When will indyref2 happen?

[sergie's no1 fan]

That's not what happened last time though.
No matter what your view of the situation is, it's quite hard to deny that the yes campaign put forward a really weak argument. They hoped people would say the whole 'You can't use the pound' thing as that was easy enough to counter it but when it come to the first debate, Darling had moved on and there was no coherent response to it; in all honesty, I found it pretty embarrassing .
If Sturgeon comes out with a plan on currency that details how iScotland will go about arranging a lender of last resort with two or three options and priorities, that'll have much more substance than it did last time round.
It's pretty easy to dismiss it but it is a very important point. People won't like whatever they come up with but the option that they put forward last time round wasn't just politically vulnerable, it was verging on economic lunacy - they can do much better on it. It was pretty much just picked because the white paper was designed to ensure continuity.
The only game in town, at least for the foreseeable future before the Euro would be viable, is an independent currency with a plan to build up cash reserves by reductions in public spending in the next period. I suspect the SNP wouldn't be comfortable being honest about that but if they try and bunch this together with changes in taxation and aligning Scotland closer to the EU, I think there's a plan there that can win the vote in the face of the Brexit shitfest.

Yeah the currency was an issue, but it snowballed into something much bigger than it should have been. Salmond could have nipped it in the bud, but as I said, who is to say the Unionists would have accepted a straight answer on it, look at the reaction when he said there is nothing stopping us continuing to use the current pound.

If Sturgeon says we will be using currency X you can guarantee Davidson coming out and saying that will be a disaster for Scotland.

[HTG]

15 hours ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

20 hours ago, Detournement said:

Why would we need to quickly build foreign currency reserves if we don't have any foreign denominated debt?
 

How will we pay the Divorce Bill from rUK?

How much is it? Is it anything? Can we get a refund from Crossrail and HS2? 

There only needsto be an agreement on shared cost of integrated infrastructure like the railways between the countries. 

If there is a debt we can maybe supply some of the power we export at a below market rate - it'll still be better than the "f**k all" we get at the moment. 

ETA - will the "divorce bill" be more or less expensive than the cost of remaining part of an absolute clusterfuck for years or generations to come (Rees Mogg's 2050 estimate).

Edited January 8, 2019 by HTG

[ICTJohnboy]

51 minutes ago, Colkitto said:

Think that's what she means by very soon. 

 

I would have thought that NS would have wanted to wait until at least March 31st, when we should know what kind of Brexit we are going to finish up with.

Having said that, I suspect there will be an agreement with the EU to delay Article 50 - maybe even to the end of this year, to allow this pathetic government to cling on to power and for the haggling to continue.

[NotThePars]

Would love indyref2 to get announced on my birthday so I’m for March 31st.

[D Angelo Barksdale]

April 23rd, St George's day would be my choice.

[sparky88]

NS will want to wait until there is movement in the polls before she even mentions a new referendum.

[John Lambies Doos]

NS will want to wait until there is movement in the polls before she even mentions a new referendum.

No she won't, the movement in the polls will happen when campaigning starts. The polls aren't going to move now

[harry94]

43 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

SNP are predicted to lose even SNP+Greens majority at next HR election, if they want to do something the clock is ticking.

I'd be quite surprised if the election takes place before 2021. The majority is much flimsier than people realise (the system is designed for minority governments) and I really don't think they'd voluntarily want another election, even if they were appearing to be doing very well in the polls and on course to a majority in their own right - tiny nudge on electiond day can have a big impact.

My worry for Sturgeon is that there aren't really any clear winning moves right now until something happens at Westminster. I think their main route to a victory is banking on the withdrawal agreement collapsing next week and then a UK General Election. Conversely, they are on track to do really well in a snap election so it could be that they go all out on kick starting an independence campaign and hoping to win it from the next government. Play it right and if it's a precursor to indyref 2, they'll get all the support solidifying around them. The trouble in 2017 was that the Tories were campaigning against independence and they weren't really doing much so their turnout was lower than usual.

EDIT - The snap election doesn't even need to be on independence totally. It could be a 'Scotland's Choice' type thing. There are a surprising number of people who believe that Scotland is entitled to a referendum, even if they don't support it.

