The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

The EU questions Salmond must answer

The SNP leader should come clean on the euro before lecturing others.

By George Eaton Published 12 December 2011 13:28

With the exception of Paddy Ashdown, astonishingly few politicians and commentators have made the link between Scotland and Europe. But Cameron's decision to isolate the UK has significant implications for the Scottish National Party [SNP], which has long campaigned for "independence in Europe". As Ashdown wrote in the Observer, "If England is to be out of Europe, why should Scotland not be in?"

From one perspective, Cameron's stance strengthens Alex Salmond's argument that Scotland needs independence to pursue its own policy of European integration. As the SNP leader wrote in his letter to the PM:

Last week's developments in Brussels demonstrate that Scotland urgently needs a voice at the top table when our vital national interests are being discussed, by becoming an independent member state, instead of being shut out of the room.

He followed that up with "six crucial questions" for Cameron on Europe and Scottish interests. But if you strip away the rhetoric, Salmond is avoiding some inconvenient questions of his own.

Until recently, the SNP leader proudly declared that an independent Scotland would join the euro. In 2009, he quipped that sterling was "sinking like a stone" and argued that euro membership was becoming increasingly attractive. "There is no doubt that the plummeting pound and parlous state of the UK economy has caused many people in the business community and elsewhere to view membership favourably," he said. That, to put it mildly, is no longer the case and, consequently, Salmond has changed tact. Like Gordon Brown circa 2003, he now states that Scotland will retain the pound until it is in the country's "economic advantage" to join the euro.

Whether or not that day comes, there is no majority for Salmond's stance. Polling shows that the Scottish electorate is only marginally less eurosceptic than the UK electorate as a whole. According to a recent YouGov poll, 44 per cent of Scottish voters want to leave the EU (38 per cent want to remain) compared to 47 per cent of UK voters. Similarly, 45 per cent of UK voters think that Britain's EU membership is a "bad thing" and so do 41 per cent of Scots.

Even if Scotland were to join the euro, would Salmond sign up to a fiscal union? Having finally won autonomy over spending and borrowing would he happily submit his annual budgets to Brussels for approval? How would he respond if the EU blocked his long-promised cut in corporation tax? Until he answers these and other questions, Salmond has little right to lecture others.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: SNP Scotland

More from George Eaton

22 comments

Wed, 2011-12-14 17:54 — Benjamin Rae (not verified)

To be honest, once Scottish independance is achieved I'm not entirely sure I'll continue supporting the SNP. The root of the problem is that I don't believe the UK serves the interests of the general population the way it should. It's establishment is infected vested interests and only a lunatic would think the likes
Osborne and Cameron give a toss about Scotland's economic and social problems.
From a pragmatic point of view getting rid of the Tories influence in Scotland is certainly a good start. Clipping Labours wings still further is another positive. Once this is done Scotland finally have the progressive policies it needs. Nationalism is only a means to an end for me.

Fri, 2011-12-16 08:15 — Christian Wright (not verified)

Asinine article. Why would Salmond spell out a currency prescription to be implemented upon independence when the situation is so uncertain? It would be irresponsible and reckless. In a fluid environment one best keep one's powder dry and revisit the issue when things have stabilized somewhat.

As for Salmond's right to "lacture others", he has every right to ask the leader of the Westminster government why he did not consult the Scottish government before exercising his veto, and what if any, consideration he gave to Scotland's interests when coming to that decision.

This article in naught but unimaginative hackery spouting the usual knee-jerk Unionist talking points. Is there no chance that this rag might produce something other than crass propaganda?

Mon, 2011-12-12 14:29 — Drew Edward (not verified)

You're quite right in the sense that the SNP have a lot to explain regarding their position on Europe but as the situation is fluid they are correct to adjust their stance accordingly, rather than entrench themselves into one position 'in or out'. But what is also emerging is it looks increasingly likely a referendum on the UK's future in Europe will be held if not in this parliament then the next. Those in favour of UK independence need to make the case how it would affect jobs and the recovery. The SNP's opponents need to outline where they stand in a straight in-out referendum and be able to answer the same questions they have been demanding of Salmond, i.e how would an independent UK be able to trade with the single market from the outside? Would the UK join EFTA? How would it affect our relationship with the US if we have less influence outside of the EU? What would an independent UK do in regards to borders with the EU, freedom of movement for living and working, environmental targets, cooperating with the EU on tackling terrorism and drug trafficking?

