Wings Over Scotland

If I put a grand on then I will still be better off than what I would get in interest at the bank…

Long odds these… Looks like a deal.

I see they have diluted their bile here from this afternoon apart from Ruthie spitting Golden Eagle feathers. The penny seems to have started to drop but still hasn’t landed yet hence the headline.

Realisation setting in perhaps.

link to archive.is

Lamont, our very own Bet No-er.

Ladbrokes are offering 7/1 50% – 55% and 7/1 above 55% which is the attractive bet as I don’t think this will end up close.

As Bateman points out the most important aspect of today’s visit is not actually what was said but the fact that Carney was up discussing a result of independence, further normalising the independence case

So if I borrow £10,000,000 and put it on Scotland using Sterling, I’ll get £100,000 profit.

That’s basically how banks make their money these days, no?

We’re buggered if Scotland wins the 6 Nations though…

@ Chic McGregor 12.46 It wizna awe that bad no er,wiz that no him that built a boat fur the flood,s comein,their droonin but their to stupid tae climb intae the life raft

By a mile Morag.

From waaaay way back (December) on Bloomberg:
“Scotland fits an optimum currency area with the rest of the U.K. very well,” Oliver Harvey, a London-based strategist at Deutsche Bank, the biggest currency trader, said in a Nov. 27 phone interview. “For the pound, Scottish independence is not particularly significant for the rest of the U.K.”
link to bloomberg.com

Just listened to GMS this morning with Londons big hitter speaking to Prof G McCrone regards Carneys statement. Amazing to see how this chap is becoming very popular these days, after decades of being invisible to our trusted media. He will of course be a useful tool to the state broadcaster, should his report be front and centre later on in the debate. Expect lots of retractions and that’s not what I really meant spin.

Good oh, Baron Lang of Monkton coming up on GMS.

And from the Herald

link to archive.is

Good stuff on GMS this morn as interviewer tries to get head of Diageo EU to say that they are making contingencies if their is a YES vote, but no cigar.

Listening to GMS brought back memories of Lang, Phil Gallie and that creepy wee guy with the lamb chop sideboards pontificating over Scottish affairs while the feeble 49 sat on their hands, waiting for ……. Tony Blair!

Never again – vote YES

Heard Lang on GMS – like a very posh Darling, and saying almost exactly the same stuff the latter was spouting last night.

It would have been very interesting to be a fly on the wall in Bute House when Alex met Mark in Edinburgh.

Just about as interesting as it would have been when Dave met Mark to organise the latter’s official visit to Scotland to discuss currency union. Because of course Mark Carney didn’t come entirely of his own volition. Nope, he was sent by the Tories as part of pre-referendum negotiations with the Scottish government.

I understand Dave’s comments on the visit were somewhat sensible and lacking spin. Well they would be wouldn’t they as he helped organise the visit.

Probably worried since Rev added Tom Gallacher to the ‘Zany Comedy Relief’ Roll of Dishonour.

Alan ‘Cockers’ Cochrane has decided to prove he can do wild eyed myopic loon havering with the best of them….

Yes folks….Scotland’s Civil War and it’s evil cybernat causes by Rear Admiral Cockers.

link to telegraph.co.uk

Right guys, I’m not going to claim to be any kind of economic or fiscal expert – did Economics to 1st year in Uni and thats about it but here’s my take from yesterday:-

Mark Carney basically said that the BoE would work with whatever settlement was agreed between rUK and iScottish governments, post negotiations from a Yes vote. Much has been made that he said that the iScottish government would have to “cede some sovereignty” due to the need to effectively agree either fiscal rules or a fiscal pact.

I, personally, have got no problems with this whatsoever for reasons that I outline below:-

Firstly, all of the economic reports that have been produced show that Scotland is in a stronger fiscal position that rUK. As far as I can see this means that iScotland would be able to work within the parameters of any fiscal pact more easily than rUK. Therefore, in the short term at least, we should have no qualms about this as a proposition as the parameters will by definition be more constraining for rUK than iScotland.

Secondly, the Scottish Government have made it clear that thet they want to (along with most of the Independence movement) utilise Independence to create an Oil fund in the same way that the Norwegians have done. In order to do this, it means that the Scottish Government would need to work towards eliminating the deficit in the short term and also to reduce/eliminate the portion of spend that is dependent on Oil over the medium-lomg term. This is also what Norway have done and their non Oil deficit is now down to circa 3% of GDP.

Therefore the need to “cede” Sovereignty is pretty much a Red Herring as we would not be agreeing to anything that we didn’t intend to do anyway.

For once I found Newsnight Scotland quite interesting, particularly the input from John Nugée. One point that he made, that all of the pro-Union commentators are missing this morning, is that it would not just be the iScottish Government that would be ceding Sovereignty it would be the rUK Government as well, as both would be signing up to a either a bi-lateral fiscal pact or fiscal rules.

