I’ve never started a great debate before, so be kind!
In the news today, it’s 300 years to the day that the Act of Union was agreed between England and Scotland, forming the United Kingdom.
This isn’t being marked by any celebrations as it’s felt that people, particularly north of the border, have pretty ambiguous feelings about it. Press and TV is making a big fuss of various polls conducted in England and Scotland which indicate that sizeable chunks of the population would like to see it disbanded, with England and Scotland returning to the status of individual political entities.
Politicians in favour of disbanding the Union (i.e. Scottish Nationalists) argue that Scotland would be better off as a small nation receiving massive grants from the European Union (similar to Ireland and Greece) and getting all the money from the oil and gas reserves in the North Sea. Politicians against argue that Scotland would be much poorer without the current financial backing it receives from the rest of the Union (mostly England), that the oil and gas reserves won’t last long, that there’s some debate about whether Scotland has the rights to all the oil and gas anyway, and that it will lose political influence without the clout of the Union behind it.
So to the debate. Do you think the break up of the Union would be advantageous to Scotland or would it suffer (economically? Politically?). How would it affect England, and for that matter, Wales and Northern Ireland? Is it all about misplaced patriotism or does it make real sense?
Having my own independentists to worry about (I’m from Navarra, one of the areas claimed by Basque nationalists), and having suffered repeatedly the phenomenon of people who couldn’t find my capital in a map telling me what to think about those guys, I try to avoid having opinions about nationalist problems elsewhere.
But I couldn’t help but notice that, the way you put it, “nationalist Scots” are counting on Scotland staying within the EU and reaping benefits from it; “unionist Scots” are talking about leaving not just the UK but the EU. So they’re talking about two different situations!
There are plenty of Scots down in England, I doubt that they’ll shuffle back home, and if they wanted to, their husbands/wives would not be that enthusiastic.
The Scots have cannily managed to retain a legal system that is rather more sensible than that of England, Wales and N. Ireland, they also have a ‘parliament’ that has avoided some of the dafter impositions recently.
Personally I would rather like to see Gordon Brown and John Reid repatriated North of the border - possibly quite a lot of people agree with me there.
The biggest threat would be that Scotland set itself up as a low personal and corporation tax zone, and that would be amusing as it is Scots that undermined our admittedly somewhat shaky structure.
Put in perspective, there are 5m Scottish residents, and there are £5m UK citizens who live abroad - the number of immigrants is alarmingly similar.
We would have to relocate Trident, useless anyway, there could be a problem with non-UK citizens serving in the Smaller British army, but we’ve ignored that problem with S. Ireland long enough.
Heck, if they get it right and Global Warming continues, I might even invent Scottish ancestry and move up there.
No. I strongly believe the UK is better off united than not. As part of the UK, Scotland has the advantage of Britain’s veto in the UN Security Council, is a party to treaties, agreements, international organizations etc. it would otherwise have to renegotiate, partakes of the history and traditions of a larger, generally-respected nation, etc. If it went its own way, Scotland would be even more second-class and sneered-at than Britain’s worst critics already think it is.
History is pretty clear: a large country, voluntarily united from its constituent parts/regions/ethnic groups, is usually going to be better off than if it spins apart. I have a problem with a lot of the decentralization measures and constitutional changes Blair has already made; I would regret seeing the ties that bind the UK become further frayed or attenuated.
It is the Scots who are talking about independence, the English are not really bothered - ‘suit yourself’ is more the attitude.
I don’t think that Scotland is regarded as second class or sneered at, we like them, and they are all over England - they are generally regarded as pretty smart. A heck of a lot of my local friends are Scots.
There could be a problem with massive dual nationality
the old saying was that Scotland has long been well governed, from London … by Scots.
There isn’t a specific Scottish Unionist party. The Labour and Conservative parties are both unionist. The Liberal Democrats are too, but less rigidly so. On the side of the Nationalist SNP are the few Greens and Scottish Socialists, and no doubt Tommy Sheridan’s one-man Solidarity.
I guess I wasn’t clear. I know that some Scots want independence (Sean Connery, among others, IIRC), and I understand that most English folks are pretty apathetic on the issue.
When I wrote, “If it went its own way, Scotland would be even more second-class and sneered-at than Britain’s worst critics already think it is,” I meant that Britain’s worst critics already consider the United Kingdom as “second-class and sneered-at.” If Scotland (and Wales and Northern Ireland) were to go their own ways, I think the component parts of what was once the UK would rank even lower in the world’s estimation than if they had remained in the UK. That’s my point, inartfully expressed.