Tue, 2011-12-13 22:21 — duck soup

As a member of the EU independent Scotland would be the largest oil,gas and renewable energy producer in the Union.We would be at the top table and would bring a positive attitude;not least during our turn at the EU Presidency.
By contrast Scotland currently has requests for Scottish Government Ministerial inclusion in UK delegations turned down by the Tories.Labour denied these requests also even for important Scottish related matters such as oil and fishing.Scotland is locked in a state that on the whole takes a negative attitude to Europe.A choice between negativity and positivity is not going to be a dilemna for the people of Scotland.

Wed, 2011-12-14 19:15 — duck soup

The comments regarding the exclusivity of nationalism are examples of the line invariably taken by those who do not wish the best for Scotland when their other arguments fail.The inability,or more likely the refusal,to recognise the difference between nationalists democratically questing for their nation to regain sovereignty according to the United Nations principle of the right to self-determination and a chauvinistic and ignoble nationalism is an inability,or refusal,to acknowledge that basic right peoples have to self-determine.As Lox pointed out,without that right the Republic of Ireland and India would not have gained independence when they did.The many Slavic nations would not have broken free of the despicably unjust Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1919.This persistence in claiming all nationalism to be indivisable and malign is all too frequently encountered in British public forums up to and including the House of Commons.To fail to recognise the democratic credentials and civic nationalism of the Scottish National Party only cheapens debate.

Mon, 2011-12-12 15:06 — Willp

Drew Edward asks, "How would an independent UK be able to trade with the single market from the outside?"
The answer is, the same way as Switzerland, Norway, the USA, and the rest of the world trade with EU members.
Salmond has long campaigned for the euro, which shows his feeble grasp of economics. The euro is strangling its members' economies and would wreck Scotland's prospects.
His policy of breaking up Britain would benefit only the EU: it would bring no gain for the people of Scotland.

Mon, 2011-12-12 15:07 — Sam Dale (not verified)

I spoke to the SNP press office recently. They say their policy upon independence is to immediately set up an independent Scottish central bank with a Scottish pound linked to the British pound. Then the medium to long-term aim is to join the Euro when conditions are right.

On another point Scottish reliance on banking and oil would hardly make it popular within the EU. Climate change and finance are two of the most heavily regulated European areas. Salmond might not like Europe as much in practice as he does in theory.

Tue, 2011-12-13 23:25 — Lox (not verified)

Nationalism is always exclusive, says Dave. So I take it you would have disapproved of Irish nationalism one hundred years ago, or Indian nationalism in the 40s, or Baltic nationalism in the 90s? You Fabian imperialists, what are you like...

Anyway. George Eaton says Salmond has little right to lecture others. Is a columnist on the NS really saying that the leader of a left of centre party in a devolved administration shouldn't criticise David Cameron? Really? By the same token, since Ed M has been pretty vague on what he'd do vis a vis the UK's relationship with the EU, perhaps he shouldn't attack Cameron either. Would you agree, George?

George Eaton's problem with Salmond is that his party has had the gall to end Labour hegemony in Scotland. You've clearly been taking lessons in bitter political sectarianism from some of the Labour contingent at Westminster, George. Next you'll be telling us that Scottish Catholics shouldn't vote SNP, because Salmond supports Hearts and is therefore clearly a closet Orangeman.

Tue, 2011-12-13 23:35 — Galen Milne (not verified)

Mr Salmond prefers shifting sands - he doesnt like to be associated too long with any particular policy, why even so-called Independence in Europe has been blown out of the water and he knows it.

Its a power grab he's more interested and not just from Westminster but from every local authority council across Scotland.

One day all the "chickens will come home to roost" and I can't wait for that day can't happen soon enough for me thats for sure.

Tue, 2011-12-13 11:49 — T Max (not verified)

Chris McLaughlin, there's no point in going on about how much "stronger" the Euro is than the pound. The British Government has deliberately devalued the pound as part of its economic policy. It's not because the Euro is "stronger" than the pound. Surely you know this?

Tue, 2011-12-13 11:55 — Dave (not verified)

Some interesting points here.

With regards to the £ vs Euro, don't forget that the Euro has a higher interest rate, and is still less then the £, not that i am attacking the Euro, just wanting to put Chris McLaughlins' point into perspective.

An Independent Scotland's options are those 3 as specfied earlier, A Scottish currency would be similar to a petro currency at the moment, and could be damaging to the countries manufacturing base if not managed correctly, with regards to keeping the £, England has thusfar resisted merging it's currency with anyone else, why do you think it would share a currency with Scotland? It wouldn't be in our interest when it would be open to speculation on the markets about when it is in Mr Salmond's interest to ditch the £ for the Euro. The third option is to join the Euro asap, which is probably what will happen, however, as George Eaton mentions, that ultimately means giving up some of the sovereignty as you'll have to have your budgets approved by the ECB.