To me, that is the key to much of the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the UK Government and its Unionist supporters. They can’t say that they wouldn’t accept a currency Union because the know market pressure will force it. They have to maintain that it’s “unlikely” because what they really know is that to rUK it would be unpalatable. It would be unpalatable because they know that a Yes vote takes Westminster from being in a situation where it exerts full, unlimited Sovereignty over Scotland to a situation where a newly Independent Scotland and international finance had just bounced it into a situation of ceding Sovereignty on a bi-lateral basis with iScotland.

Jim Sillars might disagree over the currency union but one thing that he said is startlingly clear and true. The people of Scotland will have all the Sovereign Power of a Nation state at their fingertips on 18th September. A No vote hands it straight back to Westminster. A Yes vote puts Scotland absolutely in the driving seat.

I loved hearing BBC Political Editor, Nick Robinson, talking of “spectres”, “Greece”, blah, blah last night. Listing problems (obviously zero solutions or positives) and forecasts of doom.

It’s hilarious that New OneNation Labour supporters believe any of these predictions.

I remember Nick Robinson using his political insight to predict David Miliband was the next leader of New Labour – 30 seconds before it was announced Ed had won!

@The great baldo. Aye,Cochers having a go there. No surprise. I see he is peddling the lie that Kezia, poor lamb, being bombarded with nasty nat tweets, particulary the bayonet one, all ostensibly due to her QT appearance.

Whose currency is it anyway?

I have a Clydesdale £10 note with a picture of Rabbie Burns on it!

Listen to plummy Lang spouting garbage on GMS this morning

Geeez, where did they find that old fossil? BT must be getting really desperate.

For me it all depends on how many advisors we get on the Monetary Policy Committee….it’s worth considering as well, that if it’s Yes, then Westminster may very well give in to the other regions and give them their own tax powers etc, this would then result in welsh, n.irish and english advisors on the monetary policy committee as well.

This is the sovereign part we are giving up, the chance to set our own interest rates directly. With a currency union it would be debated back and forth in the committee….important we have a couple of advisors in there, along with some from the other regions…..think there is 7 on there just now, all handpicked by George Osbourne…

@ chalks

Wishful thinking, London never gives up anything unless they’re forced, which is why we’re here now.

Doug, Unfortunately not , at 1/100 you win £1 for every £100 wagered, so £1000 bet wins you £10. The bookies are not daft , they know it is a racing certainty.

Edward,
Didn’t know Lang was still alive, he didn’t show much in the way of vital signs when he was in post. He’s either not very bright or disingenuous (that’s where I’d put my money) as it is obvious the banks’ turnover is greater than GDP because most of it is outwith Scotland and if it involves bad debt is not our responsibility. BT have been repeatedly told that any country is only responsible for debt in its own economic sphere and not those incurred in another country but they still keep banging on about it, especially Flipper. If they repeat a lie then it must be true!

Thanks GrahamB
Thought that was the case
It was obviously too much for the GMS interviewer to query this morning

@moujick or any other economists out there.
How much of the national debt can be written off by Westminster? Jim sillars suggested that about a third was held in-house.
Is this not a bit like issuing IOUs to yourself? So shouldn’t currency Union be based on a share of real debt?
Happy to hear your thoughts.

Glancing at the headlines in the shop this morning, you’d have thought that the sky had fallen in. Shrieking big scare stories about how that’s it, it’s all over for Salmond now (natch). Not a reasonable headline in sight.

Yet in contrast, John Sweeney last night was completely unperturbed about Carney’s speech and agreeing with what he said. ‘s a’ aboot keeping the heid while all around others are losing theirs.

Jim Naughtie let Lang go on and on and on this morning. But its OK because apparently there will be an independence supporter interviewed tomorrow morning. I’m sure Jim will be similarly accommodating 🙂

Moujick

It depends a bit on the structure of the debt but guilts paid in Sterling will be less onerous due to QE. It is a bit of a dark art and QE does not come without issues of its own once the world economy does pick up. Imports will be dearer and that will put pressure on inflation again.

Thanks moujick, any info is welcome.

Just a thought – if you did put a bet on ‘No currency union’ and won, what currency would you get your winnings in?

I’m beginning to see the relationship between Holyrood, Bank of England and Westminster as a future Ménage à trois !

Two recently divorced partners, being managed by a third party and all getting on well 🙂

It’s interesting that they say an independent Scotland would likely have to cede some power if we entered a currency union with England.

Consider what the English Government would have to cede:

The inability to drag Scotland into illegal wars. The end of nuclear weapons being stationed in Scotland. The impossibility of making the NHS in Scotland private. The inability to stop the Scottish Government from nationalising the Post Office in Scotland. etc, etc. The list goes on and on.

