Scotland and rest of UK ‘would have to renegotiate EU status’
Scotland would have to renegotiate EU status, according to EU sources. Picture: Getty
THE remaining parts of the United Kingdom would have to renegotiate their European Union membership if Scotland voted for independence, senior European sources have said, saying both countries would become “succession” states within the European community.
EU legal experts say both Scotland and “RUK” – the remainder, of England, Wales and Northern Ireland – would be treated the same by Brussels, with both having to renegotiate continued membership.
One of those legal figures said such a renegotiation would involve a deal “done by the [European] Council, using qualified majority voting, and with the required say-so of the European Parliament”.
This would put Scotland in a different category to new member states such as Croatia, which – as an “accession state” – must get unanimous backing of all EU governments before gaining entry, and agree to join the euro.
The reports were backed by the SNP last night, which has long argued it would not be treated as a new member state, and would not, therefore, have to re-apply for EU membership.
Pro-Union critics, however, maintain that the situation is in doubt, and argue that Scotland could, therefore, be forced to accept membership of the euro.
The lawyers spoken to suggest that, if Scotland becomes independent, it would pave the way for detailed three-way negotiations between London, Edinburgh and Brussels, with issues such as the two nations’ voting clout and financial contributions requiring to be sorted.
“There is a valid legal question about what ‘RUK’ [what remains of the United Kingdom] would have to renegotiate,” said one senior EU source.
For example, an exit from the UK for Scotland would reduce London’s EU budget contributions, but also re-allocate billions of euros in a rebate London gets each year in lieu of French and German farm aid or grants for regional development and social projects.
Last year, a paper produced by experts from Commons library declared there was “no clear answer” over what status an independent Scotland would have within the EU. It argued as there was “no precedent”, and the matter has given rise to “widely different views”.
However, the SNP insists as Scotland and the rest of the UK are EU territory, both would continue membership after independence. On the claim that Scotland and the RUK would have to renegotiate, a spokesman for First Minister Alex Salmond said: “We will both be successor states, with exactly the same status within the EU.”
He added: “The lesson for UK politicians is to be careful what they say about Scotland, because the same attacks apply to them – the anti-independence parties should adopt a more positive and constructive approach.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 45 comments to this article
Page 1 of 3
David Milligan
Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 12:28 AMComment removed by moderator
Ron Greer
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 10:05 PM36 That'll come as a surprise to the English.
The West Awake
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 08:49 PM42 - It stands to reason that the rUK would have to renegotiate membership for the obvious reason it no longer includes Scotland, and therefore 5.2m people, a third of it's land mass, the whisky industry, the EUs only oil & gas fields of any scale, the North Sea fishing grounds and the Atlantic seaboard. It would also probably lose it's veto on the budget rebate.On the plus side, though, the rUKs annual contribution to the EU would go down, as would it's rebate. If you call it a plus, it would also probably guarantee the rUK people a referendum on continuing EU membership.
Danielrober2
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 07:11 PM# 38 Chris .................. I too suspect that the First Ministers paid experts could be behind this intriguing piece of information, just to provide fog. However, the truth within the lie is that a renegotiation might take place and could ruin finances for many EU projects. Those projects would not just be located in Scotland and the UK, but across the EU, due to the UKs large contributions. At such delicate times, separation politics needs to be planned in great detail. At the very least the SNP needs to publish its legal advice, in good time rather than holding it back for months or even years now....................... There is also the highly integrated EU bidding process s might grind to a halt as the legal frame work is suspended. Bidding situations, such as the recent Train contracts going to Germany instead of a UK based manufacturing facility or even the new Bridge here in Scotland, have been won according to EU regulations (as we have all been told). With a suspension of membership, what will happen to the thousands of little and not so little bidding processes ongoing?
Auld Twa
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 05:45 PMUnnamed EU experts are like anonymous letters, they can and should be ignored.
