Q:
Is an in/out referendum a certainty?
A: No. David Cameron plans to contest the next election on a campaign of renegotiating the terms of British membership of the EU and then putting the resulting deal to the electorate in an in/out referendum by the end of 2017. So the Tories have to win the next election to ensure a vote.
Q: Isn't Cameron pro-Europe?
A: Yes. He previously said he would campaign to keep Britain in a renegotiated EU. However, his line has recently hardened and he has said he could be forced to recommend a No vote if he fails to get the UK an opt-out from Brussels' "ever-closer union".
Q: So what exactly do the Tories want to renegotiate before they would back a Yes?
A: Among other aims, the Conservatives, with UKIP breathing down their necks, want to restrict freedoms of movement and labour within the EU, despite more than 2.3m British citizens living elsewhere in the bloc.
Q: Are their demands practical?
A: Not according to Jose Barroso, the outgoing president of the European Commission, who has said Tory proposed immigration caps would be "unacceptable" .
Q: Is a vote to leave likely?
A: Polls vary. Some have shown a UK majority for quitting before renegotiation. However, recent polls have shown a steady majority in favour of staying if some kind of new settlement can be reached.
Q: Are Scottish attitudes to Europe different to those in rest of UK?
A: Yes. Research shows just four of Scotland's 51 Westminster seats would deliver a Yes, compared with most in England.
Q: Didn't we vote on this before?
A: Yes. The UK joined the Common Market in 1973 and two years later voters decided by two to one to stay in. Support in Scotland was lower than England or Wales at 58% per cent for staying, compared with 68% in England. The Western Isles and Shetland were the only places in the UK to call for an exit.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article