Scottish independence

BonnieSituation wrote:

You've been pushing the same capital flight 'argument' for pages now. We get it, no one's allowed to aspire to leave the UK. It's too late now. Everything must stay as it is forevermore.

If you looked at the points I am making instead of inventing arguments I am not, we would have a better discussion.

serfboard wrote:

I would be very surprised if the SNP aren't having regular discussions with business groups already, considering that they are in government in Scotland.

I expect business groups are making all parties aware of their concerns. That will help but the SNP will need a plan to address them as part of their referendum campaign.

serfboard wrote:

But in discussions about an independent Scotland first, they'll have to get a referendum, second it'll have to pass and third there will be a transition between a vote for independence and actual independence. In each of those stages, I would expect the talks with business groups to intensify, and their concerns to be addressed.

Put those in reverse order and you would have the bones of a plan.

serfboard wrote:

However, they cannot provide absolute certainty since that is impossible. The outcome of talks between a newly independent Scotland and rUK cannot be known until those talks are held and concluded.

That will be the trickiest bit but it doesn't stop them getting ready. That has to start with building political consensus and sending a clear message to both the international political and business audiences.

Studying the example of Brexit and then doing the complete opposite would be a good way to do it. There's even a good chance the Scottish electorate would know what they were voting for.

First Up wrote: »

The sooner they are recognised and addressed, the less negative they can be. Hoping they go away isn't a solution.

Industrialists, investors and the money markets are not interested in the finer details of electoral systems or parliamentary structures.

Fine. So we can agree at least that industrialists, investors and the money markets will be wholly unconcerned by the prospect of a realignment of the Scottish political party landscape, and on the strength of that agreement we need never mention this massive red herring ever again.

First Up wrote: »

They want straight answers to straight questions and they want to know who to ask. If that isn't clear, they might go somewhere else where there are people happy to answer them.

In a democracy, straight answers to straight questions about government policies are good for a max of five years - mostly less.

The markets adapt to this uncertainty. That's what markets do.

Obviously, if there's a prospect of Scottish independence, they'll want to know what indy Scotland's industrial, investment, etc policies are likely to be.

But it's not as though this is a complete blank slate. The Scottish government already has industrial, investment, etc, and opposition parties in Scotland have their own perspectives on these. Looking at that, and talking to the people concerned, you can project how those policies might develop or modify with the greater freedom that comes with independence, and with the new chalenges.

You won't look for a cast-iron guarantee as to future policy. Even if a political party was stupid enough to offer you one, you wouldn't be stupid enough to take it at face value, because - party realignment or no party realignment - that political party might not be in office after the next election. Just like in any other democracy.

Your nightmare scenario for a Scottish independence campaign is that it would be as badly conducted as Brexit has been. There has been no party realignment in the UK, but fûck knows what future industrial, investment, etc policy is going to be, because all we've had for the past five years has been negative positioning - loud complaints about what the UK doesn't want, but no clear thinking, and certainly no consensus even within the government party, about what it does. The markets have adapted to that, because that's what markets do, and the adaptation has included a collapse in foreign direct investment, a cratering of domestic investment and a significant transfer of capital abroad.

But there are good reasons for thinking that the strategy of abandoning policy in favour of a blend of toddler anger and magical thinking will not be embraced in a future Scottish independence referendum. First, that's not what happened in 2103/14. Secondly, the Scots Nats are a serious party of government with signficant experience in office, which is more than you could say of Vote Leave or the members of the ERG. Thirdly, who, having watched the shambolic parade of ineptitude, incompetence and disaster that is Brexit, would seek to emulate it? Especially when the shambles of Brexit has been the main driver for the resurgence of Scottish independence?

So, yeah. Thinking that Scottish progress to independence will be in any way modelled on the UK's progress to Brexit ignores the fact that one of the main reasons that the Scots might want independence is to escape from the UK's progress to Brexit. As you point out yourself, the canny thing do to here is to look at what Brexiters did, and do the exact opposite. But it's even cannier to realise that (a) everyone can see this; it's not some unique insight with which only a remarkable few are gifted; and (b) this would be the Scots Nats instinct anyway, and the Scots Tories, and Scottish Labour, and the Greens. None of them are remotely Brexity or Ukippy.