A bit of a Hobson's choice, but welcome to the game guys...

Tue, 2011-12-13 11:59 — Dave (not verified)

@Benjamin Rae

'Nornally agree with most of what George Eaton writes but don't really understand these attacks on Salmond and the SNP. Most of Scotland consistently votes for progressive politics and that's why people are increasingly likely to vote SNP and independance.'

Possibly because the politics of nationalism are ultimately always exclusive...not just in the case of Scotland but anywhere, and whilst Mr Salmond is quiet progressive in his general political moves, nationalism is always the undercurrent.

Tue, 2011-12-13 13:57 — David (not verified)

I do not with interest that when it comes to Scotland, George Eaton generally does not understand what he is trying to talk about. And he seems to have crucially overlooked the fact that the FM of Wales also wrote to Cameron attacking his decision. Where's the treatise about this?

Mon, 2011-12-12 18:07 — Benjamin Rae (not verified)

Nornally agree with most of what George Eaton writes but don't really understand these attacks on Salmond and the SNP. Most of Scotland consistently votes for progressive politics and that's why people are increasingly likely to vote SNP and independance.
The UK is looking increasingly fractured and divided. Perhaps the break up of the UK would suit us all

Thu, 2011-12-15 01:36 — Lox (not verified)

Hi Galen, still supporting the lib Dems, are you? I remember you from the Scotsman years ago: remember, at the time when your party still stood for something-albeit incoherently. And, since that final adjective is so apposite to your post, I'll leave it there.

I'd welcome an intelligent contribution from you, but I won't hold my breath.

Mon, 2011-12-12 18:45 — Benjamin Rae (not verified)

What does that tell you? That he along with many others would rather Brussels was making decisions for Scotland rather than the likes of Cameron

Mon, 2011-12-12 19:13 — Chris McLaughlin (not verified)

Despite all the anti-Euro retoric in the London press, the fact remains that despite Greece, despite Ireland, despite Portugal, despite Spain, despite Italy, overall the Euro has horsed the Pound in terms of value since its launch.

If the Euro has failed, then the Pound has utterly failed. The Euro floated in 1999 at about 69p. It fell to a low against the pound of 57p in 2003. Since then the tend has been resolutely upwards, peaking at 97p in 2008, and is currently valued at 88p.

In other words, since it's initial launch in 1999 the Euro has appreciated by 25% compared to the Pound when averaged over that 12 year period.

An independent Scotland essentially has three options: float your own currency, keep the Pound or join the Euro.

Option 1 is seriously possible as similar-sized Denmark, Sweden, Norway, New Zealand have proved. That option should not be discounted out of hand, although the last thing a newly independent country would want is a currrency crisis. The risk might simply be too big to run.

Keeping the Pound is theoretically possible. However if the choice is between the Pound and the Euro then the evidence shows the Euro is a stronger and more resilient currency today than the Pound is. Also Scotland would be entitled to a representative on the European Central Bank Committe (as 1 voice among 18), which is still more of a say than we have on the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee.

Tue, 2011-12-13 17:13 — David (not verified)

What is George Eaton's problem with Alex Salmond? As a Scot living in London, I despair at the portrayal of Scotland in the London-centric media. I also despair at George's subtle and persistent put-downs of Scotland.

The YouGov poll shows that in Scotland there is no absolute majority for voting for or against leaving the EU when you include the don't knows (and don't include those who "would not vote".)

Whereas outside of London - the region with the largest population of EU nationals - there is a absolute majority in every other region for leaving the EU.

Europscepticism, if you could even call it that in Scotland, is not deeply entrenched outside rural areas and fishing communities (whose opposition to it is logical enough - cf. fisheries policy.) Whereas in areas of the Home Counties and Southern England it is ideological and deeply expressed. And illogical considering those areas benefit most from it.

Incidentally, I think it would be hard for any country in these islands to not have a Eurosceptic majority given the constant bashing it gets in the Express, Daily Mail and the Sun. There is not one pro-EU tabloid and only a handful of broadsheets broadly supportive. It's ridiculous. It only goes to show you the vested interests want us all to shoot ourselves in the foot. Twice.

Thu, 2011-12-15 11:09 — Willp

David, could it not be that the British people are generally Eurosceptic because the EU does not meet our needs?
It's not a matter of what the papers tell us to think, it's a matter of what we actually experience - deindustrialisation, unemployment, installing monetarism as a legal obligation, taxing and spending powers going to Brussels, the CAP, the CFP, etc.