Scottish Independence

[Dixie]

True, but one partner feels they are in a rut and thinks they'd be better off without the other one.

Which partner is that, do you think? The obvious answer is Jockland, since they are agitating; but the English are almost as ambivalent (new word of the week) about having the Jocks in the marital bed as the Jocks are about having the English. I think we've slept back-to-back for years, and never ever engaged in spooning.

The question is promised to be a simple yes or no, so it can't involve options for devo max etc. Since the vote won't address devo max then should the vote be against full independence then that question remains on the btable and may be addressed subsequently.

Once they vote to remain with the status quo, they can whistle for further devolution - at least until the English get some too. Bloody West Lothians!

 

[Davet]

at least until the English get some too

Quite.

I'd be perectly happy with England being independent within Europe

 

[Taff]

... the English are almost as ambivalent (new word of the week) about having the Jocks in the marital bed as the Jocks are about having the English. I think we've slept back-to-back for years, and never ever engaged in spooning.

I don't think the English are ambivalent (I had to look it up to be sure) because the impression I get is that a bigger percentage of English people want Scotland to be independent than Scots who want independence. I can't remember the percentage, but it was quoted on Radio 4 a few months ago.

 

[Dixie]

I'd be perectly happy with England being independent within Europe

Can those two states co-exist? is it possible to be independent, while at the same time you have subsumed your independence within the greater European project? Isn't it rather like your wife and you remaining single after the wedding?

What is the word for such a statement?

 

[Davet]

Pragmatic

 

[Taff]

... Isn't it rather like your wife and you remaining single after the wedding?

What is the word for such a statement?

I think the word you're looking for is Oxymoron.

 

[FlipFlop]

The key words there are "As long as" and I reckon this is where it's going to get ugly.

The British government won't give up the oil and gas fields without a scrap. No doubt they will argue that it was British money that developed the oil and gas fields, it was British money that built Faslane, and other big employers in Scotland etc etc so Scotland can't just trouser them with impunity. Of course the Scots paid something towards them too, but no doubt the British government will point out they didn't pay for most of it, and if they want independence they will have to in effect buy out their erstwhile partner. Is erstwhile still the word of the week BTW?

I'm sure you're right, but they agreed that the Scots won't be given that option of voting for anything else. It's a straight Yes or No.

(Using UK to mean England, Wales etc; and Scotland as a separate entity)

The UK government will want the oil fields, and should use International Law to justify most of them remaining in UK hands. The England Scotland border does not go East/West at when it hits the coast, it is closer to North/South (something like NNE - SSW), and it is this that has historically been used to define maritime boundaries.

Of course the Scots will argue against this, and say that the coastal direction is an anomaly. They will also argue about possession - the oil and gas being landed in Scotland, although this is also a fairly dubious way of claiming it - most (not all) the oil and gas can be re-routed via other platforms to Norway, or down in continental Europe, as happens where there is maintenance on the St Fergus Terminal in Scotland. For a fairly minimal cost (for the oil & gas industry) it can also be re-routed to enter via Theddlethorpe or Bacton in the UK.

Plus Scotland would only be able to export to the UK via pipeline, or would have to tanker it away, adding to costs. And with all those extra costs - which refineries etc in Europe (or further afield) will want to pay for it?

Plus the issue of taxation on the oil and gas is not easy - tax too highly, and the oil and gas gets re-routed so never lands. Tax too heavily, and no new exploration.

The question of who owns it is nowhere near as simple as most Scots and English like to think. Or even who would benefit most from it whoever owns the fields.

I can fully imagine a situation where the proceeds from the oil/gas industry and put into a Escrow account for long years of international wrangling, during which time neither Scotland nor the UK get any benefit. And this uncertainty woudl reduce investment, and cripple the industry in the UK/Scotland, and ruin the finances of both countries (although the UK could probably out last Scotland on this front).

 

[Robert Burns]

Hence why I believe with the unstable world economy, it's a bad idea for both.

(Just think of the export tax on Short bread, irn-bru, macaroon bars & most of all, whisky).

 

[Dixie]

(Just think of the export tax on Short bread, irn-bru, macaroon bars & most of all, whisky).

Why on earth would Scotland elect to disincentivise export activity through taxation? There are very few countries in the world that tax exports, adn the ones that do tend to be failing states.

 

[Cave Dweller]

Will it end again by some poor Scot getting castrated again?

 

[Robert Burns]

Probably Alex Salmond though!

And I'd hate to think if him being remembered in the same context as William Wallace, Rob Roy, Robert the Bruce, etc...

*shivers*

 

[Dixie]

Probably Alex Salmond though!

And I'd hate to think if him being remembered in the same context as William Wallace, Rob Roy, Robert the Bruce, etc...

