Forum Topic

Scotland leave UK?

Should Scotland leave the UK and become independent?  Or should Scotland remain wholly part of Britain, along with Wales, Northern Ireland and England?  Does it really matter?  Or should we insist that Scotland stays an important and vital part of the Union? Could Scotland exist as an independent nation on its own in Europe? Why do some Scots feel they should be separated from Britain?  Why are the Scots so querrelous?

Gerry Tan ● 4694d33 Comments

Bump for anyone interested....

Keith Iddon ● 4549d

The people of England were in effect ruled from Scotland throughout the Blair-Brown years. The worst outrage inflicted by Scotch politicians on the English was higher education tuition fees which were not imposed on Scotland - compounded by the out-and-out racism of the much higher fees imposed on English students (ALONE among EU citizens) at Scotch universities.Meanwhile much-needed transport investment in England (at least outside London), and above all Northern England, was vetoed by a Scotch Transport Minister, while transport spending was let rip in Scotland.Sooner or later there will have to be a reckoning for those and numerous other outrages.

Chris Veasey ● 4691d

Well nobody should ever underestimate the capacity of the establishments in both London and Edinburgh for sheer selfish, grasping dishonesty.So what about the lie that all the British North Sea oil is Scotland's? -  a big chunk of it is rightly Northern England's if the maritime border was drawn correctly.

Chris Veasey ● 4692d

"I wonder how the people of England and Ealing would feel if their country was run from a parliament in Paris or Madrid".It's already run from Strasbourg, as will be an 'independent' Scotland when they are forced to adopt the Euro.The McCrone report (predicated on oil revenues) has already been discussed.I would love to have seen the Scots attempt to 'bail-out' their ailing financial services industry with no help from the rest of the UK - it would never have happened while you had such 'quality' financial leaders as 'Fred the Shred' and let us not forget how good Gordon Brown was at financial management. You can have independence as long as you keep people of this ilk firmly north of the border.

Nigel Brooks ● 4692d

There is a very considerable amount of misinformation being peddled by the media about Scotland, its intentions, its fiscal relationship to the UK state and its relationship with the rest of the UK.This is unhealthy and unhelpful. A growing number of Scots would like to run their own country. (They used to and in fact were a country before England was). This is entirely natural. All self respecting countries run themselves. I wonder how the people of England and Ealing would feel if their country was run from a parliament in Paris or Madrid. Scotland's desire to run itself (which will win the vote next year - ignore the dubious Opinion Polls)is not anything to do with anti-Englishness but what confuses the whole matter is a lie that was introduced to frighten timid Scots away from voting for Scottish independence when Scotland  found oil. While the UK government made secret a government report (for thirty years) which pointed out that Scotland with oil would be the richest country in Europe simultaneously the lie that England subsidised Scotland was introduced. This was meant for timid Scots. Sadly it escaped into England and has made many English people imagine that they are subsidising Scottish services. They are not. With 8.4% of the UK population Scotland provides 9.6% of tax revenues and gets less than that back every year. The opposite is in fact the case. The subsidy runs the other way. It always does in these relationships.It would take a particular kind of half-wit to believe that the struggling UK was hanging onto Scotland to throw subsidy at it.Scotland chooses to do different things with its devolved budget and this has no effect whatsover on budget provision in EnglandI could go on all night with facts and figures supplied by the Government which corroborate these facts. What would be best is for any person with an honest interest in this subject to look up the McCrone Report (which was kept secret until recently as Scotland was lied to and lied to and lied to) and look up the recent interview with Denis Healey who confirms that the UK would have gone bankrupt without Scottish resources and confirms that the UK government is terrified of loosing them next year.Then join the debate properly informed

Dave McEwan Hill ● 4692d

Was also used by Scots themselves, whatever they claim now - plenty of recorded and published instances.But the current 'tish' fad goes back further than 50 years - I remember being told by my (West Yorkshire born and bred) mother best part of 60 years ago that it was an offence to call Scotch folk Scotch, without it being explained why.

