Labour Councillor of ill-repute gets it all wrong again, on EU funding this time

Another one of the old grey guys who can’t stand intelligent women

From Alasdair [THE] Galloway:

The Letters they don’t publish

This letter is a response to one published by Labour in Scotland’s redoubtable (now ex?) Councillor Alex Gallagher (or Millport Eck as a friend calls him), taking issue with whether “the Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) would deliver £212 million to projects north of the Border over the next three years compared to £549m that would be due from EU structural funds”. In the course of this he makes claim that I cite in the letter.

Begins

Alex Gallagher claims that had there been a Yes vote in September 2014, “Scotland would have ceased to be a member of the EU in March 2016, meaning we would have got nothing from either fund over the last six years.”, so accepting Alex Salmond’s, much derided at the time, estimate of 18 months to negotiate independence.

However, even if Scotland would have been out of the EU in March 2016, it is not obvious that it would have remained outside for the last six years.  We know for instance that there is no “queue” to join the EU. The notion that Scotland would have to wait in line for Turkey to secure membership is quite risible.

Instead, Scotland would have had to negotiate its own membership, but with the not inconsiderable advantage that immediately prior to March 2016 it was part of an EU member state, and thus already consistent with its acquis. Mr Gallagher’s estimate of an independent Scotland being out of the EU for six years really is not tenable.

But, let’s say Salmond was wrong, even if just a little. Perhaps, it took half as long again, so not eighteen months but twenty-seven, taking us rather neatly to the end of 2016. By this time not only has Scotland voted for its independence, but the remaining UK has voted to leave the EU (Brexit). While negotiation would remain necessary, is it not unimaginable that Brexit would not influence opinion within the European Commission? Michel Barnier’s “My Secret Brexit Diary” suggests this strongly. Would there not even be a shred of schadenfreude there that they could assist a part of the UK that wanted to remain in the EU? Even if Scotland hadn’t voted in the Brexit referendum, the application for membership would surely speak for itself. Might the Commission be less concerned about Scotland’s currency, for a time, being one shared with another member state? Between 1944 and 2002 Belgian Francs were legal tender in Luxembourg.

Lastly, had there been a Yes vote and a successful application to the EU, Scotland would be a member who could apply to EU schemes. Can’t say that as a continuing member of the UK!

ENDS

Two reasons for drawing attention to this

  1. The continuing argument about whether Scotland could join the EU and for how long we would have to wait, is a continuing one. The answers are “yes” (partly down to schadenfreude on the part of the Europeans) and “not long” (though the longer it takes to get out of the UK may extend that).
  2. The Herald has a nice line in publishing a controversial letter (usually of the Unionist variety) but publishing no replies. This is an example. Usual reason given for this is that “the debate moved on”.  To be fair, this can happen. I sent off what I thought was a rather good letter to the Herald one morning about four years ago, but in the afternoon Alex Salmond was charged with what he was found Not Guilty/ Not proven of. Drew Allan was even moved to send me an email apologising for not using the letter which he felt was rather good, but “things clearly changed after lunch”.

Footnote:

We’ve done Eck here before:

Advertisement

7 thoughts on “Labour Councillor of ill-repute gets it all wrong again, on EU funding this time

  1. All that the unionists have left is the narrative that without England, Scotland is nothing.
    Sounds like an abusive relationship to me.
    Fortunately, thanks to blogs like this,many more Scots can now see through their empty rhetoric and have decided that Yes we can do better on our own.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Another letter on the same theme, they didn’t publish.

    “Let us take Alex Gallagher’s history redux as seriously as he presumably does. Scotland voting YES, would by 2016 be in negotiations for the return of its sovereignty with London, while discussing a temporary trade deal with the EU till it joins as a new entrant (meeting all criteria and no queue), while the Rump UK is holding a referendum to leave the EU. In that circumstance I would hazard a guess that both the EU and rUK would be “keen” to add Scotland to its side of the propaganda scales.
    Win, win for Scotland though my preference is for Scotland to go for the “Norway Option”. Of course the present stooshie is about the commitment made by the UK, to match EU funding to the devolved nations. That it has failed to do so in every criteria examined seems to be of no interest to Mr Gallagher”.
    Yours,
    etc

    A little inelegant compared to Alasdair’s, but two points.
    1.-rUK at the point of leaving the EU, would not have been wishing to make an enemy on its northern border, I would have thought.
    2.-The gung-ho “Global Briton” brigade is going down fast with the sun, leaving an Anglo-British nationalism sentiment in London’s elitist commentariat .
    I honestly do not know which is worse, but it may be the latter..

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Sur Dyson the tax evader claims to invest £120,000 in a farm. Claims Brexit is great because he can tax evade and use cheap labour from the rest of the world. Total hypocrite in every way. On another planet. The UK is losing £Billions because of Brexit and people are starving and dying. A subsidied tax evading farmer claims it is better without CAP payments. They are milking it in. A greedy pig full of dung. Waiting for another bung.of tax evaded monies. Starving people. Wasting taxpayers monies. Clean up the mess of tax evading hypocrites. Hoovering up taxpayers cash with every subsidy going. .

    Like

  4. If there had been a YES vote in 2014. Scotland would have continued to be an EU member in 2016. There would have been no EU Ref in Scotland. Scotland would have still been a member by negotiation. Scotland would not have been out of the EU. Scotland would have negotiated successful terms and conditions as before the 2016 Ref when Scotland voted to stay in the EU.

    Like

  5. @ Sir Dyson spent 120million on his farm. Tax evaders monies, using poor workers worldwide. Yet reckons this is a better deal than CAP payments from EU. So twisted beyond belief. Prices rising, people dying. The wealthier getting tax cuts. The poorer getting income cuts. The ignorant, arrogant Sirs.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.