Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
of Scotland be a member of the EU or would they have to apply and prove they could meet the criteria?
by observer393 on Thu Jan 18th, 2007 at 06:22:27 AM EST
It would have to negotiate an accession treaty, but it would obviously meet the criteria, so barring some politically motivated roadblocks (say, the split from England being acrimonious, or Greece and Cyprus wanting to extract a stronger EU stance on Northern Cyprus, or something like that) it should go through. However, an accession treaty needs to be approved in referendum in at least some EU member states.

See this comment subthread in MfM's diary on the Nations Of Europe, which begins with

There hasn't been a single case of breakup of an EU member state, and the treaties have no provisions about it. So we don't know what standing an independent Scotland or Euskadi would have in the EU.
and seemed to end with the position I outlined above.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 18th, 2007 at 06:42:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Given all that oil, I wonder if the Norwegian route would be in the cards.

Have to believe the SNP would require a referendum on membership.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jan 18th, 2007 at 07:51:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The difference is that Scotland is more pro-EU than Norway or England. And the Netherlands doesn't have a problem having access to North Sea fields and being in the EU.

But, sure, a referendum would be appropriate.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 18th, 2007 at 07:58:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I didn't know that.

Point taken on NL, but then, the quantities and proportion to pnb is quite different.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Jan 18th, 2007 at 08:03:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In addition, I don't think Norwegian Euroscepticism is motivated by oil, it's mostly about fishing (especially whaling) and a good measure of Scandinavian "we have better standards than the EU anyway, so we'd have to downgrade". Scotland is not in that situation, I don't think. They tend to think the EU is a good thing, and Scotland receives structural funds.

"It's the statue, man, The Statue."
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jan 18th, 2007 at 11:29:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My Norwegian partner - who actually voted "No" twice - tells me that oil was never mentioned the first time, as you imply, and that fishing was indeed a serious issue.

Moreover, many women - who tipped the balance in the second vote - were very much against the EU due to the "downgrading standards" point of view you mention.

But far and away the key issue was the Norwegian attitude to land ownership and both the "Odelsrett" - ie the law of promogeniture - and the obligation for farmers to live and work on the land.

The concept of absentee landlords/ rentiers - particularly by foreigners (where legal resrictions applied, and may still do) - was and remains anathema to most Norwegians.

There was a deeply held view that membership of the EU would lead to undesirable changes in land ownership and tenure, which would have a detrimental effect on Norwegian Society.

The Scots were - prior to the Union and the Clearances - in many ways identical in view to Norway (which they would be, bearing in mind the history), and in fact through the vehicle of Scottish Land Reform we are beginning to see the faintest stirrings of a possible change of direction.

There are deep issues here relating to flows of Capital and rural depopulation.

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Thu Jan 18th, 2007 at 02:45:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series