*shivers*

Oh I don't know. I can see some Hollywood type deciding that Mel Gibson should play him - though perhaps Robbie Coltraine is rather more to type.

 

[Davet]

If he succeeds in gaining Scottish Independence then that surely makes him greater than William Wallace?

But I fear the Scots haven't got the bottle to cut the apron strings, and we'll have to keep looking after them.

 

[didds]

I am genuinely interested how independence would genuinely work... Obviously it means its a sovereign state etc with its own economy. But what about stuff like defence? Would it raise its own army/navy/air force? Health - would it have its own health care system ie non NHS?

didds

 

[Dixie]

I am genuinely interested how independence would genuinely work... Obviously it means its a sovereign state etc with its own economy. But what about stuff like defence? Would it raise its own army/navy/air force? Health - would it have its own health care system ie non NHS?

Clearly, Scotland's infrastructure is currently a shared resource. A rump UK would have no need of hospitals, schools or universities in Scotland, so it seems reasonable to suppose that existing infrastructure would pass to Scotland under the divorce settlement. But once that has happened, the teachers, nurses, armed forces personnel etc are employees of the Scottish state. The British NHS would no longer serve Scottish residents, so Scotland would need very quickly to come up with its own solution.

Of course, many affected aspects are currently managed in Scotland by Scots under devolution - schools for example. But there will be many instances in which an entirely new operating process - often involving switching on a brand-new computer system - will have to be
adopted. This will be a challenge.

I imagine the UK may be asked (for a fee) to continue to provide certain services until the new, independently-run ones can be rolled out. But defence will be the big debating point. How many of the UK's ships, aircraft, tanks and guns (if any) can reasonably be transferred to Scottish ownership and control? The UK's risks will not diminish one iota from the secession of Scotland; can it afford to give away resources that it previously deemed necessary to keep it safe? It's a bit like a building's insurance policy; if I rent out my daughter's room while she is at uni, is it unreasonable of me to expect that the tenant maintains insurance at their own expense - even though yesterday I paid for it all?

 

[Davet]

Once Scotland leaves then the two Kingdoms, that were United by the Act of Union, would no longer be United.

So you can't talk about a United Kingdom after Scottish independence.

You would have the Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland.

 

[Simon Thomas]

As long as Scotland gets the oil and gas fields that are in its waters, it will be fine.

There was a paper written in the 70's about what would happen if Scotland got independence, the opinion was so shocking that it was classified top secret until it became public under the freedom of info.

It basically said allowing it then would remove most of England's wealth and would see Scotland having to subsidise England.

Personally, I independence as a bad thing, especially in the current economical climate.

The economic outlook is somewhat different in 2012 to 1970s, but Scotland is still 'in credit'.

The strength of the UK economy varies from country to country and from region to region. Excluding the effects of North Sea Oil and Gas, England has the highest Gross value added (GVA) with Scotland close behind, though Scotland has a higher figure, estimated as approximately £24 000 per capita in 2009, once a geographical share of oil and gas is assigned
Also Scotland had the best rate of per capita growth (well actually smallest decline !) over the preceding 12 months, declining by 1.4%, ahead of the best performing region of England which was the North West with a decline of 1.9%. GVA per capita figures in GBP £ for 2009 for the four countries of the United Kingdom (excluding oil and gas) are:

1 England £ 20 442
2 Scotland £ 19 744
3 N. Ireland £ 15 795
4 Wales £ 14 842

Within England, GVA per capita is highest in London. The following table shows the GVA (2009) per capita of the 9 statistical regions of England. At the same time as Scotland getting independence, how about London &SE doing the same ?

1 Greater London £ 34,200
2 South East £ 20,923
3 East of England £ 18,591
4 South West £ 18,211
5 East Midlands £ 17,349
6 North West £ 17,263
7 West Midlands £ 16,788
8 Yorkshire-Humber£ 16,569
9 North East £ 15,621

Also two of the richest 10 areas in the European Union are in the United Kingdom. Inner London is number 1 with a GDP per capita of €65 138, and Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire is number 7 with a GDP per capita of €37 379.

At the other end of the scale, Cornwall has the lowest GVA per head of any county or unitary authority in England, and it has received EU Convergence funding (formerly Objective One funding) since 2000.

 

[crossref]

before the act of union there there must have been agreement between scotland and england about martime boundaries, and the direction it extends from the coast. that will still hold.

 

[Davet]

I think the agreement was along lines of, "My ships are bigger than your ships, so bugger off."

 

[Cave Dweller]

What's the difference between a Scotsman and an Englishman?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Moderated by ST - potential racial overtones, which given the current high profile John Terry and Mark Clattenburg cases in soccer are not appropriate on a public forum.