Interesting, don’t you think?

This, of course, is blatantly untrue. The SNP policy, agreed by the Party in conference, is not that at all. The actual SNP policy is to go for an independent currency as quickly as possible, and there are no tests attached.

That’s the P³.

According to the BBC at least the party in conference agreed the following:

The aim should then have been for the Scottish Parliament to take a decision on whether to establish a new currency “by the end of the first term of an independent Parliament”.

Pleas from the leadership not to amend the motion were ignored by a majority of party members, who voted by 781 to 729 for a new currency to instead be introduced “as soon as practicable”.

However the amendment, by the SNP’s Dalkeith and District Branch, kept the vast majority of the leadership’s proposals – including the use of six key economic tests that will “guide” the precise timescale for a new currency.

These were set out by the party’s Growth Commission, and include an independent Scotland having a “sufficiently strong and credible fiscal position in relation to budget deficit and overall debt” before a separate currency is introduced.

And there would need to be evidence that the new currency would “meet the ongoing needs of Scottish residents and businesses”.

The tests were kept despite activist Timothy Rideout, who spoke for the amendment, describing them as “rubbish”.

Can’t see that they changed this at the November virtual conference.

But then who are we to believe? That tax funded and therefore entirely impartial BBC or some loon on the internet?

41 thoughts on “Interesting, don’t you think?”

  1. A new currency for Scotland?
    A tartan dollar….on an economy of haggis, malt and tourism! They’re having a joke.
    The new currency name? What about the “Jocular”.

    But since they’ll be strapped for cash, perhaps the “Jockstrap” is more appropriate.
    Only exchangable in Darien, Panama…

  2. 80 per cent capital flight estimated, based on local financial institution private client surveys, they keep their trigger fingers ready.

  3. “But then who are we to believe? That tax funded and therefore entirely impartial BBC or some loon on the internet? ”

    I’m not sure if that’s a choice the BBC would like people to be discussing.

  4. So Much For Subtlety

    I don’t see much of a difference between the BBC and a random loon on the internet. The bias of the loon is usually more obvious but not by much.

    Won’t Scotland be forced to adopt the Euro?

  5. . . . and include an independent Scotland having a “sufficiently strong and credible fiscal position in relation to budget deficit and overall debt” before a separate currency is introduced.

    So they’ll always be using the Pound then; presumably how they’ll keep milking us.

    If the poison dwarf pulls off this unconstitutional separation I’d like to see a very hard border indeed.

  6. “This, of course, is blatantly untrue.”

    So Spud is accusing Andrew Wilson of lying.

    I wonder what Andrew Wilson would think of that. Or Andrew Wilson’s lawyers.

  7. Won’t Scotland be forced to adopt the Euro?

    Yes if they were to join the EU but they won’t be joinging the EU because Spain will veto accession so as not to encourage its own Catalan secessionists.

    They’ll need to go their own way as TtC says. How about 100 Crivens to the Agley?

  8. Scotland would fail the economic tests (yes, there really are some, after Greece) necessary to join the euro, and therefore probably fail to join the EU either, though Brussels would likely make an exception if they thought it would damage the UK. The new Scottish currency must, simply must, be the Bawbee.

  9. TMB

    Not quite. Since 1999, all new EU members are obliged to commit in principle to joining the Euro once they meet certain criteria. However, there is also no mechanism that actually forces a new EU member to adopt it. Sweden still hasn’t joined the Euro, even though it doesn’t have a formal opt-out, and it’s not in ERM II. So an indy Sco’land could postpone Euro entry indefinitely – and would not be eligible given its likely budget deficit.

  10. It is logically consistent to be in favour:

    1. of Brexit but opposed to Scexit – eg on the grounds that the UK is an optimal union and the EU isn’t.

    2. of Brexit and Scexit – eg on grounds of national sovereignty.

    But it is not logically consistent to be in favour of:

    3. Scexit but not Brexit – because the arguments used by remainers against Brexit apply in spades to Scexit.

    The Scotch Nazi Party’s members struggle to grasp this.