Edited January 8, 2019 by harry94

[AUFC90]

That's not what happened last time though.
No matter what your view of the situation is, it's quite hard to deny that the yes campaign put forward a really weak argument. They hoped people would say the whole 'You can't use the pound' thing as that was easy enough to counter it but when it come to the first debate, Darling had moved on and there was no coherent response to it; in all honesty, I found it pretty embarrassing .
If Sturgeon comes out with a plan on currency that details how iScotland will go about arranging a lender of last resort with two or three options and priorities, that'll have much more substance than it did last time round.
It's pretty easy to dismiss it but it is a very important point. People won't like whatever they come up with but the option that they put forward last time round wasn't just politically vulnerable, it was verging on economic lunacy - they can do much better on it. It was pretty much just picked because the white paper was designed to ensure continuity.
The only game in town, at least for the foreseeable future before the Euro would be viable, is an independent currency with a plan to build up cash reserves by reductions in public spending in the next period. I suspect the SNP wouldn't be comfortable being honest about that but if they try and bunch this together with changes in taxation and aligning Scotland closer to the EU, I think there's a plan there that can win the vote in the face of the Brexit shitfest.

Our share of the BOE reserves will do just fine thanks.

[AUFC90]

We're not liable for a bloody divorced bill. This isn't a voluntary organisation like the EU where we have made obligations to pay stuff. Like any other country that's split up, debts and assets, including BOE reserves will be split up. No assets then we start off as a debt free, oil rich, independent country. It's that simple.

 

 

[ICTJohnboy]

1 hour ago, AUFC90 said:

On 1/7/2019 at 11:59, harry94 said:

 

Our share of the BOE reserves will do just fine thanks.

 

Didn't Gordon Brown spend all that?

[AUFC90]

 
Didn't Gordon Brown spend all that?

No

[John Lambies Doos]

We're not liable for a bloody divorced bill. This isn't a voluntary organisation like the EU where we have made obligations to pay stuff. Like any other country that's split up, debts and assets, including BOE reserves will be split up. No assets then we start off as a debt free, oil rich, independent country. It's that simple.
 
 

MSM won't be spinning that I'm afraid

[doulikefish]

MSM won't be spinning that I'm afraid

Cross border trade would stop but only 1 way obviously

[ICTJohnboy]

1 hour ago, AUFC90 said:

8 hours ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 
Didn't Gordon Brown spend all that?

No

 

57 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

He sold gold reserves or a large bit of them, but that's not the same thing.

 

Right then.

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, MixuFixit said:

He sold gold reserves or a large bit of them, but that's not the same thing.

Unfortunately when gold was at a record* low price.

*ish

[harry94]

11 hours ago, AUFC90 said:

On 1/7/2019 at 11:59, harry94 said:

That's not what happened last time though.
No matter what your view of the situation is, it's quite hard to deny that the yes campaign put forward a really weak argument. They hoped people would say the whole 'You can't use the pound' thing as that was easy enough to counter it but when it come to the first debate, Darling had moved on and there was no coherent response to it; in all honesty, I found it pretty embarrassing .
If Sturgeon comes out with a plan on currency that details how iScotland will go about arranging a lender of last resort with two or three options and priorities, that'll have much more substance than it did last time round.
It's pretty easy to dismiss it but it is a very important point. People won't like whatever they come up with but the option that they put forward last time round wasn't just politically vulnerable, it was verging on economic lunacy - they can do much better on it. It was pretty much just picked because the white paper was designed to ensure continuity.
The only game in town, at least for the foreseeable future before the Euro would be viable, is an independent currency with a plan to build up cash reserves by reductions in public spending in the next period. I suspect the SNP wouldn't be comfortable being honest about that but if they try and bunch this together with changes in taxation and aligning Scotland closer to the EU, I think there's a plan there that can win the vote in the face of the Brexit shitfest.

Our share of the BOE reserves will do just fine thanks.

The share of BOE reserves is thought to be insufficient to do this when grouped with the liabilities that it would result in and the projected ongoing debt accumulation for (at least) the initial future. The population share isn't sufficient enough to cover the sort of reserves needed - that analysis is 5 years out of date but gives you an idea of the work needed.

