Egypt4u

As there is a lot of debate going on right now regarding the Scottish ‘Independence’ vote because we are now on a 100 day countdown to the actual vote taking place and thinking more about it does raise a few questions in my mind.

I started off having no particular opinions about it and thought it's a bit like a marriage that breaks down, you cannot force people to love or live together, but the more I think about that analogy the more I wonder just exactly what is it that Scotland wants with Independence.

When you consider that according to the 2011 census figures the breakdown was as follows in millions:
England 53,012,456
Scotland 5,295,000
Wales 3,063,456
Northern Ireland 1,810,863

So the largest majority is in fact English even if we remove the minority ethnic groups, Wales and Northern Ireland combined form only a small percentage of the overall population of the UK, so my question is this:
Isn’t the real situation in fact that the Scots want to end their union with England as we English are by far the largest majority by nationality?

This then raises another question, do we then not also have a say in whether or not we (the English) wish to have a union with Scotland? It does seem strange that only one partner in the marriage is having a say on whether a couple continue living together or not. Most people I know would say “let them do what they want” so from what I can see there is no pressure from most English people for Scotland to go or to stay. I reckon that most English do have a great affection for our Island neighbours and see our union over the years as a great thing, we have worked well together, but this referendum is being seen more of a slap in the face to the English, more of a rejection of us than a break up of a union.

Salmond himself seems to have used any tactic available to secure a ‘Yes’ vote, in particular allowing 16 year olds to vote. Lets be honest a 16 year old has hardly had any real political experience to decide on something that could so greatly affect their own future in the world and at that age you tend to have some radical views. There are also many Scots living in the rest of the UK, but unless you actually live in Scotland you cannot vote, another fudge by Salmond.

The biggest change to the rest of the UK would be no Scottish MPs in our parliament, which in turn means less chance of any future ‘Labour’ government getting into power as it was only ever the Scottish ‘labour’ vote that got the Labour party elected in the UK, so they did have a disproportionate say in UK politics.

The Shetlands, Orkneys and Western Isles have always seen themselves as not being part of Scotland and may themselves push for independence for themselves after a ‘Yes’ vote, would Salmond be in favour of this or would he change his tune when he realised his ‘Scottish’ oil was at risk?

Even without Scotland the ‘Union’ would still exist so the ‘United Kingdom’ of England, Northern Ireland and the Principality of Wales would still exist and its combined population of over 60 million would still be the third largest in Europe behind Germany & France so our influence would not be diminished and we would still be a member, whereas Scotland would not be. Past associations would not entitle an independent Scotland to join the EU as Salmond often claims, they would have to apply in the same way as any other country wishing to join and that could take years, if ever. Just think of the opposition by coutries such as Spain who have their own Basque seperatist groups who are demanding independence, they would certainly block a breakaway Scotland from gaining membership.

Even if we assume that they could continue as a member, they would then be subject to EU rules which for example would allow anyone from England to receive the free university tuition currently available in Scotland, but not available in England and they could not stop it happening. What about the ‘Euro’ if and I say if, they were allowed into the EU would they adopt the Euro?

As for the £ Sterling, does Salmond actually believe he will be able to align himself to the £ without England controlling his economy? He can call his currency whatever he wants, but without the Bank of England’s consent it will never be the £ Sterling and even if Scotland were allowed to use the £ Sterling it would be subjected to Bank of England control, a Scottish £ would not be independent.

There are some down sides for England in this equation, we would need to move our nuclear submarines bases at Faslane for example, but it would be done and no doubt contingency plans already exist for such an eventuality. We would need to lose some excellent Scottish regiments which would be a great pity, but again numbers could easily be made up again. Our defence contracts such as shipbuilding would probably move south so that could advantage English shipyards which often lose out to Scottish ones.

Even the North Sea oil is not as cut and dried as Salmond would have people believe. All reserves belong to the nearest land mass and international law gives each country territorial waters that extend a maximum of 12 nautical miles (22.2 km; 13.8 miles outwards from its geographical borders. In Scotland’s case that would be a diagonal line from the Solway Firth to just above Berwick on Tweed.
You then extend this diagonal line outwards for 13.8 miles in each direction unless you reach another countries territories. This means that a lot of the North sea oil fields and especially the new unallocated blocks fall below this line, so not all of the oil is Scotland’s as Salmon would have people believe.

As for defence, Salmon wants Scotland to be nuclear free hence the removal of our nuclear subs, that would also include the Trident missile system. He says he wants to be a part of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) yet he rejects being part of that defence system. Does he really think that they will be welcomed into a mutual defence organisation after leaving large gaps in that same defence system? England, Norway & Sweden would have to fill the shortfall in our Northern defences. Even the English Scottish border would be deemed unsafe as we (England) would have no defence against attack coming from that direction, not by Scotland itself I add, but because Scotland would not be properly defended. It may have a credible home defence, but it’s defence roll internationally would be none existent.

I along with many others hold dear our union with Scotland and apart from our individual national pride which is to be celebrated, I reckon overall it has been a good thing and I would be sad to see it go. It has been to each countries mutual benefit, each has helped the other in various ways and we have been the richer for it. I personally feel that Salmond has opened a can of worms in calling into question something that has worked well for over 300 years, a bit like your best friend telling you they no longer enjoy your company, either way it is Scotland’s decision and I wish them well whatever they choose, but remember you cannot reverse independence once you have voted to have it and many trials will lie ahead for both countries.