  11. Come with me
    And you’ll be
    In a world of pure imagination
    Take a look
    And you’ll see
    Into your imagination

  12. TMB,

    A hundred “Crivens!” , followed by some mild scuffling in the shrubbery would worry me far, far more than anything else in the world…

  13. Assuming they actually left, on day 1 they would still be using Sterling, as from what has been said it seems the decision on a new currency would only be taken after independence.

    In that case would not the Bank of England have something to say about their use of Sterling. I’m sure they have controls on what Jersey and Gibraltar can do. That would still stick in the craw of the loonier nats. (My spellcheck said ‘bats’ for ‘nats’. Perhaps it’s perceptive…)

  14. “I don’t see much of a difference between the BBC and a random loon on the internet.”

    The random loon will occasionally be right.

  15. Blimey, I just went to snippa’s place and posted a pretendy outraged comment from a Stefan Richter of NKVD Solicitors Edinburgh threatening legal action if the Visiting Professor didn’t withdraw his libel against my client Mr A Wilson, and he’s fallen for it.

  16. @ Bongo

    Well done.

    Anything to annoy the little shit.

    He had been wholesale cutting and pasting chunks from the FT so I brought that to the attention of the FT’s copyright people who thanked me and said that appropriate action was being taken. Noticeably of late he’s reduced that to the 30 word verbatim quotes allowed so it seems he got a legal shafting from them. Hopefully it’s making him nervous and paranoid.

  17. “but they won’t be joinging the EU because Spain will veto accession so as not to encourage its own Catalan secessionists.”

    Yes but no but. As the current vaccine issue is showing the EU have little regard for law or democratic (or diplomatic) niceties. If the EU (ie the Commission, which in turn means Angela Merkel or her successors) think that Scotland being in the EU is a ‘good thing’ (most likely because it would p*ss off the English) then Scotland will be accepted regardless of what some Spaniards think. They’ll be told to shut up or get the ‘No more money for you’ treatment in very short order. Or just ignored entirely, as the EU seems quite capable of ignoring its own laws and Constitution when it suits it.

  18. The problem with that Jim is that most Spaniards aren’t that fussed about the EU. It only has a favourability rating just a few % higher than the UK had when it left.

    What keeps it in is that the politicians are largely pro-EU. So leaving never gets discussed, except by their equivalent of UKIP.

    Should the EU hit one of Spain’s trigger issues — and Catalonian independence is most certainly one of those — then that might rapidly change.

    The combination of mass scepticism about the EU combined with politicians being against it is not something the EU will want to test.

  19. Bloke in North Dorset

    One of the podcasts I listen to while out walking recently covered the run up to the Act of Union and how they went about negotiating it (next door rooms passing bits pf paper, by his account) and then the host went on to read the whole Act. I was going to skip it but thought I’d give listen.

    Bearing in mind it was one of those crisp, clear, sunny January days that make winter bearable, and for those who know this area I was on top of Bulbarrow (the Ice Drove for most of it) I wasn’t giving it my fullest attention. What struck me though was once you got past the initial setting up of a single monarch and the conditions around religious freedom, very short sections, it is nothing more than the setting up of an FTA and customs union and how to transition to them.

    I sometime wonder in my most cynical moments if the SNP really wants independence. They remind me of the ANC in that if you opposed Apartheid you joined the ANC and as an organisation it became all things to all men. The result is clear to see, no credible opposition and rampant corruption. In the same way if you want independence for Scotland the SNP is the only route, even if you despise their politics.

    If Scotland does gain independence the SNP will be seriously exposed. I don’t think we’ll see the ANC types of corruption but as an outsider looking in they are really incompetent and getting a free ride from most of the media. Why would you want to expose yourself to real scrutiny without being able to blame the English? Although that said, I suppose it will be a century or 2 before they’ll stop blaming us, if ever cf Ireland.

