So everyone in Scotland will have to go through some application process to become Scottish citizens? Will they be allowed to vote in subsequent Scottish elections without doing so? ISTM your version of separation makes the entire nation foreign nationals.
I don’t see rUK being hardass about it but I also don’t see them being legally obligated to continue every Scot’s UK citizenship.
How would a rUK government know how each person voted? Secret spies? So they can just strip YES voters of citizenship?
How about those that vote NO or did not vote? Should they lose citizenship through the votes of others?
How did the Czech Republic and Slovakia handle these matters?
It also creates precisely the administrative nightmare that he has earlier decried.
They will not be obliged under Rottman to allow citizenship to people who voluntarily take Scottish citizenship by taking a passport or some other act. Mere residence cannot be the decider, nor birth, nor naturalisation. Reality says that they will not push this.
But for the majority of people who continue to live quietly in Scotland, renew their British passports and slide under the radar, they will retain their status.
No government, Scottish or rUK has an interest in opening the Pandora’s box of Scottish/rUK citizenship. Scotland will not enforce Scottish citizenship as they need more residents, not fewer; rUK cannot withdraw citizenship outside Rottman.
So when you say “live quietly” you mean not voting or having any Citizenship priveleges in their native land? Could Scotland deport criminal Scots who haven’t applied for citizenship?
One assumes they complied with Rottman and there was an element of choice.
The Czech Republic/Slovakia split is an interesting example. The Czechs suggested major doom and gloom for Slovakia. What happened was that both countries flourished after separation with Slovakia approaching closer to Czech levels of wealth rather than being an impoverished appendage; and no oil was involved.
No friendly government would engage in such a strategy. Commonwealth citizens, settled in the UK have the full franchise without affecting their own citizenship.
There is the moral argument. Don’t harm your own.
There is the legal argument. Rottman.
There is the pragmatic argument. Don’t be so silly.
And then there is the problem of getting such legislation past the Upper House and dealing with the Queen’s views about stripping citizenship from her subjects.
It is just a unionist scare story that Better Together didn’t even stoop to.
More nationalist handwaving. Lol
I think I am the only one who has introduced an incontrovertible FACT to the debate.
RumpUK cannot strip citizenship without restriction as they are bound by Rottman. I see there has been no contradictory cite or successful argument against it.
Back to the OP.
NO. The Scottish MPs will remain so until independence is negotiated. There is no precedent for disenfranchising people like this. The UK will remain the UK until separation is agreed. Talk of removing Scottish MPs is unthinkable before the process is over. Another unionist scare story.
There is talk of postponing the May 2015 general election to avoid a short lived government falling on final removal of Scottish MPs.
This is difficult because although the Commons might decide to save their seats, the upper house would be able to block it effectively.
All this talk of citizenship is conjecture until Scotland has an agreed constitution which will make clear who is a citizen and who is not and the status of English immigrants who have settled in Scotland. Presumably the Scots will get to vote whether they approve of the Constitution, but not until all the work on these nuances has been done. That will take a few years. Then, of course, there may be changes on the UK side.
After a Yes vote, I think it would be more sensible for the UK to have a General Election pretty much immediately. I’d like to see Cameron resign both his position and his seat, but I don’t think he has the integrity to do it. I think that the next government will be a Labour one and probably won’t need the Scottish MPs to have an absolute majority. But if it does, that could act to the rUK’s advantage as Labour will try to prolong the negotiations not only to stay in power but also to give themselves the best possible start for the following election by getting the best deal for the rUK. A 5-year divorce could be on the cards. There may also be some boundary changes.
Rottman is decisive for those who do not voluntarily formally renounce their British citizenship.
It would be a fine mess if 59 Scots MPs were elected only for their seats to disappear at independence. Since at least 40 of the voted Labour, it would give Labour an unfair advantage in the UK General election.
The UK has only recently gone to fixed 5 year maximum terms for its governments. It would have to repeal this law to get the date shifted to after Scots independence.
Better to shift the date of Scottish independence.
They wouldn’t know - if they chose that route, they’d just strip rUK citizenship from everyone resident in Scotland.
Yes, they’d get stripped of rUK citizenship too. That’s what it means living in a democracy. Not only do you abide by the wishes of the majority, but you accept the consequences.
Do you want to be Scottish or not?
He has just been quoted as saying he will not resign if there is a YES vote.
All the polls on the May 2015 election (and previous experience of moderate recovery by the governing party over the last six months of almost every parliament) are highly suggestive of a very narrow finish. Nothing I have read or know about elections suggests that a majority Labour government is possible without its Scottish MPs given its current standing in the polls.
A general election cannot be called by Cameron anyway without further legislation which is unlikely to become effective any time before May next year. As noted above, delaying the election is a possibility.
Do you not understand that the rUK is not legally able to withdraw citizenship from people who have not voluntarily agreed to obtain citizenship of another country. Go read Rottman. This is not a moot point for compliance as with the ECHR, but is enforceable under European law in the ECJ. Anyone stripped of their citizenship without voluntarily agreeing to Scottish citizenship could successfully have this overturned by the ECJ.
Are you seriously suggesting that Parliament would agree to remove five million people from the franchise to ensure a Conservative government. I just cannot see it getting past the Lords, let alone international obligations under various treaties.
I am just wondering how people would feel if another European country proposed to strip a percentage of their population of their franchise while still citizens and eventually of their own nationality against their will.
But you’re seriously suggesting that there wouldn’t be a single Scottish citizen after separation. Everyone would have to apply for it. How many would have to apply before they could have a legitimate national election?