Chris Veasey ● 4692d

'Scotch' was the usual adjective, at least when used by the English, until about fifty years ago.

Susan Kelly ● 4692d

I think you're spot on with the disparate(in modern speak 'diverse' ;-0)collection of tribes put under a convenient heading Celt to emphasise their preferred and false seperateness from the genetically identical English.

Keith Iddon ● 4693d

Well you can't tell in English whose spelling-pronunciation even in its London Home Counties establishment dialect form is just a morass of irregularities - even without considering its multiplicity of other dialects and usages.Personally I aren't fussed how Celt or Celtic are pronounced - it's even questionable whether the folk they refer to are/were even a real ethnic/ racial group rather than a motley of disparate tribes of different origins. Would just say I have read the spelling Keltic in certain academic writings.

Chris Veasey ● 4693d

How can anyone else tell how you pronounce a word from how you spell it? Unless of course you are using phonetics.I don't know nor care how you say Celt.The word is pronounced selt,from long before drawing rooms were even thought of.

Keith Iddon ● 4693d

Me picky?? - you must be thinking of somebody else - I don't presume to tell other folk how to speak or write as long as they're comprehensible - and even then it's up to them if they aren't fussed about being understood.The correct and concise adjective Scotch is applied to many things - broth, mist, pies, express trains, etc etc etc - and also to people. This silly affectation about not using it to refer to people was unknown till some time in the last century, and it's best left there. I suspect it was cooked up in their New Town drawing rooms by members of the Edinburgh Posh set with nothing better to do with their time - possibly in partnership with the Glasgow Posh set in their Kelvingrove drawing rooms. It's a load of silly nonsense  - do the Welsh similarly object to being termed Welsh, and insist on Welish or Walish?

Chris Veasey ● 4693d

I am not anti- Scot either.I am pro- English and pro-British.But if they want independence they have to accept that the purse strings will be cut and that they will sink or swim by their own actions.If they do well,good luck to them.It's much the same as how I feel about British independence from Europe,which can't come quick enough imo. I have no axe to grind with the people of Europe,I just don't want their politicians meddling in what are essentially national issues.I find it hard enough to trust ours in Westminster,never mind theirs in Brussels.

Keith Iddon ● 4693d

"need a few corrective buckets of cold water poured over them."I'm glad you said that,it's Scottish!...Scotch is the drink.You used to be so picky about language/grammar,what's happened?  ;0)

Tony Wood ● 4693d

Well I wouldn't get too hung up on my shorthand employment of the term 'Celtic' - Scotland's population has substantial Anglian ('English'), Scandinavian, French, Flemish etc (eg De Brus, aka 'The Bruce') roots as well as the two principal branches (Brythonic and Goidelic) of Celtdom. And Scotch English dialect, as opposed to pronunciation, is essentially Northumbrian English, originating in the long-distant era when much of what's now southern and central Scotland was part of the 'kingdom' of Northumbria.And I aren't anti-Scot - au contraire, I'm probably a bigger Scotch (and for that matter Welsh) nationalist and separatist than most of them - I just think some of the more outrageous claims and assertions by some on their behalf need a few corrective buckets of cold water poured over them.

Chris Veasey ● 4693d

The Celtic Whinge? Well put.There is a strong school of thought that says it's a Celtic myth too.If you'd have called William Wallace a Celt(it's pronounced selt,as in Glasgow Celtic) he would not have known what you were talking about.All the mystery is basically down to the romantic poets of the 18th/19th centuries invoking the myth of the Celtic warrior.

