I would also add that I expect there to be a knock on effect in Scottish politics whatever the results. The 'Senior Politicians" from the unionist parties are becoming seen as un-Scottish and under UK control; same with the CBI and other organisations. I suspect this will ensure that whatever the outcome the 2026 Scottish General Election (whether as an independent state or as continued devolved government) will be SNP dominated. The SNP are not doing too badly in the polls currently for a government in mid-term. Even if independence is not gained, there will be many more powers devolved according to current plans, and the closer the result, the stronger will be the hand of those demanding further devolution.
2016 Election, not 2026!
If the result is close, then the loser may not accept the result.
If the result is Yes by a small margin, the British Government could not go back on what has been decided- a straight vote and a decision- it would cause uproar and probably a divisive fight followed by a massive vote in a second Scottish organised referendum.
If the result is No, i suspect it will be revisited within a decade especially if there is a Tory government in London for that period.
Indeed, the whole reason for having the vote in the first place is to capture clearly the sentiments of the Scottish electorate on the independence issue.
If Scotland votes for independence, the machinery will be set in motion bring it about.
Of course, there are other political parties in Scotland that will have a different vision of what independence means from that proposed by the SNP.
I would expect the 2016 election to be quite interesting, two years afterward the 2114 vote, the SNP will be examined on their progress on the currency question, the EU question, the NATO question, the Oil question and a great many other things that they have promised are simple and straightforward issues to solve. There is nothing quite as intimidating a prospect as a Scot who thinks he has been deceived.
I see this as the latest installment in the constitutional story of these British Islands: how should the nations of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales be governed and by whom?
There will be a new agreement with Scotland and the details will be hammered out over time. All of this process will take place in the context that we live next to each other in these islands and share many common interests.
At the moment there is a fashion for small states in Europe because of the NATO security umbrella and the EU economic club. Should those organisations break up, small states will rapidly go out of fashion. In matters of international geo-politics, when the game gets rough, size matters.
Or, maybe, ethnic nationalism will flare up back in England, and it will end in the result of two nations side by side who despise each other. I still don’t understand the long term benefits of breaking up a Union which has served pretty well for generations.
That’s what I call long-term thinking 
Is there a proposed schedule of independence? Say Scotland votes ‘Yes’, how long would it take for it to become a fully independent country? I can see this process taking some time, so maybe the 2016 election will happen just a few months after Scotland becomes independent…
I’m not sure I would agree. If we exclude Norway and Denmark, the most successful small states in Europe are NOT part of NATO. Sweden never joined, neither did Finland despite its violent history with Russia, and neither have Austria, Switzerland or Ireland felt the need to join the military alliance.
This is what you don’t get. It has served pretty well IN SOME WAYS. In other ways, it has been terrible.
Personally, on balance and with the way things are at the moment, I think the union should stay as it is. I suspect the majority of Scots will, too. But all you have to do is look at history and realize that Scotland went from a small independent country to an backwater province, and that its particular needs and wants were an afterthought at best to London.
Devolution has helped a lot. I think the UK should consider a more equal federal system, with Scotland, NI, Wales, England (London) and perhaps Northumbria (York) each given their own parliaments, keeping one at Westminster for UK-wide issues. As it is, the huge disparity in size and population between England and everywhere else makes it hard for Scotland to have a voice.
I am English but live in Scotland. I am aware of the massive difference in Social outlook and politics between Scotland and England- one of the reasons I moved here. cots lost faith in being governed by England some decades ago, before that it was a minority who resented rule from Westminster, but many Scots will quote the Poll Tax experiment as the start of the loss of faith- a generation ago the Conservatives could expect 20 plus seats in Westminster- for the last two Parliaments they have had one- unfortunately now my MP! Most of the responsibilities devolved have been carried out in a manner to the left of the current Westminster government- Lab/Lib when Tony Blair’s New Labour was recreating moderate Conservatism, and SNP against the coalition. We didn’t want the NHS reorganised- it wasn’t. We didn’t want anyone messing with education- it wasn’t. We wanted to retain payment for students- it was retained, we didn’t want University fees, we didn’t get them and still have student grants, we didn’t want expensive nursing homes stealing houses from the middle class- we have reasonable payments for such care. But there are many other areas where we want to have a Scottish, not English approach, and some of those are central to statehood- setting corporation tax and VAT, Defence, Foreign relations etc.
Add to that the sense of resentment currently being stoked by the Better Together campaign who are just doomsayers, it looks like we are headed for independence in the next couple of years(or at least in a decade). I think the people are deciding that they want it and will have it.
Scotland is geographically very important to NATO.
You need a country with a navy to secure the sea lanes.
The SNP defence policy seems to be that they can ban all nuclear weapons from Scottish territory and reduce their navy to a few fishery patrol boats and still have their national defence guaranteed by the goodwill of others.
Defence policy is an insurance policy and the SNP want to cancel the policy currently in place.
Scotland shares the island of Britain with England and Wales, so the national security issues of the two countries will be directly linked.
I would expect this to be a major issue to be resolved.
At the moment a large part of the Royal Navy ships are built in Scotland employing thousands of people. They could be the last. The thing is all along the SNP claims that it is in the best interests of the rest of the UK to make it easy for Scotland to pursue these policies. Their arguments will not count for anything in London if Scotland is Independent.
Like some self absorbed student they think that independence means exercising choice regarding lifestyle whilst at the same time using the parental home as a resource to used for their convenience.
Eventually matters come to a head and there is a serious reality check.
Independence is planned for 24th March 2016- the 413th anniversary of the Union of crowns and the 309th anniversary of the creation of Great Britain by the merger of the Parliaments. A date that resonates in history and Scotland’s future Independence Day Holiday.
This is two months before the election which will elect the first entirely independent Scottish parliament for many centuries.
Such a move is independent of agreement on Monetary Units or EU membership as a simple withdrawal by Scotland would at least allow continued use of the Pound as Ireland did for half a century and membership of the EEA awaiting full membership of the EU.
After that I would expect a further SNP landslide in May 2016 (in a parliamentary system designed to avoid one-party rule!)
Too little too late I am afraid. England does not want a regional tier and it is too big for any reasonable federal system. Devolution has not helped quell the independence spirit as expected, it has fanned the flames.
Ireland 1920-2016- same sort of size, same sort of geography. Your example does not hold.
The Royal Navy is hardly commissioning any ships over the next two decades. Ship building belongs in other less developed nations. Not a real problem.
The main loss of jobs will be Faslane and that will take a couple of decades to settle finally.
And that is the type of statement that drives Scots crazy and increases the potential Independence vote.
Scots are as able to make such decisions rationally as anyone else, whether for or against independence- there are valid arguments both ways and they will be considered. Characterising the Scottish electorate as ‘self-absorbed students’ is counter productive if you desire a United Kingdom…
Easter 2016 is gonna be a big deal in Ireland too.
There’s the Type 26 replacement for the Type 23 frigates, the replacements of the mine hunter fleet, the ocean patrol ships and various RFA vessels. I’m not sure what can be built outside the UK (or rUK), but the Type 26 will certainly be in-house, so to speak, if just to retain capability.
And they make amusing mistakes such as asking the SNP MSP (and Scottish Government Minister) Humza Yousaf to speak on behalf of Better Together.
Apart from education, welfare, Trident, fisheries, agriculture, childcare …? Independence is the main big headliner right now, so it might seem to be “all they talk about”. How about Labour for Independence or the Green Party? Is Independence all they talk about also?
Concentrate on sorting out a constitution and the economy. However, likely to break up as it includes people from “left” and “right” and things in-betweem.
Eh? Do you make a hobby of going around deceiving people and rating their reactions by nationality? That’s just a bit weird.
I was characterising the SNP and the messages given out by its leadership who simply reply to every problem with the rather silly assumption that it is other countries interests to help Scottish independence.
It is isn’t and they won’t.
The Irish example. Civil war, then decades in poverty. Neutral during WWII, it took some very deft footwork by DeValera to avoid being invaded by either the UK or Germany. It was bombed by the Luftwaffe and suffered a blockade on its sea traffic despite its neutrality.
It was a close run thing, had not Germany turned on Russia, Ireland as a backdoor to an invasion of the UK would have been under severe pressure. Moreover, a large number of Irishmen fought with the British and were subsequently punished by the Irish government for many decades after the war.
The position of Scotland, given its many strategic ports and defence assets and land border with England is a much more important strategic concern for securing the sea lanes. The UK is an island and lives by international trade, which is why it has always had a strong navy.
It think you misunderstand that the precision engineering required by warships are not commonly available across the world. It is not your regular type of ship building. These things are not just carrying containers from port to port, you know.
You are wrong about naval ship building, there is a decision on where to build the Type 26 in 2015. This will be a big chunk of business that will keep shipyards busy for some years.
It is a serious concern that will affect the livelihood of many people in Scotland.
Currently they have 52 Members of Parliament in Westminster who wield considerable political influence. At independence Scotland will have zero influence on the decision making regarding where these contracts will go. A matter that will affect 12,600 jobs.
The SNP vision of a navy consisting of a few inshore fishery protection vessels is not going to take up the slack.
I would expect any worker in that industry to be asking some serious questions about its future prospects under if the SNP plan is followed through.