11 hours ago, AUFC90 said:

We're not liable for a bloody divorced bill. This isn't a voluntary organisation like the EU where we have made obligations to pay stuff. Like any other country that's split up, debts and assets, including BOE reserves will be split up. No assets then we start off as a debt free, oil rich, independent country. It's that simple.

It's really not that simple.

As you say, this isn't a voluntary organisation - that means that the protocol to depart is entirely dependent on our masters, the UK. There is obviously UDI which was a popular concept during colonial times but that's not realistic - any route to independence comes from Westminster consent.

The Edinburgh Agreement was the precursor to the last indyref and the expectation was that there would be some sort of negotiation to determine the share of assets and liabilities. There will be some sort of debate about the mechanics of those liabilities (as they are legally belonging to the UK) but in exchange for access to the assets, they will be incurred by iScotland. Your assertion that Scotland would emerge debt free may be technically true in the immediate sense but it won't be in practice.

[AUFC90]

It's really not that simple.
As you say, this isn't a voluntary organisation - that means that the protocol to depart is entirely dependent on our masters, the UK. There is obviously UDI which was a popular concept during colonial times but that's not realistic - any route to independence comes from Westminster consent.
The Edinburgh Agreement was the precursor to the last indyref and the expectation was that there would be some sort of negotiation to determine the share of assets and liabilities. There will be some sort of debate about the mechanics of those liabilities (as they are legally belonging to the UK) but in exchange for access to the assets, they will be incurred by iScotland. Your assertion that Scotland would emerge debt free may be technically true in the immediate sense but it won't be in practice.

You just said it yourself. Liability of debt will be dependent on access to assets. No access no debt. And even the debt is up for negotiation as the debt was accumulated by Westminster and spent on things needed by Westminster. It won't all decided by our masters like you say. Unlike the EU negotiations we have a very strong hand and the EU negotiations have shown how bloody useless the UK governement is at these sorts of things.

Its not just a share of BOE reserves either. We're entitled to our share of military assets as well. They want to keep them too they can take them off the debt and i very much doubt wed take our share of the very large sum of debt owed to ourselves that we pay interest on right now. I.e quantitative easing. Im pretty sure our debt would look a whole lot rosier than they make out right now.

[Paco]

Unfortunately when gold was at a record* low price.
*ish

The stock answer to anything about Gordon Brown is almost always about the gold.

The Tories have sold off the oil, the railways, the electricity, the gas, the banks, water, the post office, BT, to name but a few.

Anyone any idea if there‘s money in any of those industries?

[harry94]

Just now, AUFC90 said:

You just said it yourself. Liability of debt will be dependent on access to assets. No access no debt. And even the debt is up for negotiation as the debt was accumulated by Westminster and spent on things needed by Westminster. It won't all decided by our masters like you say. Unlike the EU negotiations we have a very strong hand and the EU negotiations have shown how bloody useless the UK governement is at these sorts of things.

Its not just a share of BOE reserves either. We're entitled to our share of military assets as well. They want to keep them too they can take them off the debt and i very much doubt wed take our share of the very large sum of debt owed to ourselves that we pay interest on right now. I.e quantitative easing. Im pretty sure our debt would look a whole lot rosier than they make out right now.

I'm not denying a share of assets but the idea that we're in a great negotiating position is completely delusional - Westminster just needs to withhold a share in certain assets and we're pretty fucked. We don't have a third party arbitrator - the UK are the nation state and we aren't. Even something like talking to the EU and lodging official papers has to be done through a nation state - the UK could just deny their legitimacy as official correspondence and put us two years behind.

Quantitative easing doesn't really work like that - it's public debt held in other hands effectively but it doesn't change the raw numbers of public debt. There may well be some quirks to it that make the overall number lower but ability to service it is very important. iScotland would have no initial credit rating and initially be borrowing at a higher price. The idea that things are going to look rosier, at least immediately, is against all economic consensus and I'd be interested if you've got a peer reviewed publication that backs that point up?

I'm not meaning to target you but with Brexit, we've seen these absolutely lunatic fantasy views that took hold during the vote and we're gradually finding out that opinion from people who know what they are talking about is actually important. It'd be embarrassing and could be very damaging if the Scottish Government go into indyref2 playing up to these sorts of myths and then we vote for independence and there's a massive backlash when people learn that they've been mislead. Now more than ever before, there's a path there and it should be articulated properly.