  20. Well done Bingo and AC..his arrogance, self righteousness as self importance knows no limit, clearly encouraged by those in his echo chamber…we all know he can start an argument with himself in an empty room and it’s a matter of time before he walks into a legal wrangle, aka Ashcroft, at some point… some of his postings are comedy gold.. he loves to offer comment on things he knows very little about.. the blog on shorting is a classic and ended up with him seeing himself as a kind of self appointed regulator of the fixed income market. He is a fool..

  21. “I sometime wonder in my most cynical moments if the SNP really wants independence.”

    The ones with brains don’t want independence, they know they’d be f*cked financially from day one, which means f*cked politically, because they’ve sold it as a land of milk and honey, free of the hated English and their austerity. Present the Scottish public with the sort of austerity not seen since wartime and you could well see SNP MSPs claiming asylum in the rUK, they’d be that hated and in danger of hanging from a lamp post. So their best plan is to keep calling for independence, hoping all the while that the idiot Tories keep refusing to give it to them, or even a new referendum. This is the best outcome for the wise SNPers – perpetual grievance against Westminster and the hated English (esp. Tories), while the object of their hatred keep sending money north.

    Its the ones with nothing but tartan and Buckfast between their ears who really want it.

  22. The wise thing would be to grant the SNP’s bluff, especially if the English get a vote too.
    After a few years, if we really want Scotland, we could buy it back from the Official Receiver.
    Keep Shetland though, they don’t want to be part of an independent Scotland.

  23. After a few years, if we really want Scotland, we could buy it back from the Official Receiver.

    Why? Go on, sell it to me….

  24. There was a weird meme going around during that very-foreign-country era of British politics that lay Before Brexitref, when europhiles completely failed to understand the more ardent eurosceptics (Remain/Leave not being the labels of choice back then). They also thought that leaving the EU (don’t even think the word “Brexit” had been coined) was such an obviously stupid and self-defeating idea that there’s no way anyone could actually want it, what with all the trouble it would bring.

    Or at least anyone serious, at a high level. IDS or Farage were, one was assured by a certain type of europhile smuggo, merely playing a populist card among those undereducated and stupid enough not to twig leaving would be economic and geostrategic suicide, while putting the leader of UKIP out of a job. Privately they didn’t want it, just claimed to in order to benefit their political careers or in the hope of having a bargaining chip to extract future concessions from the EU. “Call their bluff” was raised as a suggestion. Cameron did it in the end for reasons more to do with internal party politics, but when the Lib Dems had a few years earlier called for an in/out referendum, that was very much in a europhile spirit of “let’s see how people really act when the chips are down – bet they’ll admit that we were right all along when their jingoistic talk risks actual consequences!” (In fairness, by calling out David Cameron as someone who’d feed lukewarm Brussels-bashing comments to his voter base while swiftly defending EU membership if the prospect of doing anything about it was ever raised, the Lib Dems had a fair target.)

    Now I’m not saying True Believers in Sindy are totally analogous to True Believers in Brexit. There are differences as stark or starker than the similarities. But I think people at a social/political/cultural/geographic distance from the True Believers are making a similar mistake in underestimating just how badly they want this, to the point where not wanting it has become unthinkable and therefore unchallengeable. Take a good look inside their bubble – talk to some of them, try to get into their group mindset, explore their now quite extensive media landscape – and rather like the Irish nationalists by circa 1900, it’s clear they have already created something of an alternative subculture and community of thought. One that is, not by coincidence, often orthogonal, even impervious, to many ideas floating around the English political and media mainstream.

    Concepts like “you’ll never afford it”, “the EU won’t have you anyway” or “Scotland is not and never was a mere colony of England under the Union, and moreover Scots were historically active participants in the British Empire” simply have no grip over the imagination of hard-line Scottish nationalists, regardless of either the rhetorical strength or the truth value of these arguments. Yes you’ll see such lines paroted by pro-Union politicians, but only in an attempt to reach undecided voters. In terms of the battle for the hearts and minds of nationalists – whether they could be persuaded to settle for a form of civic nationalism in a Quebec-style quasi-federal arrangement or whatever – those arguments have already been blunted to the point of total irrelevance.