So, there'll be serious conversations about Scottish industrial and investment policy. Industrialists and investors will be involved in those conversations and will be listened to. Indy Scotland will probably offer them a more certain policy climate that Brexit Britain does. That's not to say there won't be challenges, arising out of Scotland's geographical position and its current trade dependence on a hollowed-out and failing UK. But if Scotland doesn't choose independence it's even more dependenent on HOFUK, as industrialist and investors will be well aware. Whichever set of problems Scotland chooses, the markets will adapt; that's the whole point of markets.

First Up wrote: »

You are free to ignore anything you don't like. For Scotland's sake, I hope their government doesn't.

There is nothing the Scottish government can do to prevent a realignment of Scottish political parties. In a democracy, political parties control the government; not the other way around.

I think you're jumping at shadows here.

First Up wrote: »

Could be, or it could be that with independence achieved, the SNP will fragment. Or it could be that cutting the Labour, Lib Dems and Tory parties links with their mother ships will cause them to scatter in various directions. Meanwhile, industry will want to know what's ahead.

Somebody needs to be thinking about it.

You're doing enough thinking about this hypothetical scenario for all of us.

I can't believe that after Peregrinus' lengthy, informative and well-informed post above, that all you have had to say is the equivalent of "yeah, well". Again.

What do you want the rest of us to say?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

This is very rich from a man who is harping on continuously about hypothetical capital flight from hypothetical industrialists' in the hypothetical event that an independent Scotland's first notable political event is a hypothetical realignment of their political parties.

But no, it is I that is inventing arguments here.

The point I am trying to make is obviously eluding you. It eluded the Brexiteers too. Have you noticed the similarities?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So much so they brought in the FTP Act to stop the LDs legging it at the first sight of trouble.

Other way round. It was the LDs who insisted on it.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Big boost for Sturgeon:

https://twitter.com/BBCJamesCook/status/1374036694677258245

Indeed, makes the hysterics of the Tories and Ruth Davidson in particular the past few days look completely ridiculous now. Hopefully it will see a bounce in the polls for Sturgeon, she's a bit too left wing for me but I think she is easily the most impressive politician in the UK right now, such a breath of fresh air besides the Tories and Boris in particular.

The Greens have confirmed they won't support a Tory no-confidence motion following today's outcome.

https://twitter.com/lynseybews/status/1374041495553118209

Interesting to see what the Scottish Tories' strategy will be now. Do they continue the attacks on Sturgeon, or will they cool off?

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't see how that suggests that it's "on the cards". They need Johnson's assent and he won't give it.

It's on the cards by virtue of them publishing the bill and then seeking a mandate in May's elections.

That BJ won't assent is neither here nor there.
The Scottish Government can only work within the democratic institutions that exist.

The shambles of the Tory attacks on Sturgeon and the SNP the last month show exactly the sort of approach that will continue.

Every week at PMQ's, no matter what the question from Ian Blackford, Johnson ends his 'answer' with, "...and the the SNP just want a divisive referendum". The contempt that Scotland has been treated with by the Tories means that we know that they'll cry about this in the fashion that they have, but with it being published, they have to ask questions on it now that it's on the cards.

What would scottish independence do to brexit ?
I'm assuming it wouldn't derail it , scotland is a relatively small economy compared to england/uk ,
And considering how much of it's trade scotland does with the rest of the uk , I assuming that joining the eu would be economically difficult .. at least to start with ,

Markcheese wrote: »

What would scottish independence do to brexit ?
I'm assuming it wouldn't derail it , scotland is a relatively small economy compared to england/uk ,
And considering how much of it's trade scotland does with the rest of the uk , I assuming that joining the eu would be economically difficult .. at least to start with ,

I would think Scotland would join the EEA, quite quickly.

rock22 wrote: »

Sadly , the English media are now reporting the same old story as "breaking news"

I suspect there will be a huge effort to demonise SNP coming up to the elections in May

That's an impressive twist on that story from the Guardian. Well played.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

That's an impressive twist on that story from the Guardian. Well played.

TBF, I misread that story. Seems there was another committee vote that was separate to the report yesterday.

Given that the vote broke along party lines, it's hard to know what to take from it.

There's no new information to come out of it anyway.