Is GB planning to join the EU currency?

[josie 8]

Just thingking that EU is expanding and dont know where it will stop most probaly in border in russia that other route may be taken that the link is GB and its CN well that is the question to both countries but I think it is more better than taking a route to middle east for now.for me that there is a war on trade or economy.between russia,america,EU and Asia

For me I see EU is a union of country for trading,but without the particpation of Canada and Australia the next inline will be middle east and thier is much more heavier problem, for turkey is already exceed the boundary of Europe for it has a part of minor Asia if Turkey join in the future. just thinking if this shortcut may apply and beneficial.

[scottishmoney 18]

The EU is not going to admit anyone out of Europe. Look at all the noise from France etc that Turkey is an Asian nation. The only logical steps for countries outside of Europe is to look within their own particular regions of the world for trade agreements. The USA has done that with Mexico and Canada, as well as Chile in S. America. The APEC organisation is looking towards this goal in the Asia Pacific region. Membership in APEC includes Japan, USA, Russia, Canada, China etc.

If anything I think the EU is going to go through some growing pains, and perhaps countries might even leave it if nationalism takes stride. The EU constitution was voted down in formerly driving EU countries like Netherlands and France. France's election this Spring will be an indicator of where France is going to go with the EU over the next few years. The election pitting Segelene Royal against Nicholas Sarkozy will be one of France's most important elections in a long time.

Some newer EU members and candidates for the Euro are starting to have second thoughts, Poland for example. Estonia's economy is very strong and driving in the Baltic region, but... how long will that last with a huge labour shortage that cannot even be augmented with labour coming in from Russia and ex USSR states.

I am not predicting the demise of the EU, but rather that I believe there will be some bumps in the road on a way to a Unified Europe.

[josie 8]

Thank you scott.

What do you mean by continental treat I watched the news that GB is merging with Frace what is the story in 1950's that they are planning now.

About EU even Russia is already a strong country I think it is also included in the list to join EU if Im not mistaken and if Russia join this will put him in strong position against other nation it is not EU for me it is EURASIA.

[scottishmoney 18]

Russia doesn't want to join the EU, frankly Russia will not have to. Who supplies vital quantities of natural gas for heating etc? Who supplies so much energy in Western Europe. Russia has a huge trade surplus, and the old bankrupt USSR is a distant memory. Why were Germany and Poland so concerned when Russia briefly shut off gas and oil shipments into Belarus and resulted in Belarus shutting off the pipelines west into Poland and Germany? The EU is very uncomfortably dependent on the Russian Federation and the whims of Vladimir Putin and his Oligarchy.

[josie 8]

OK SCOTT

About the merger of GB to FRANCE what is this story.

[josie 8]

http://www.itv.com/news/britain_ea3b6db531...949ba90e28.html

Hope this will help.

Here is another one

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6261885.stm?ls

For me to add up to confusion on where GB is going expanding and to whom

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6264823.stm

[Chris Perkins 223]

Isn't the Queen already head of the French state, what with her pedigree and the lack of French nobles since the revolution?

[josie 8]

What will happen to the money own on GB during the time of Thatcher? the she wanted back.

Is this another economic manuever?

Just dont forget NO GODLESS POUND and it will be a good news.

Now other CN nations can join?

[scottishmoney 18]

Isn't the Queen already head of the French state, what with her pedigree and the lack of French nobles since the revolution?

For some reason, when the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was formed in 1801, George III renounced the old claims to the French throne. Perhaps HRH could make a case that due to his porphyria and the resultant madness, that such a renunciation was made under duress and is therefore not valid.

Then when Charles III becomes queen, the monarchy can claim the French disease.

[coin watch 1]

Then when Charles III becomes queen, the monarchy can claim the French disease.

Has Charlie had the `op` then or have I missed something?

[scottishmoney 18]

Then when Charles III becomes queen, the monarchy can claim the French disease.

Has Charlie had the `op` then or have I missed something?

You cannot ask about what you don't know or have heard about. That is the way Princess Charles wants it. Rumour hit Fleet St a couple of years back and it was quashed by Buckingham Palace.

[josie 8]

Happy Union day to scot and english or british.

