bloomberg) and wont restart till 2018.

I am sure a lot of people both north and south of the border have worked out that some of Salmonds statements on these two issues are BS and that you can't allow 'the tail to wag the dog'. I think people will simply get fed up with it all to the point where some Scots may not even bother to vote which would be a terrible thing. In short it is the same rhetoric going round and round and quite frankly it is getting boring and there are far more important issues at stake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...