It’s not Scotland that will be ceding any power to speak of, it’s England and London.

The Westminster Government (I hestitate to say English since Wales and Northern Ireland are still going to be lumbered with them) will also have to cede some power to enter a currency union with Scotland, a little point the BBC et al seemed curiously reticent to point out. Mark Carney would have been talking about the kind of legal guidelines that govern all parties to an agreement; kinda like the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, but one that works. The other screams that it would be really really hard to do, ‘just look at how badly it works in Europe’ ignores one fundamental point. The number of parties involved. It’s pretty easy to get most things to work when you’re dealing with two national governments. How many are they trying to juggle in the Eurozone now? That’s a whole different trick they’re talking about there; it doesn’t appear to have been set up quite well enough, and it was always going to be difficult with so many different national interests trying to be heard. My point here is that you just cannot compare a Scotland / rUK currency union with the Eurozone and expect anyone with a bit of knowledge not to laugh at you.

O/T

Great Britains place in the world:

The British Olympic Association is recommending that its delegation wear “less overtly branded Team GB kit” during their journey to Sochi.

In a statement, the BOA added that the safety and wellbeing of the delegation remains its number one priority and it is in daily contact with the relevant authorities in the UK, including the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

From the bosom of the State Media Machine

Rough Bounds
Good list there which many are not yet taking into account.

@ Grant_M

I couldn’t watch that all the way through. Darling’s constant negative droning and misinformation is a complete turn off. If Darling has that effect on a political anorak, how dire must he seem to Joe Public?

Some-one from YES Scotland really needs to set up a debate with Darling in order to put his falsehoods to the test.

Seasick Dave says:
AS is stood behind Darling pretending to hit him on the napper with a spoon while Mr Carney twats him one with a giant spurtle.

Screen cleaner, please.

@Kevin Kane –

Spotted the battlebus fundraiser too late but delighted to see you exceeded the target.

I thought Darling looked pained and hunched over in the interview yesterday. Is he OK?

Do you realise how much a long, wooden nose weighs?

@Moujick

They have to maintain that it’s “unlikely” because what they really know is that to rUK it would be unpalatable. It would be unpalatable because they know that a Yes vote takes Westminster from being in a situation where it exerts full, unlimited Sovereignty over Scotland to a situation where a newly Independent Scotland and international finance had just bounced it into a situation of ceding Sovereignty on a bi-lateral basis with iScotland.

Absolutely, and more importantly rUK would have to cede sovereignty over the currency they used; neither iScotland nor rUK would control it. As you said, this would cause more problems for rUK than for iS, since iS would, for the short to medium term at least, be likely to run current account surpluses thanks to oil. With its persistent, large current account deficits rUK would face exactly the same problems afflicting Greece, Spain etc. in the eurozone.

The core that makes currency unions work is the combination of a single overarching fiscal authority — a national government — and fiscal transfers. Someone here asked about Carney commenting that Scotland is already in a currency union with rUK. It’s true, it is. So is Yorkshire, the Isle of Wight, South Shields, and my neighbour at number 48. Nobody cares if Northampton is in surplus or deficit with the rest of the UK, because the national government and fiscal transfers fill in any gaps. Perhaps insufficiently; governments can still implement bad policy.

With Scottish independence there will be no single fiscal authority, there will be two independent ones, and there will be no transfers. Would the people of Scotland want to constantly send money to England to try to fill the gap, or vice versa? rUK would be the party to suffer under those conditions, and badly.

This is why I believe them when they say a currency union is unlikely; they simply won’t give up that sovereignty, that control. To do so would require a level of incompetence that I don’t believe exists even in Westminster. If I’m wrong, get ready for a flood of economic refugees from England.

@Edward

Hold on , a company or companies within a country having a bigger GDP than the country their based in. Is that possible?

Yes, if you’re a multinational. There’s the overall size of the company, with its overseas operations, and there’s the issue of ‘moving’ apparent trade around. It’s the Vodafone — and others — trick of booking profits via one bloke operating out of a cupboard in Switzerland.

@Breastplate

Is this not a bit like issuing IOUs to yourself?

Yes, it’s exactly like that. It’s part of the insanity of pretending the gold exchange standard is still in operation. Westminster doesn’t need to write debt down though. Its debt is denominated in sterling, and it issues sterling; it can just pay it down, if it chooses.

@desimond

Yes, an independent Scotland with its own currency would need either a central bank much like those in other nations, or it could bring the functions of such a bank — (some*) currency creation, the payment system, bank supervision, etc. — into a Scottish treasury. The latter approach has the advantage of bringing it under direct democratic accountability, and would fit well with public banking, debt-free money creation, and similar ideas that are floating around.

* I say ‘some’ since treasuries already create some currency, with central banks creating most of it, under government mandate. That’s just currency though; most money is created as credit/debt by commercial banks.