Leader: Salmond has his own answers to provide over EU veto

Published on Monday 12 December 2011 00:00

WITH Britain now, as the headlines say, isolated within the European Union, where does that leave Scotland? This, essentially, is the question that First Minister Alex Salmond has posed David Cameron.

It is not a particularly Nationalist question, indeed it is something which any First Minister, regardless of political affiliation, would need to ask on behalf of Scottish interests.

There are, after all, key negotiations about to take place at the European Council on the allocation of fishing quotas for next year, the outcome of which will affect the livelihoods of thousands of fishermen and their families. There are important discussions continuing on the Common Agricultural Policy and on the myriad of other policy areas where Scottish interests intermesh with EU policy.

Following last week’s drama of the British veto being wielded, where does Scotland now stand in these discussions? The short answer is that business as usual in all these matters should be unaffected, at least in legal terms. The UK is still a member of the EU, still pays its dues, and all its existing rights are unaffected.

So Scottish fishermen can be confident that rural affair secretary Richard Lochhead will take part in the crucial December talks in the same way he has done in previous years.

What the UK has refused to do is to take part in what will be an intergovernmental, and not an EU (because of the British veto), treaty on a fiscal union binding the participating states to tighter rules on their national budgets and tighter financial regulation.

But it seems most unlikely that the rest of EU business will be conducted as usual. There is no doubting the anger felt by the other 26 states at Mr Cameron’s decision. It seems fair to assume British representatives will feel that anger at EU meetings, and it is also likely that the British voice will be heard with, at best, icy politeness and, at worst, ignored.

Mr Cameron, therefore, should answer Mr Salmond’s questions with due seriousness. Though Mr Salmond has indulged, deplorably, in some political point-scoring in his letter, Mr Cameron should rise above that, for there are the livelihoods of real people at stake here.

All the same, Mr Salmond can take this matter only so far without having to provide some answers of his own. What if Scotland’s financial industry supports Mr Cameron’s view that what was being proposed was so dangerous to the productivity of that industry that he had little option but to veto it? Will Mr Salmond then support Mr Cameron’s decision?

What indeed, would Mr Salmond have done had he been at that top table? Would he, as head of an independent Scottish government, be happy to submit his annual budgets to the European Commission for approval? And would he be happy if the commission told him that no, he could not cut corporation tax in the way he wishes to? Scotland needs these, and many other answers, from Mr Salmond.

Related Articles

• 100 voices

  The Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, The Most Rev Dr Idris Jones

  0 Comments

Comments

There are 9 comments to this article

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

9

Hearthammer

Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at 09:02 AM

No political point scoring, just truth. Maybe an unpalatable truth to unionists, but truth all the same..................................EFTA and the Scots Merk are calling.................

• Report Unsuitable

8

calimero

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 10:26 AM

"Mr Salmond has indulged, deplorably, in some political point-scoring in his letter", well he has raised some very pertinent points actually.===============What "respect" or consideration did the UK Government take of political and business opinion in the devolved territories? Even if ultimately, the FMs of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, would have supported his position, to support the City of London, were they not entitled to input into a decision that could costs jobs and business in their spehere of interest?=================I never saw the Scotsman condeming the likes of George Osborne or Danny Alexander for deplorable political point scoring over their fearmongering on business investment to Scotland or Scotland's membership of the EU =======the fact is that as things stand I think the European Community will look far more favourable on a future independent Scotland than it would on what is left of the UK.

• Report Unsuitable

7

wee-scamp

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 10:23 AM

#6 I agree. I'm a strong supporter of both the SNP and full fat independence but I want the same relationship with the EU as Norway and our own currency.

• Report Unsuitable

6

Derick fae Yell

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 08:25 AM

Point of order for the factually challenged Iceland and Ireland are both more prosperous than the UK, even post crash. Norway is MUCH more prosperous. EFTA not the EU A Scottish currency, not the pound, or the euro

• Report Unsuitable

5

Mercutio

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 02:15 AM

#1`All leaders are written anonymously this is the newspaper's official view.

• Report Unsuitable

4

Beachdair

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 02:12 AM

Very thoughtful and balanced article in general, but the final two paragraphs are meaningless because the answers would be coloured by 2020 hindsight.

• Report Unsuitable

3

thomas79

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 01:14 AM

This article raises an important point. What would the FM have done? Would he have wanted to take an independent Scotland into a closer fiscal union with more powers given to Brussels? For me, the European Free Trade Association is looking more and more attractive.

• Report Unsuitable

2

voice of reason

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 12:36 AM

Whatever Cameron had done, veto or acceptance, he would have received a letter from Mr Salmond complaining! This is politics, after all. I would like to know what Mr Salmond would have done if we had been independent when RBS and HBOS went belly-up. But of course, we were in the "arc of prosperity" then with Iceland and Ireland, weren't we?

• Report Unsuitable

1

wee-scamp

Monday, December 12, 2011 at 12:27 AM

" Though Mr Salmond has indulged, deplorably, in some political point-scoring in his letter," What patronising twaddle. Is the anonymous writer of this piece saying that Mr Salmond shouldn't have asked any questions or made any comments at all? Sorry chum but our forelock tugging days are well and truly over.

• Report Unsuitable

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 1

• 1
• Show all

Logged in as:

Comment here. Start typing your comment here:

Post comment

Please adhere to our Community guidelines

Your view

Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.