Europe’s Richer Regions Want Out

The New York Times ^ | October 6, 2012 | STEVEN ERLANGER

[presidio9]

CATALONIA may be the catalyst for a renewed wave of separatism in the European Union, with Scotland and Flanders not far behind. The great paradox of the European Union, which is built on the concept of shared sovereignty, is that it lowers the stakes for regions to push for independence.

While a post-national European Union may be emerging out of the euro zone crisis, with a drive for more fiscal union and more centralized control over national budgets and banks, the crisis has accelerated calls for independence from member countries’ richer regions, angry at having to finance poorer neighbors.

Artur Mas, the Catalan president, recently shook Spain and the markets with a call for early regional elections and promised a referendum on independence from Spain, although Madrid considers it illegal. Scotland is planning an independence referendum for the autumn of 2014. The Flemish in Flanders have achieved nearly total autonomy, both administrative and linguistic, but still resent what they consider to be the holdover hegemony of the French-speakers of Wallonia and the Brussels elite, emotions that will be on display in provincial and communal elections Oct. 14.

There are countless things that hold unhappy countries, like marriages, together — shared history, shared wars, shared children, shared enemies. But the economic crisis in the European Union is also highlighting old grievances.

Many in Catalonia and Flanders, for example, argue that they pay significantly more into the national treasury than they receive, even as national governments cut public services. In this sense, the regional argument is the euro zone argument writ small, as richer northern countries like Germany, Finland and Austria complain that their comparative wealth and success are being drained to keep countries like Greece, Portugal and Spain afloat.

The crisis has also produced a loss of

[Vanders9]

The financial services industry is more than just banks, but in any case London has Natwest, LLoyds/TSB and several others. They also have a controlling interest in RBS, which since the financial crisis is now mostly owned by the British government.

[Vanders9]

Yeah! For God and Ulster! and...the South will rise again!!!

[Lysandru]

All,
So check this out:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/9593135/Nine-in-ten-Scots-living-off-states-patronage.html

[NonValueAdded]

Mel: "Freedom... hey, where's everybody going?"

All: "Free stuff! over there ..."

[presidio9]

If you don't think a hot dog can be a luxey item haute cuisine a regular necessity, you my friend have never been to Walter's in Mamaroneck NY.

[presidio9]

The financial services industry is more than just banks, but in any case London has Natwest, LLoyds/TSB and several others. They also have a controlling interest in RBS, which since the financial crisis is now mostly owned by the British government.

As much as I am enjoying our little conversation here, there comes a point where someone needs to admit that they are in a little bit over their head and arguing for argument's sake. I'm afraid that you have just reached that point. Your original point of contention was that Scotland's financial services industry is insigificant, which is simply not true. Your most recent post here makes it clear that you are unaware of the fact that (1) RBS owns Natwest, and (2) the British Government (of which Scotland is still currently a part) made similiar investments in both RBS and Lloyds TSB as part of the 2008 UK rescue package.

[Vanders9]

I never said that Scotland's financial services industry was insignificant. I merely said that it was much smaller than the City of London, even accounting for the difference in population size My contention is that an independent Scotland would not be able to rely on its financial services industry to sustain its needs, particularly as an independent Scotland would be in competition with the City.

I know that the British Government intervened in several banks during the financial crisis. That is not the point I am trying to make. If a large proportion of RBS, Scotland's largest bank, is owned by the British Government, that means that a large amount of RBS is owned by the BRITISH people. And England and Wales make up 90% of Britain's population. That makes it OUR bank, not Scotlands.