Comprehensive and thoughtful Horus. I'm a wee bit behind the mark in this discussion as while I've know, via the relatives, for years that there is a prevailing sentiment that Scotland should be free, apart, separate I've never thought much about it or analyzed exactly what the situation is.

I can say that we do have a similar situation here in Canada in that there is a certain faction of French Canadians who want to separate from Canada. The "Separatists" feel that being attached to Canada is somehow keeping them down, dis-ing them, not honouring their cultural heritage and on and on. I know that the laws in Quebec are quit different from the laws in English speaking Canada and I'm also quite aware that many English speaking people arriving in Quebec don't find the French all that friendly towards them. If you can't parlez-vous and fail to even try you're often not treated too well, helped or otherwise catered to. There is also a tacit but very strong vibe here in Canada that 'we' the Canadian people do NOT talk about or ever ever criticize our French brothers. The French sensitivities are worn on the sleeve like a badge and to say anything remotely disparaging is frown upon severely and this was all well prior to any PC police running around. The French here have had referendums however when it came to a vote the Separatists didn't prevail.

Having the French experience of a group of people wanting to separate and coming back to the Scotland/England situation I can comment that from an outsider looking in I do see Great Britain, the UK as an entity of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. Outside looking in all the countries seem a unit that has familial, social and economic ties that is a viable working unit. Maybe I'm wrong but 'if it ain't broke don't fix it.' I guess I'm trying to say I don't see any advantage - other than the Scottish mindset - of breaking up. AND I'm not sure that all Scots would want to break up. My mother's side of the family often talked about Scotland the free. My father's side has never mentioned it. One Scottish co-worker is/was an ardent separatist but many of her views seem pretty radical.

The economics of separating, to me, would be phenomenally horrendous. OMG just all the changes to paperwork alone would break the bank. This has been no recent union so to separate would be an undertaking of enormous proportions.

I'd hate to see a split however I know that that is a mental/emotional feeling. It is the what always has been so my response is an emotional one. I wonder if the Scottish desire to split is also more an emotional feeling. Almost like a teenager wanting to leave home - they want to just cause they want to BUT once you get out there in the big bad world would you survive as well as when you're at home?

Difficult situation to deal with and to get a handle on what everybody really wants especially when you have a few ardent people really pushing. Are they really reflecting the majority? Do they really have a handle on the economic? EU? etc etc etc ......... ?? Probably more questions than answers 'til it happens and then it could be too late OR can you go back?

LLL, I always have to smile when I hear people go on about Scottish 'freedom' I think that they have watched Braveheart to much
No one forced Scotland into any union, it had been muted several times before from the early 1600 and we have shared Kings & Queens before. Probably one of the biggest things that pushed Scotland into a union with England was to save itself from financial disaster due to a ruinous colonial adventure and I would suggest that Mr Salmond in particular reads this Wiki article about the 'Darien Scheme' and its similarities to what he is promising to the Scottish people and the potential pitfalls. One only has to look at how the Royal Bank of Scotland had to be bailed out by the British tax payer to see that the common benefit of union is a stabilising factor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darien_scheme

I think both the 'Yes' and the 'No' lobbys should read that Horus. A good balanced statement about the main issues for Scotland's referendum

I think that as we get nearer the date, Salmond will ramp up his persuasive attempts by focusing on the positives, and not telling the whole truth, and certainly not mentioning the negatives. I believe at the moment it is fairly evenly balanced between the Yes and the No's. I think most of the Scottish people who live and work outside Scotland would probably vote No if they were still resident north of the border.

This leads me to expect that the 'Yes' vote will strengthen and possibly just win on the day. I hope not because I am sure that the UK is stronger WITH Scotland but we would do just fine without Scotland. I have doubts about the long term prospects for an independent Scotland.

I personally have no concerns regarding the remaining part of the UK and England in particular being OK in the longer term, it may put a few problems in the way, but this country is far to strong both industrially and financially to be affected too greatly by a break up. It is more a case of us both being stronger together and I fear that an independent Scotland will be that in name only, Salmond is promising "jam tomorrow". His policies just don't stack up from membership of the EU to sharing the £ and all he does is play upon Scottish nationalism to get votes and I reckon many will follow him without thinking it all through though. There has been an all day coverage up and down Scotland canvasing opinions and I was surprised to see fishermen from Kiya's home town saying that they would vote to stay in, people were also quoting the reduction for an Independent Ireland's fishing industry within their EU membership.

Edit: Only just noticed LLL's last question, no once they are out that is it, there is no comming back even if it all goes belly up. It took a parliamentry act to create it in the first place and a similar one is needed to dissolve it, so it is highly unlikely that England would ever consider such a union with Scotland again.

If Quebec separated from the rest of Canada it would be Quebec that would suffer as federal funds tend to GO in that direction. Quebec isn't exactly providing much that I'm aware of to the rest of Canada.

I think that Scotland's dream of freedom is just that. Kinda like a donkey plodding on trying to get the carrot but once he gets it and eat it - then what? Not a great analogy but the best my brain can think up right now.

Taken to an individual level if people believe strongly they will get something better then they're apt to feel and believe they're being denied something. Am sure in the case of Scotland, especially if national fervor is being whipped up, many may start to feel they could do better alone however I personally believe this to be a false feeling. And if the entire story isn't being told then ???

I know when my relatives "escaped" Scotland they were definitely coming TO Canada. My father's people went back and forth a bit but ultimately remained in Canada and of all the literally HUNDREDS (due to huge families) of Scottish that left I know of none that went back once they left.

Your classic example is Sean Canary a big supporter of Scottish independence and always banging on about it, but lives in America and keeps all his money there, some patriot!