May HOPE and FAITH is high

[TomGoodheart 373]

Has Charlie had the `op` then or have I missed something?

Vive la difference!

Sounds like a great idea to me. We will have Burgundy and France can have Burnley (!).

[scottishmoney 18]

Happy Union day to scot and english or british.

May HOPE and FAITH is high

From the Belfast Telegraph today....

What would happen if Scotland achieved its independence?

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Could Scotland survive as an independent nation? Paul Kelbie asks The Big Question

Why are we asking this question now?

Today is the 300th anniversary of the signing of the Act of Union between England and Scotland, and if the latest political opinion polls are to be believed it may be one of the last. In little over four months the Scottish parliamentary elections could see the Scottish National Party (SNP) win power, or at least enough votes to hold the balance of influence and push a referendum on independence. And according to recent polls, around 52 per cent of Scots would back moves to dissolve the Union of 1707, which means that after three centuries of shared blood, toil and tears, the marriage of convenience that turned a small island into a world power is shaping up for divorce.

What was the Act of Union?

The treaty of Union signified the end of England and Scotland as separate states and the birth of Great Britain. It was a marriage of convenience. Although the two countries had shared a monarch for almost 100 years since the Union of the Crowns in 1603, when King James VI of Scotland succeeded Queen Elizabeth I, they remained two distinct countries. However, when England found itself at war with France at the turn of the 18th century and King Louis XIV began pushing for the Catholic James VIII to be the rightful heir in both England and Scotland, there was a need to protect the Protestant succession of Queen Anne.

Fearful that Scottish Jacobites would let England's enemies "in the back door" the Westminster parliament threatened to stop all trade with Scotland and deprive Scots of any lands they owned south of the border, unless they agreed to the House of Hanover succession.

In return for creating a new joint country, the Scots were guaranteed access to England's overseas trade routes and the independence of its own legal system, universities and church. After much debate and despite widespread public hostility, both the Scottish and English parliaments were dissolved on May 1, 1707 and replaced with a new British one.

Would a separate Scotland flourish?

If countries such as Malta, with a population less than Edinburgh's, can be self-governing, supporters of independence believe there is no reason why Scotland shouldn't. Optimistic nationalists claim Scotland could be as prosperous as Ireland, Norway, Denmark or Iceland with enough revenue from oil, gas, renewable energy and other industries to invest in a fund to look after future generations. The idea would be to invest revenues in a permanent reserve fund and use the interest to fund public services, pensions and other expenditure for years to come.

According to UK government estimates only about half of the reserves of oil in the North Sea have been extracted so far, which means that there is still enough to support a population of just five million people.

An international convention has determined that the North Sea north of the 55th parallel is under Scottish jurisdiction, which means some 90 per cent of the UK's oil and gas reserves are within Scottish waters.

As far back as 1975, experts recognised that oil could make an independent Scotland one of the richest countries in Europe. A government report saying as much was labelled incendiary, classified as secret and hidden away for 30 years until it came to light at the end of 2005 as a result of Freedom of Information legislation.

In addition to oil Scotland has as much as 25 per cent of the EU tidal and wind resources, which if managed properly could deliver a second energy windfall for the country. However, like any divorce, it is likely that there would be a great deal of argument over the splitting of assets.

Pessimistic supporters of the Union claim that there wouldn't be enough money to finance Scotland's dreams.

Far from being rich, they claim Scotland would have a huge deficit of between £6bn and £11bn and would need to raise taxes which, unionists claim, would drive away much-needed businesses.

What would happen to the relationship between Scotland and England?

If you believe the nationalists, the relationship would change very little and perhaps even improve. For years pro-unionists have argued Scots could not survive without English financial support and as a result many English people perceive Scots as a nation of sponging whingers. Independence would force Scots to stop blaming the English for all their ills and put a stop to southern resentment at "carrying" Scotland. According to pro-unionists Scotland receives far more in subsidy than it contributes to UK coffers. However, separatists argue that Scotland actually subsidises England to the tune of almost £3bn a year.

Culturally, there would be little change as the Queen would remain as monarch, just as she does in other members of the Commonwealth, while Scotland has always had its own legal, educational and religious institutions.

How would Scotland fare in the EU and on the world stage?