    We are at an equivalent point to when the eurosceptic wing of the Tories had truly bought in to the Kipper idea that no extra Treaty opt-outs, no piece of paper Cameron brought back from his doomed “renegotiation”, could ever reconcile the UK to a comfortable position within an integrated EU. Brexit had crystallised as the only viable option in their minds. Cameron and Osborne’s counterbluster about car manufacturers abandoning Britain en masse if we left the Single Market, or Washington downgrading the Special Relationship if we lost influence in Brussels, could never win them back. That would be quibbling about on what terms they’d accept the UK remaining, but the True Believer mindset had already moved on to Leave, ergo the only questions that absorbed attention were the possible means and desired terms of Brexit.

    The SNP did historically possess senior politicians who were wary of independence, or saw it only as a long-term project which required decades of political and popular preparation. That generation has either changed its mind as they’ve seen their goal become more tangible, or simply been usurped by a more aggressively pro-indy group that now utterly dominates the party’s upper echelons. Indeed one of the largest spaces for internal debate is between those that think Scotland should be pushed towards unilateral independence if necessary, at least as a way to pile pressure on Westminster, versus those who think doing so through agreement with the UK government, however fraught and hard-fought for, is the sager route. There is absolutely no space for internal debate any more about whether/how Scottish nationalism can embrace a cultural, political and social vision of a distinctive Scotland and Scottish identity while remaining a constituent part of the United Kingdom.

    Without independence, any ideal of “Scotland” or “Scottishness” is now inherently imperfect and incomplete. To suggest Sindy must wait many, many years until the country is somehow “ready” is to succumb to loserthink and letting the Unionists play mind-tricks on you. It is to doubt in the strength and vitality and boundless possibilities of Sᴄᴏᴛʟᴀɴᴅ. It is to deny the viability of The Project and the capabilities of its Leaders. It is to cravenly shirk the price of Fʀᴇᴇᴅᴏᴍ. It is, in short, a heresy.

    Nationalist MPs and MSPs, and their many placemen (placepeople?) strategically positioned across almost every organ of Scottish public life, genuinely desire and actively seek independence. Yes, they lack a coherent picture of what post-independence Scotland will look like and how it will function, especially on the currency issue, but while that’s a valid political line of attack and indicative of how much chaos and uncertainty Sindy would kick up, it’s not proof they don’t want it. Just that as a collective, they don’t all want it for the same reason.

    During Brexit we heard from Leavers who wanted an immigration-clampdown Fortress Britain, a buccaneering libertarian and very open Global Britain, or even a socialist workers’ paradise freed from the neoliberal shackles of Brussels. People with divergent views of the true nature of the EU and the best interests of the UK could nevertheless agree they wanted to get out. Yet I still occasionally come across FBPEnuts who claim confidently, presumably via the medium of telepathy, that Johnson/Hannan/Rees-Mogg/Farage never truly wanted Leave to win, always knew Brexit was doomed to failure, and were – in private – devastated by their completely accidental achievement when they saw the results. Partly they’ve gone daft through being sky-high on copium, but they also lack brain-space to reconcile the facts someone else can hold a fundamentally different world-outlook to you, and such a person can want something fundamentally different to what you find desirable, feasible or even rational.

    I can understand people thinking the SNP head honchos are crazy if they truly want independence in the near future given the practical ramifications “success” would bring. But you’d have to forget a lot of lessons from history, psychology and anthropology to think people never believe crazy ideas, set their heart on crazy desires, or devote themselves to crazy causes. Especially when “crazy” is being defined by a cultural outsider who shares neither their factual assumptions and biases, nor their value-set. Sometimes an entire town, even an entire country, can haves a great notion and get swept away in a river of Crazy. There’s no doubt that a political party is capable of jumping headfirst into one.

  25. MBE: Nice argument. I’m thinking of climate change, covid lockdowns, LBGTetc, BLM, WW1, WW2.

    You may well be right.

