England Frightened Of Scottish Indepemdence

[scott 129]

will that be put on an English 50p after Independance?

[azda 973]

will that be put on an English 50p after Independance?

No, it will be a raised Finger symbol

[Peckris 579]

So...

Scotland leaves the UK

England leaves the EU

No-one bothers to ask the Welsh or N Irish what they want to do

Going to be a fine old mess soon enough.

Bring back Home Internationals! Time the Wembley goalposts got broken again.

[Geordie582 18]

Time the Wembley goalposts got broken again.

Usual response from the Scots.

[azda 973]

We. Left them alone last year

[azda 973]

We. Left them alone last year

[ozjohn 552]

As far as I can see the recent move for Scottish independence started with the crazy idea of Blair's allowing governments for Wales, Scotland and N. Ireland but no government for England except the traditional Westminster UK government . This has lead to differences and distortions over the UK, such as prescription charges, university education charges etc. which have help foster the idea of breaking up the UK. When Australia federated all the potential states agreed to a common constitution that spelt out the responsibilities and powers of the State and Commonwealth governments. In fact this constitution was a bill of the house of commons. As a result the house of commons should have known better when trying to introduce a sort of federal system to the UK when it instituted aState/Local government for each part of the UK ie. England Scotland etc. and should have drawn up a constitution stating the rules of this federal system and how the components react with each other. In any case this wasn't done and the result we can see to day with a referendum for Scotland to leave the UK. Perhaps this was Blair's intention I don't know the best judgment being it wasn't thought out very carefully or at worst a sinister attempt to destabilize the UK. Again coming back to the Australian model the constitution can only be changed by a referendum where there is a majority of States that agree to the proposed change. Perhaps you can argue that the present setup in the UK isn't a federal system however the UK as it stood before the Blair changes was a country governed by a single parliament from which some responsibilities have been devolved to different states in a non consistent way causing a lot of unnecessary grief and uncertainty. In all a very bad idea which all the people in the UK will come to regret. For example if Scotland becomes independent it will probably lose its membership of the EU. Not a bad idea for the whole UK but for a small country like Scotland could be very bad and not at all certain if Spain opposes it and it seems likely they will. There would not be any reason for an open border between England and Scotland. Financial implications are also great. I could go on. The only positive could be a completely new issue of coinage for Scotland but according to many not based on the pound.

[Geordie582 18]

If "Freedom" goes ahead, my wife will be sad as her tot of whiskey will probably double in price! She'll have to start drinking a proper drink like gin & tonic like I do!!!!

[Peckris 579]

Perhaps you can argue that the present setup in the UK isn't a federal system however the UK as it stood before the Blair changes was a country governed by a single parliament from which some responsibilities have been devolved to different states in a non consistent way causing a lot of unnecessary grief and uncertainty.

I agree with much of what you said, but not this bit. The UK consisted of two countries (England and Scotland), one province (N Ireland), and one Principality (Wales). In theory, equal partners, but in practice not. Northern Ireland would never seek independence, and Wales would never be permitted to, or in practice want to, given the lack of any real size or economic clout. I think the secession of Yorkshire would cause Westminster more concern to be honest.

[Rob 3,002]

Perhaps you can argue that the present setup in the UK isn't a federal system however the UK as it stood before the Blair changes was a country governed by a single parliament from which some responsibilities have been devolved to different states in a non consistent way causing a lot of unnecessary grief and uncertainty.

I agree with much of what you said, but not this bit. The UK consisted of two countries (England and Scotland), one province (N Ireland), and one Principality (Wales). In theory, equal partners, but in practice not. Northern Ireland would never seek independence, and Wales would never be permitted to, or in practice want to, given the lack of any real size or economic clout. I think the secession of Yorkshire would cause Westminster more concern to be honest.

It's already a world away, so how far do you want it to secede? Might have to make the furrow that is the Pennine Way, a bit deeper and wider.

[TomGoodheart 373]

In all a very bad idea which all the people in the UK will come to regret.

Despite being half Scot, I rather agree. I receive letters concerning my taxes and premium bonds from Glasgow, suggesting there are Government departments which would need to relocate if Scotland were a separate country.

Only today Wifey and I were looking at mobile phone charges in Spain. People might not be too happy if they have to pay additional roaming costs when crossing the boarder. Or if, as when in Anglesey our phones sometimes switched to Irish networks, folk in Newcastle found they were paying overseas rates to make a call!

If Scotland is outside the EU will the rest of us need passports to visit? And will the Scots need to expand their border control/customs agencies?

Minor details you might say. But all potential sources of friction and resentment if not thought through very carefully.

[DaveG38 385]

Despite being half Scot, I rather agree. I receive letters concerning my taxes and premium bonds from Glasgow, suggesting there are Government departments which would need to relocate if Scotland were a separate country.

Only today Wifey and I were looking at mobile phone charges in Spain. People might not be too happy if they have to pay additional roaming costs when crossing the boarder. Or if, as when in Anglesey our phones sometimes switched to Irish networks, folk in Newcastle found they were paying overseas rates to make a call!

If Scotland is outside the EU will the rest of us need passports to visit? And will the Scots need to expand their border control/customs agencies?

Minor details you might say. But all potential sources of friction and resentment if not thought through very carefully.

These and many others are indeed the details that need answering. The problem is that neither side knows exactly what they will do once there's a 'yes' vote. The SNP will have you believe through their 'white paper' that Scotland will become the land of milk and honey and there won't be single downside to independence - believe that and you'll believe in the tooth fairy. In my view the biggest flaw in the SNP argument is that there are no downsides. Everybody knows there will be and the SNP would have had more credibility if they had acknowledged this.

The trouble is that although certain positions can be made clear now, for instance the UK government's one on a currency union, most can't be determined until after the vote and policies become clear. And some of that clarity might come a long way down the line. I've no doubt that on day 1 of an independent state things will look the same as the day before, but then events and policies will start to kick in. For example, the SNP wants to encourage migrants to Scotland whilst the UK Government wants to curb immigration. Those are two diametrically opposed policies and I can't see how it would be possible for them to co-exist before border controls between England and Scotland came into force. Otherwise, you'd have the potential for immigration into the UK via the Scottish back door and there's no way that could be allowed to stand for very long. At the moment the two sides just ignore the obvious, by claiming nothing would change, yet it's obvious it would.

Then there's the EU. I don't think anybody doubts that Scotland would not be technically an EU member state post independence, nor do I doubt that they would gain formal accession in due course. However, there's no clarity about what would happen in between, since technically Scots working in England wouldn't just be foreign workers, but they wouldn't even be migrant EU workers. Would they need passports, work permits etc. Would they be excluded from the UK labour market if their numbers exceeded UK government quotas for immigrants? Nobody can tell you the answers to these sorts of questions because they are hoping that the 'yes' vote will lose and if they win then the SNP will hope to fudge some kind of deal on the old-boys network to maintain things a much as they are now. The real issue is whether the UK government will play ball with this, or whether they will play hard ball with Scotland and drive some very tough decisions through. Where those decisions affect Scotland, but the Scots have no say, there's very little they can do about it. Somehow, I don't think we will stay nice ducky friends together for very long. Every time the UK government does something that doesn't suit Scotland Alex Salmond will be whingeing away over the border and that is bound to create a backlash from the UK.

Edited May 28, 2014 by DaveG38