As a member state of the European Union, Scotland would possibly have more of a role in international affairs than now, as its politicians could argue their own case. Unionists have warned that an independent Scotland might not be able to join the EU if the UK was split. However, such a situation is highly unlikely, not least because the same argument of denying membership could be applied to an independent England. Similarly, many countries share overseas embassies and assets and there is no reason why Scotland and England couldn't continue to co-operate.

Would it be secure?

The SNP has already said it would scrap Trident, the nuclear submarine deterrent, and would prevent Scottish troops from taking part in any future illegal wars - such as the invasion of Iraq. This, they claim, would likely make Scotland less of a terrorist target. However, Scotland would continue to have a conventional military defence that would work alongside English forces in the mutual defence of the British Isles.

What would happen to the rest of the UK?

With a population more than 10 times the size of its northern neighbour England will always be the dominant force in the British Isles but without Scots troops and revenue, it would probably have to adjust to a diminished role on the world stage. And while England would retain Britain's nuclear deterrent, it would mean having to find a new base for the Trident fleet and supporting it from a smaller national defence budget.It is also possible that if Scotland made a success of independence, this would hasten calls for Wales and Northern Ireland to seek self-determination of their own.

Could Scotland survive as an independent nation?

Yes...

* Scotland would be much wealthier and better prepared than many other independent nations around the world

* Revenue from oil and other energy industries could be invested to provide a secure fund to support future generations

* Much of the political and civil infrastructure needed to administer the country is already in place, and the people are highly educated

No...

* Without subsidy from the rest of the UK, it is claimed by unionists that there would be a fiscal deficit of up to £11bn

* Nationalist promises to cut taxes while increasing spending on pensions and higher education would put the country in the red

* If the bonds that unite Britain were severed, all the countries of the union would suffer economically and culturally

[josie 8]

Its been several weeks since you post this article,

For me it is very informative that the article coming from a numismatic and historian like you, a substantial information from your knowleged and experience,

Several weeks ago that a nationalist member interviewed at sky that mentioning they are going to walk this december or going to a referendum, although the survey on both scot and english are still in favor of the union as far as my memory is right that is what I comprehend.

As for many question arising in the news lately and some plans of others to the status of GB it is possible to published this tread in the web wheather or not it will be helpfull other viewers in the net are informed.

[scottishmoney 18]

Devolution was a big issue beginning in the 1960's - the rise of the Troubles in Northern Ireland may have provided a catalyst, but in Scotland there has been a long seething resentment against the Act of Union more than being a part of Great Britain.

I do not believe the SNP really makes a serious attempt at independence or even greater autonomy. Politics in Scotland are such that nearly £1 Billion was blown on the new Parliament building, whilst nothing was done for Scotland's infrastructure. Some in Scotland believe the North Sea oil revenues should only benefit Scotland and not Britain.

Sadly whilst I wish it were the opposite, in fact it was the Scots that lost money in the Darien scheme and bankrupted the Scottish nation in the early 18th century that sought out English monies to succor their losses which brought about the Act of Union. Modern day Scots may blame the English, but in fact it was Scots that sought out revenue from London that brought Scotland into the Union.

Caught up in all the discussion of joining the € currency is the fact that Scotland and Northern Ireland have unique forms of currency issue, that being that a Central Government operated institution does not print and circulate monies, but that they are created and circulated by public institutions. How that would work in the € band is still not sorted out all these years hence.

[josie 8]

Yeah the building that was pointed out by the tour guide when we were in scotland as other project things can go on that way,one thing thou is how a foriegn architect or designer of the building was hired and not scottish one and the architect died before the complition of the project and the wife told that the architect finished it before he died,

Now about the plan, during the conversation on the two on the other channel they do mentioned about the oil in the north sea,If the scot suceeded they will have the full domestic control of the country but regarding foriegn affairs and defense thier is a question,now I have an idea on where the CN ends on FA or defense for now thats what I know the boundaries.

About the defense and the joint policing in the north where SF agree to support that also raise another question for policing and defense for me is somewhat corelated and its means it is all up to the viewers to comment or view for now for it is still in process.

About the currency thats what most are looking what will happen,for me it is essential on both what ever their plans.