Chris
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 05:11 PM39 - I agree, mid-level bureaucratic comment, spun for effect. And one thing not tackled in the article is this: treaty change would be needed to secure Scottish membership of European institutions. Treaty change is not a matter for QMV, or within the power of the European Court or European Council to bring about - with or without the European Parliament. It requires unanimous agreement of all member states.
LondonReader
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 04:55 PM35 & 37 - appreciated; 38 "who are these legal experts?" ---- I imagine that at best they are bureaucrats speaking out of turn. The EU will just get into in a huddle and find the line of least resistance that serves the EU ... no change there.
Chris
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 04:33 PMA question for the author - who are these "EU legal experts" and with what authority are they speaking? That these people won't go on the record, or even reveal where they work, makes it impossible to judge the worth of their views. The European Commission has consistently refused to be drawn into the argument and by its nature the European Court of Justice cannot comment on hypotheticals of this kind. I suspect the story is actually a plant from the First Minister's press team, telling us what they would like us to think the EU thinks. It bears then only a distant relationship to the truth. No one really knows or can say what relationship an independent Scotland would have with the EU, legal or political. Best bet is the continuing UK would assert that it retains its constitutional identity - it would after all constitute more than 90 per cent of the original unit - and it would do so successfully.
The West Awake
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 04:18 PM29 - "Scotland leaving the UK will weaken its position further" Although you are referring to the EU here, I reckon this statement sums up your argument generally. You are right, the rUK, assuming it will survive as such, will be a smaller power than it is presently - you can't take an egg out of a box and sell it as a full box. The rUK will simply have to re-adjust to being a smaller nation. But.... for us Scots we will have what we have never had, direct representation of our interests, as opposed to the UK decided what is best for Scotland. What good was being a member of the UK when the Scottish fishing industry was sold off during Thatchers rebate negotiations for example? If you can show me examples where Scotland benefitted from being in the UK with regard to the EU please let me know. For me it's like the argument that Scotland will "lose" influence over monetary decisions if we use the £ - we never had any! The nub of the problem with the union is it's inbuilt inequality, England (through no fault of it's own) cannot help but completely dominate it.
The West Awake
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 03:58 PMRon - "what pray does England stand to lose if Scotland becomes independent." I don't really understand this question insofaras under the union England doesn't exist as a political entity.
Ron Greer
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 02:53 PM29 London Reader.----Thank you for your considered response. Though we may have substantial differences of opinion on this, I appreciate the generousity of spirit in which it was written. My detestation of some of the attitudes of the English political class should not be taken as detestation of the English nation. Indeed my worst vitriol is reserved for Labour Unionists up here, trying to defend their sinecures. I am a long term Nordophile and hope see to see the nations of these islands have a similar amicable relationship as the nations of Scandinavia have in their national lives.
Ron Greer
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 02:44 PM31 Sorry as well--sometimes my sarcasm goes past my friends too!
Charles Addison
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 01:57 PMOn a related line, did anyone else see the Telegraph trying to claim that Scotland would inherit 27% of the UKs debt: http:tinyurl.com6uorb6k. They then made sure no comments could be posted against the story. Seems a bit harsh given we only have 9% of the poulation.
LondonReader
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 12:55 PMThe number of MEPs for each country is now meant to be in proportion to its population; Scotland's population comprises 1% of the EU, There are currently 754 MEPs of which the UK has 72 and Ireland has 12. No country can have fewer than 6 or more than 96 MEPs. MEPs are grouped by political allegiance and not by country. The EU Parliament.does not have the legislative power of Westminster; MEPs influence EU institutions in a similar way to a Second House, like the US Congress. The European Commision is the executive branch of the EU responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding treaties and day-to-day operations: Scotland would have 1 commisioner out of 28. .
Jimson
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 12:43 PMRon Greer Sorry your post at 20 suggested to me that YOU were a Unionist. I am an independence supporter. More power to your elbow.
Page 1 of 3
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.