  26. The wise thing would be to grant the SNP’s bluff, especially if the English get a vote too.

    Does anyone happen to know why the English weren’t given a vote in the previous referendum? The obvious answer would seem to be because Westminster didn’t let them; but the SNP’s private polling ought to have told them that there was a fair chance that the English would vote for secession. So why weren’t they campaigning furiously for the entire UK to get the vote?

  27. the SNP’s private polling ought to have told them that there was a fair chance that the English would vote for secession. So why weren’t they campaigning furiously for the entire UK to get the vote?

    The only logical answer is Jim’s above: the scotch natsi leadership were scared shitless they might win, and then they’d be the ones telling the sweaties that there is no money to give everyone free haggis and bucky.

  28. aaa: I think the nats would have found it hard to stomach an English vote that said “Fuck off Weegies”, especially if the Scots voted against leaving themselves. As MBE said above, there isn’t the sort of rationality or pragmatism there that could countenance or even conceive of a strategy like that.

  29. Its all playing the Spiteful Nannying Party’s game yet again isn’t it.
    They’ve already had a once in a generation vote – the Natzis lost.
    The Scottish Numpty Party are a minority administration, only in power in coalition with loony greenies.
    Last elections in Scoand saw majority of vote go to Unionist Parties.

    As the Natzis sole skillset is being perpetual grievance mongers causing a fight in an empty room, its time to treat them like the badly behaved 4 year old they are.
    The only reason they keep getting the attention, is it suits the BBC’s agenda to undermine the UK & eeeevil Tories by continually covering up for the Natz and giving it Daily North Korea for Krankie.

    If al Beeb treated the Natz like climate rationalists or lockdown sceptics it would be a different story, with frequent reports on the ANC levels of incompetence, malfeasance and skullduggery already evident, as frequently mentioned on Effie Deans blog:
    https://www.effiedeans.com/p/function-loadthearchivetotalfeed-var.html?m=1

  30. @PF
    After a few years, if we really want Scotland, we could buy it back from the Official Receiver.

    Why? Go on, sell it to me…

    I put in the word ‘if’ to do some heavy lifting there! 🙂

  31. MBE is right. Craig Murray has a big web following. And for many it’s a question of principle, not economics (as Brexit is for many people here).

  32. “And for many it’s a question of principle, not economics (as Brexit is for many people here).”

    The difference between those on here saying ‘Scotland will be broke on Day 1 of Independence’ and those Europhiles who decried the ability of an independent Britain to make a go of it outside the EU is that the latter wanted Britain to stay, while the former (mostly) want Scotland to leave, and take their high spending and socialist habits with them. The pointing out that they will be broke is not to try to dissuade them from leaving, its more to just make sure they know what they’re voting for. Its a mark of the intellectual honesty of those of us south of the border who want to be free of Scotland that we aren’t just saying ‘Yes, go on, do it, there’s no problems, it’ll all be fine!’ We are pointing out the negatives to independence to our own detriment purely to be fair to those who seem set on voting to be impoverished.

  33. @Theo
    Andrew Wilson often lies – particularly BTL in The Times.

    If you’re thinking of the persistent EU-shill commenter, I don’t believe he’s the SNP’s AW (a generation older and a retired EU veterinary).

  34. So, when the Krankies win their referendum and fuck off, creating their Porridge Pound or Neep Nicker or whatever, the poison dwarf will be expecting two things:
    1. All the North Sea Oil will suddenly be theirs (no, fuck off, fuck off some more)
    2. They’ll be keeping one of the Ballistic Missile subs in Faslane (no, fuck right off)
    We should hold a referendum here and ask if the English have any desire to keep the porridge wogs hanging round our necks, the answer would presumably scare these tossers into silence for the next century.

  35. “Faslane”

    Perhaps as part of the settlement, the area around Faslane could remain a UK base (a bit like we did with Cyprus?), save us moving it all south? Maybe Lossiemouth too? That might work if the Scots don’t want to commit serious Porridge Groats to defence…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *