Turned into the Smith Commission and implemented as the Scotland Act 2016.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Scottish Independence
- Thread starter Aictos
- Start date
- Status
Turned into the Smith Commission and implemented as the Scotland Act 2016.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
It's not about logic.
Much like the vote for the UK to leave the EU it is largely based on principle and emotion. There are a lot of people who are for independence on principle. They don't have a logical reason, they just believe that Scotland should be independent. Just like with the UK leaving the EU they can come up with arguments which initially sound good, but fall apart once facts are applied.
Then they'll fall back on "sovereignty", "control from afar" and "make our own laws" (sound familiar?)
If that was the basis on which a new referendum was held, I'd expect the result to be about the same - around 40-ish% support.
The issue is now one of emotion. There is a sizable percentage of "No" voters who feel that the UK government betrayed Scotland by (a) promising that a "No" vote would secure our European rights for a generation, then holding a referendum on those rights less that two years later; (b) by conducting a referendum campaign for internal party political reasons (and given that there were more Giant Pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs, we can say English internal party politics); (c) conducting that campaign so poorly as to lose; and (d) have compounded that betrayal by appearing to treat Scotland with contempt during the negotiations which have been undertaken so far.
That's why I can't say with any confidence that Scotland wouldn't vote to cut off our nose to spite the UK's face, because it's one that we no longer recognise when we look in the mirror.
Well, a watered-down version...
Sad Sprinter
Established Member
Yes I see your point, the difference
Yes but the difference is that there is one but it is in the Irish Sea.
It’s not just road checks, what about passport checks at all the railway stations that serve trains to Scotland?
I admit, I’m an English/Welsh Brexiteer, I just don’t see the attraction of Europe. I feel hardly any affinity to the EU at all, but have a much closer
a. I understand your point, but it still raises questions. Are you saying that generally, the only reason Scots votes to stay in the UK was out of allegiance to the EU and that their emotional relationship with the UK was effectively over anyway in 2014?
b. Brexit wasn’t only Conservative internal politics. Pretty much the only reason Labour didn’t offer Britain a referendum on the Euro was because there was the possibility they could either not win it and their credibility would be damaged or it would be an economic disaster and they would lose their hard won reputation on economic competence. Plus, don’t forget it was New Labour who refused to implement controls on the amount of new Eastern European workers could enter Britain which caused the groundswell for the referendum 10 years later. How they could so badly misread the mood of their own public like that I don’t know, but the point is That was an internal politics issue in the Labour Party and that was something that led to Brexit-it’s not just a Tory thing.
c. I don’t think this is fair. A lot of remainers didn’t actually vote for whatever reason. I mean, Scottish turnout was only 62% for the EU membership referendum. If it had been in the 80s like the 2014 referendum then I’m sure the UK would have voted remain.
d. How has this been the case? The SNP want customs union membership and single market membership. The campaign was won on the basis on making our own trade deals and controlling immigration.
Little England is an abusive term. If it applies to Brexiteers then Little Scotlanders applies to the SNP and they would accept that.
Most of the damage was done in the 1980s and early 90s. However 2000-2010 saw the reconvening of the Scottish parliament, devolution of powers, etc. Which softened many people's view of the English/Scottish relationship. Hence why the independence bid was unsuccessful.
The general view among my peer group was that the relationship was based on mutual respect even though there were some areas of disagreement. So breaking the Union had more downsides than benefits, the potential loss of EU membership being just one of them.
Rightly or wrongly, the impression that the UK government has given us that we were wrong to believe that Scotland and our needs/desires are given due weight and consideration where the future of the United Kingdom is concerned.
We've also been told that there won't be a border in the Irish sea.
Revisionist history much? We were told multiple times that we would have an EEA-like arrangement, which would mean accepting pretty much the status-quo where the customs union and four freedoms are concerned.
I agree, and never claimed that it was.
Err... Because the campaign was poorly run, perhaps?
Last edited:
edwin_m
Veteran Member
It wouldn't have been the only issue but the question of staying in the EU and whether an independent Scotland could join was an important issue in the 2014 campaign. The possibility of being in the EU would tend to increase support for independence because it shows that small nations don't have to be totally isolated and can prosper within it (Ireland being the most obvious example). So one of the arguments put forward by Union supporters was that Scotland would have difficulty becoming an EU member. Now if the Union continues it is impossible for Scotland to be an EU member.
Whether it was Tory internal politics or not is out of scope for this discussion. The important thing is that it was seen to be Tory internal politics and therefore a creation of a party few Scots support and many loathe. The fact that Scottish issued appear to have been ignored when calling the referendum bolsters that view.
I've posted the link below already. It was 67.2%. The turnout in Scotland would have had to be well over 100% for the Remain vote there to outweigh the Leave majority elsewhere. And I don't see how the turnout in Scotland could have influenced voting elsewhere, considering voters couldn't know the turnout at the time of voting.
https://www.electoralcommission.org...-referendum/results-and-turnout-eu-referendum
Would an independent Scotland be allowed to immediately join the EU?
i suspect being a “ new “ country the EU will want to see it can run at the required max of 3% deficit, especially as Scotland has never been able to borrow before. I also suspect the EU would want to see how the negotiations went with England , I highly doubt the EU will be impressed with the SNP threat to not take on its part of the U.K. debt if it does not get what it wants. That would mean Scotland being with hard boarders with the U.K. and EU for a short period , if not longer.
It’s going to be Hard enough to unpick 40 years in the EU , imagine trying to unpick over 300 years worth
i suspect being a “ new “ country the EU will want to see it can run at the required max of 3% deficit, especially as Scotland has never been able to borrow before. I also suspect the EU would want to see how the negotiations went with England , I highly doubt the EU will be impressed with the SNP threat to not take on its part of the U.K. debt if it does not get what it wants. That would mean Scotland being with hard boarders with the U.K. and EU for a short period , if not longer.
It’s going to be Hard enough to unpick 40 years in the EU , imagine trying to unpick over 300 years worth
Last edited:
That is a question that the EU previously declined to answer unless specifically asked by the UK Government.
arbeia
Member
Just as the United Kingdom has a hefty "divorce bill" from the EU, could an independent Scotland expect a similar sort of bill?
Not for the same reasons - the UK was committed to future EU spending because of the multi-year EU budgets.
Depending on the speed of transition the Scots might have to keep paying the UK government for some services that can’t be quickly split.
Can’t easily think of long term projects we could insist they keep paying for, though it would be a giggle to demand they keep paying for the committed Trident replacement programme
Not for the same reasons - the UK was committed to future EU spending because of the multi-year EU budgets.
Depending on the speed of transition the Scots might have to keep paying the UK government for some services that can’t be quickly split.
Can’t easily think of long term projects we could insist they keep paying for, though it would be a giggle to demand they keep paying for the committed Trident replacement programme
maybe England would insist of us having a trident base still there in exchange for Scotland to keep building the Royal Navy ships ?
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Probably some right-wing faction in England will insist that doing either of those things outside its boundaries is a national security risk and demand the base is relocated further south.
Almost certainly. There was a great hue and cry about the latest RFA ships being built in South Korea and they were basically just freighters painted grey.
Unless Barrow desperately wanted them I can’t see any clamour to move the missile boats south. Don’t forget one of the biggest issues is the storage depot which needs to be large (look on a map how big RNAD Coulport is), have a dock and be within an hour but not too close to the subs base.
Plymouth might demand the attack subs come south.
Shipbuilding would be a more political issue, but the possible answer might be building in sections so the work can be shared across the border.
Plymouth might demand the attack subs come south.
Shipbuilding would be a more political issue, but the possible answer might be building in sections so the work can be shared across the border.
There is a separate long-running thread on the EU referendum result and aftermath at https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/eu-referendum-the-result-and-aftermath.132044/page-710
I suppose the posts on Brexit should be in that thread really, but the one that I wanted to reply to just happened to be in this thread.
bramling
Veteran Member
Brexit and Scottish independence can't really be untangled at the moment, since one is being used - rightly or otherwise - by the SNP as a justification for the other.
True. Though some of the posts which were removed (mine included) were about Brexit generally rather than the impact on Scotland.
Butts
Veteran Member
I am probably unique on here (perhaps even in Falkirk) as a Scottish Conservative who voted to leave the UK and EU - nothing like consistency !!
If we really want to "Rise and become a Nation again" it should come from the heart not the head. There is no doubt in my mind that we would suffer in economic terms for years if not decades should we opt to leave the UK. The question is - is that a price worth paying to have control of your destiny ? Ireland was poor for decades when they left the UK.
Seemingly a lot of Scots want to have their cake and eat it , but in the long term that is not an option.
One of the most worrying aspects of the SNP's outlook is the suspicious lack of any public dissenters in relation to leaving the EU. All the other parties had at least a few rebels from their parties stance but not the SNP. Ironically in years gone by they were dead against the EU and being in NATO come to that. If they continue to exercise such control Scotland could become a one party state.
I think Boris Johnson should call Sturgeons bluff and grant permission for another referendum. The result will be the same as last time. Note the Borders are pure Blue in Scotland and England so there is a chance of a North/South divide evolving in Scotland similar to England.
If we really want to "Rise and become a Nation again" it should come from the heart not the head. There is no doubt in my mind that we would suffer in economic terms for years if not decades should we opt to leave the UK. The question is - is that a price worth paying to have control of your destiny ? Ireland was poor for decades when they left the UK.
Seemingly a lot of Scots want to have their cake and eat it , but in the long term that is not an option.
One of the most worrying aspects of the SNP's outlook is the suspicious lack of any public dissenters in relation to leaving the EU. All the other parties had at least a few rebels from their parties stance but not the SNP. Ironically in years gone by they were dead against the EU and being in NATO come to that. If they continue to exercise such control Scotland could become a one party state.
I think Boris Johnson should call Sturgeons bluff and grant permission for another referendum. The result will be the same as last time. Note the Borders are pure Blue in Scotland and England so there is a chance of a North/South divide evolving in Scotland similar to England.
Last edited:
edwin_m
Veteran Member
And only became prosperous after joining the EU.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Although the EU’s spending on infrastructure is one of the main reasons for Ireland’s prosperity post-1990, Ireland joined the EEC in 1973 and was poor for quite some time after that. Scotland and Ireland can’t really be compared; Ireland was a predominantly un-urbanised and agrarian society with backwards social conservatism.
Only became prosperous when bunged large amounts of EU (our) money, and undercut everybody on corporation tax (illegally in the Apple case?)
matacaster
On Moderation
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,602
The basic answer is that as long as wee Sturgeon can keep independence (on which she has no control / blame) on the front pages, the less other topics over which she has control (health / education / crime etc) get scrutinised. One actually suspects she sees herself as heir to Mary Queen of Scots, hence her courting of France and the EU. Sadly for her, they won't come to her rescue this time either!
Struner
Member
Now just explain this to me:
I come across English pensioners in Scotland (like UK ex-pats in Spain?), who are thinking of moving back to England, to be closer to their grandchildren.
BUT, they say, the NHS is worse in England than it is in Scotland.
I come across English pensioners in Scotland (like UK ex-pats in Spain?), who are thinking of moving back to England, to be closer to their grandchildren.
BUT, they say, the NHS is worse in England than it is in Scotland.
- NHS Scotland outperforms the NHS in England.
- Reported crime in Scotland was down 27% between 2009 and 2019
- There's no statistically significant difference between English and Scottish GCSE-equivalent qualifications
Butts
Veteran Member
That cuts Wales out completely then...allegedly the NHS is even poorer than England or Scotland !!
bramling
Veteran Member
I do think it's hard to make meaningful comparisons between England and Scotland simply due to the difference in population density, and the highly rural nature of much of Scotland. The reduced population density is very conspicuous even within the central belt.
DaleCooper
Established Member
My main concern with Scottish independence is: where will we get our prime ministers from?
https://www.scottishfield.co.uk/living/ten-prime-ministers-who-were-made-in-scotland/
https://www.scottishfield.co.uk/living/ten-prime-ministers-who-were-made-in-scotland/
- Status