Diplomatic wrangles over Brits in Scotland and Scots in England | @guardianletters
 Normally sage Martin Kettle seems to have lost his sense of reality over Scotland (Comment, 20 February). When George Osborne and his allies – lamentably including Ed Balls – proclaimed that an independent Scotland would be barred from the sterling zone, most European and American commentators recognised a political threat rather than a serious economic judgement. They wondered how much of the ban would survive a possible Yes vote for independence this September. As for Jose Manuel Barroso's claim that Scotland might be barred from EU membership, which Martin Kettle calls "an important warning", this clownish blurt seems to have no support from embarrassed European commission colleagues. Kettle is right to say that the referendum contest has suddenly taken up heavier "political weaponry". Currency is heavy. But it can be inflated. This is politics, not banking. Given the will and a bit of ingenuity, Osborne's "impassable" obstacles to currency union can be messily or neatly circumvented. Osborne's line, if followed through, would require customs barriers at the border – which nobody – English or Scottish or even a denizen of Littleminster-on-Thames – wants to see. Does Kettle really think Osborne would go through with that? Salmond is probably wrong about Scotland's automatic entry to the EU: there will indeed have to be a fresh application. But nobody is going to sever Scotland's thick web of EU connections and programmes while negotiations go on. As for an assured veto ... British diplomacy has failed to nudge the Spanish into that folly. Why should Madrid do London a favour in the middle of another Gibraltar wrangle? Finally, it's sad to see this usually judicious columnist tell readers that Scottish interest in independence is about anti-Englishness and orchestrated by the SNP. He should get out of London more. • Ruth Wishart (Letters, 21 February) must know different people to me in the Scottish Labour party if she believes that the Yes Campaign has considerable support. My own constituency party, one of the biggest and most active in Glasgow, has received no resolutions of support for independence and it's extremely doubtful there will be any move in that direction at the Scottish Labour conference in March. This is strikingly different to the positions taken up – sometimes in open revolt against the leadership – in the devolution debates of the 1980s. What we have seen is a handful of Labour figures from 1990s coming out for Yes, and the brief emergence of Labour for Independence, which has now vanished. In contrast, every serving Labour MP and MSP in Scotland has backed the Better Together campaign and likewise no Labour councillor has indicated anything other their support for the UK. • While Larry Elliott is right that Scotland using the pound is not real freedom, the alternatives are worse. The sensible answer is to stay together. A lot of proud Scots are beginning to ask the question, could we keep our British citizenship if Scotland sleepwalked into independence rather than be ruled by an increasingly arrogant SNP? • A Scot living in England will become a foreigner. What type of foreigner depends on whether Scotland is in the EU or not. In the EU and they will be no different to a Romanian or Pole. Outside they will be like a Russian or Ukrainian living here. That means residence and work permits, unless legislation changes matters. All this and they do not have a vote in the referendum. Surely a breach of their human rights. theguardian.com © 2014 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds |
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario