On Saturday 27 January 2024, we held a workshop in Edinburgh, entitled:
The EU is enlarging – how can Scotland join in?
Click here to view the full Report from our successful workshop.
Watch here for an interview with one of the presenters, Dr Kirsty Hughes.
SCOTLAND’S relationship with Europe is paramount. There can be no doubt that raising awareness and encouraging debate on this issue is important in preparing for independence.
It is generally thought that it would serve an independent Scotland better to join an international organisation at the earliest opportunity. Within the independence movement there has been some debate about the relative merits of joining the European Union (EU) or the European Free Trade Association (Efta) and the European Economic Area (EEA). How do these options compare?
The EEA combines all the countries of the EU and three of the current Efta countries into a single free-trade market. The fourth Efta country, Switzerland, is not in the EEA and has a separately negotiated treaty with the EU. Membership of the EEA is gained through the EU or Efta.
Efta was created in 1960 by seven countries: Austria, Denmark, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK. It was later joined by Iceland, Finland, and Lichtenstein. Of these 10 member states, four remain and six left to join the EU.
The Efta countries are not part of the EU customs union or common agriculture and fisheries policies or various other policies. This gives them a degree of freedom to negotiate trade agreements with other countries, as long as these do not contravene existing obligations to the EU. Efta countries abide by the trading standards and laws of the EU because EEA law is in most circumstances identical in substance to EU law. Efta countries do not have ministers or seats at the Council of the EU nor the EU Parliament, and are not involved in choosing the EU Commission (the EU civil service).
The EU is the dominant force in Europe. Following the horrors of the Second World War, it was created with the aim of fostering solidarity and peace in Europe, and application for membership is open to all countries in Europe that agree with its principles and values.
Only countries with full EU membership are “rule makers”. Joining Efta, would make Scotland a “rule taker” and it would continue to suffer a democratic deficit. On this basic level, the EU would appear the better option but what other considerations are there?
It has been argued that it will be quicker to join Efta. This would be of little use as the EEA and bilateral agreements would also have to be agreed. Equally, it cannot be ruled out that Scotland, as a past member of the EU for nearly 50 years, would have a swift entry to the EU.
Either way, the suggested speed advantage of an Efta application disappears when we consider the possibility of an Association Agreement (AA) with the EU, an often-overlooked option. An AA is in essence a trade agreement that allows an applicant country to benefit from tariff-free trade and other benefits with the EU while working towards full membership.
It is noteworthy that negotiating an AA would not take long, estimated by experts from three months to a year. This renders the speed advantage for Efta membership redundant.
Many countries have struck an Association Agreement with the EU, to their considerable benefit. Having an EU Association Agreement might well shield Scotland from a resentful or otherwise hostile Westminster.
Crucially, EU membership has many other advantages over Efta membership. Being part of the EU would place Scotland at the centre of Europe, reaping the benefits of and contributing to future developments within the European social, cultural, political, economic and environmental spheres.
Would Scotland not suffer more of a democratic deficit being one of 28 nations? Small and medium-sized countries have a proportionally larger number of seats in the European Parliament, much in Scotland’s favour. In some ways, the question is irrelevant because the European Parliament works in groupings, across nations, where Scottish MEPs can join forces with similar minded MEPs from other countries. In the Council and the European Court of Justice, Scotland would be represented by one member like all the other countries, regardless of size. In many cases, a Scottish minister would have a veto, which adds to the power that Scotland would exercise.
I suspect Scots would want to play a role in European developments rather than just observing from the sidelines. Whatever happens in the EU will have a strong effect on nearly all aspects of Scottish life. Currently, the Scottish electorate appears to firmly favour EU membership by a significant margin. It works both ways: The EU would welcome what Scotland has to offer.
When it comes to Scotland’s relationship with Europe, joining the EU is probably the better option by far.
Peter Glissov, Edinburgh, 24 February 2024
IT’S more important than ever to keep flying the flag of Europe. What follows is the untold story of the flag, human rights, and the campaign for independence.
The new Rwanda Bill is an appalling example of the UK Government’s readiness to ride roughshod over human rights
and the rule of law. It orders British judges to ignore sections of the Human Rights Act, including the right not to be
tortured, and to ignore international laws, in particular the Refugee Convention. Several Tory politicians have even
advocated for the UK to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
What’s the link with the “EU flag”? It’s true that the blue flag with a circle of yellow stars is the flag of the EU, but
that’s not how it originated, and it has an important back story which everyone needs to know if they are to hold an
informed attitude towards Europe and an independent Scotland’s future place in it. The Flag of Europe – to give it its
correct title – is a symbol of human rights, peace, democracy and the rule of law. If ever we needed a visible sign of
Scotland’s commitment to these values, it’s now.
The flag was designed for the Council of Europe (CoE) in 1955, decades before it was adopted in 1986 by the
European Economic Community, the organisation which later developed into the EU as we know it today. The CoE
itself had been created in 1949 in the aftermath of World War Two, pre-dating even the earliest origins of the EU,
which lay in the European Coal and Steel Community formed in 1951. It was established with the noble aim of
creating “a Europe of peace founded on the values of human rights, democracy and the rule of law”. It was, and still
is, a peace project. Its key focus is promoting and protecting human rights – this is useful to know, at a time when
arguably the greatest threat from the UK Government is its erosion of our human rights.
The CoE is a separate organisation from the EU, but the two cooperate closely. The EU is “the main institutional
partner of the CoE in political, legal, and financial terms”. Their relationship is described as “a strategic partnership,
which draws on a long tradition of cooperation based on their shared values: human rights, democracy and the rule
of law.” Indeed, all 27 EU countries are CoE members and no country has joined the EU without first joining the CoE.
The latter has 46 members in total including the UK, whose CoE membership was unaffected by Brexit. The sharing
of the Flag of Europe by the two organisations demonstrates that connection.
How is this story of the flag relevant to Scotland’s constitutional question? The answer lies in those values that the
flag represents. They are values that we Scots embrace. We have elected a Scottish Government that promotes
peace, human rights, democracy and the rule of law, ie the very values set out by the CoE and EU. The same cannot
be said of the UK Government given, for example, their failure to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, their overruling
of Holyrood’s democratic decisions, their unlawful prorogation of the Westminster Parliament and disregard of
international law, and, right now, their Rwanda Bill and threat to withdraw from the ECHR. In contrast, the Yes
movement’s vision of a future independent Scotland is surely one that shares the values of the CoE and the EU.
In fact, attitudes to Europe have become central to the independence campaign: the rock-solid evidence of Brexit
harm, and heightened awareness of what we have lost, makes the return to the EU a clearly desirable goal for more
than 70% of Scots, and independence is widely agreed to be the best or only route for doing so in the foreseeable
future. Pollsters tell us that the prospect of Scotland’s EU membership is key in turning many Scots from No to Yes.
At the march and rally for an independent Scotland in the EU, held by Believe in Scotland and Yes for EU in Edinburgh
in September, many folk who took part said they were No voters in 2014 but absolutely determined to get back to
the EU and therefore tending towards Yes.
So let’s see the flag in a different light: it’s not just “the EU flag”, but a meaningful, visible symbol of the values that we aspire to as an independent nation, and which we will work together with our European neighbours to realise in practice. Let’s keep reminding ourselves of those values, by ensuring that the Flag of Europe is flown and celebrated all across Scotland!
Morag Williamson, Convenor, Yes for EU
I was born and spent half of my childhood in Wales, the other half in England. I moved to Edinburgh in 1998 for work and immediately fell in love with Scotland & Edinburgh. At one point during this time, I was running a team that managed exports for my employer from Scotland to virtually every corner of the world, seeing and understanding at first-hand how doing business within the Single Market & Customs Union was so much easier than trading further afield. Later career moves meant I lived & worked in Sweden (briefly) with a spell working across the countries formerly part of the USSR and then the Netherlands (for a decade) and apart from living & working abroad my jobs involved a great deal of international travel across Asia, Africa, the America’s and all of Europe.
My point is I have gained some insight into the sheer quantity of paperwork needed to trade out-with the single market, and how the world is coalescing into trade blocs. I also have stood in border control passport queues on every continent (except Antarctica) and I can tell you the inter-EU travel experience with Freedom of Movement is vastly easier!
I was living in the Netherlands in 2014 so – as the franchise for IndyRef1 was residence-based – I could not vote. But if I could have voted, being honest with you, I would have voted No. Partly because I do believe we are all better when we work together, but I was also convinced that Scotland’s place in the EU could not be regained after independence against the wishes of the “former UK”. Even so I was a bit taken aback the morning after the vote to watch Cameron’s EVfEL speech on TV and over the longer term was dismayed to see the unravelling of the Vow. It got me thinking.
However, it was the Brexit referendum in 2016, without a clear proposition, with illegal dark money funding via a loophole in Northern Ireland electoral law, the theft of almost all social media account profiles in the UK, the illegal collaboration between campaign organisations and the endless lies that made me realise Scotland must make its own way and work with like-minded democratic neighbours.
Within the confines of devolved powers, the choices our elected MSP’s have made since devolution (baby boxes, free public transport for youngsters & OAP’s, free University tuition and the most progressive tax system in the UK) provide a glimpse of what an independent Scotland might look like, and that glimpse is both an intriguing and motivating vision of the Nation we could make. It’s a vision of the future I would like to see become real.