Keith Iddon ● 4693d

Well, I and some of my fellow Northern English nationalists were debating the matter of the rightful maritime border between Scotland and Northern England back in the 1970s. The current 'official' border, even as later adjusted by the Blair regime, still outrageously favours Scotland by skewing well south of its rightful alignment which should be along a line perpendicular to the coastline at the land border point - that would put a large part of the oil and gas fields firmly within Northern English territory. The Scots have been robbing us (English) Northerners for decades, not just in that regard but through the pernicious Barnett Formula which in effect takes money away form Northern England and gives it to Scotland; and Scotch plundering of Northern English business by a variety of means - exemplified in the sorry HBOS story (that stands for HALIFAX Bank of Scotland btw - the Hailfax concerned being the original one in Yorkshire, not its Nova Scotian namesake) - a successful Northern English bank took over a failing Scotch one, but the combined HQ was lost to Northern England because its quisling boss wanted to live in Edinburgh and happily acceded to the Scotch view that they had a divine right to it - then he and others ended up wrecking the whole outfit.So, there will have to be a reckoning in due course - beware the sleeping (or sedated) giant in this island's central heartland - whose people number several times the entire population of the Celtic Whinge.

Chris Veasey ● 4693d

The report by Gavin McCrone did indeed state, in 1978, that Scotland could be financially independent but it was largely predicated upon oil revenues which have declined by almost 70% since the report was written.The financial services industry, once a mainstay of Scottish revenues, is in chaos (BoS, RBS et al) so you can't look to that for support - save for taxpayers across the UK.Shipbuilding and heavy industry have largely gone, mining has gone. To resurrect them, if you wanted to at all, would take decades.An independent Scotland would need to 'hit the ground running' and I simply cannot see where the revenues will be generated.

Nigel Brooks ● 4693d

I doubt if we could stand the climate, Eric.

Susan Kelly ● 4693d

If the English don't want to break the Union between itself and Scotland then we'll stay just as we are.Scotland doesn't have its own military force and weapons to use to threaten England. If Scotland wants to leave the UK then they had better start looking now for somewhere else to set up. There's plenty of open space in Africa for example. And the space the exiting Scots leave north of the border will provide welcome new land for the increasing English population to move to and occupy.

Eric Alan Leach ● 4693d

I apologise for my previous rudeness...but it doesn't alter the fact that you're still not informed about much of the issue. I recommend that you look into the subject more thoroughly, as you may be somewhat surprised by what you discover in relation to Scottish contributions etc. One small fact that few are aware of for instance is that in 1999 'call me Tony' arranged for the maritime boundary lines between England and Scotland to be redrawn (without due consultation) thus gaining England an extra 6000 square miles of coastal waters in which numerous gas fields also happened to reside within. This act wasn't publicized of course, and only came to light via a freedom of information request. If these waters are returned they will, along with the remaining Scottish territorial waters, result in no small loss of revenue from 'Crown estate' dues. The 'supposed' revenue from Scotland has -for the past thirty years in fact- been 8%...which isn't bad for a nation of alleged 'spongers' (as the media are apt to frequently describing them) Then of course we have the prickly issue of those numerous military and nuclear storage facilities scattered around Scotland which will of course have to be removed and relocated elsewhere at a colossal cost.In relation to Scotland managing itself, I suggest that you seek out the McCrone report. This was commissioned by westminster in the 70's as a result of the SNP's increasing popularity. The report concluded that if Scotland gained independence then it stood a very good chance -by various means- of being amongst the richest nations on earth. Upon its completion and as a result of its conclusions, the McCrone report was immediately buried under the thirty year rule.Westminster want us all to believe exactly what they and their friends in the media tell us about the 'sponging' Scots and their silly quest for independence. In burying the McCrone report they no doubt hoped that over time (like thirty years perhaps)the whole Scottish national thing would ultimately collapse and the SNP would end up as a political joke like the Monster Raving Loony Party.Early signs perhaps that the 'Tartan garden' had a very real potential to blossom......Westminster clearly thought so back then. It does so even more now. 

Robert Rosamond ● 4693d

But you're right...there was no need to be so blunt.

Robert Rosamond ● 4693d

Had you been paying attention then you would have noticed that I stated WE English.You see? Anyone can be gratuitously ill informed.

Robert Rosamond ● 4693d

I presume that if they are to leave they will be taking their proportion of the national debt with them...it will make a rather large hole in those oil coffers for a good few years to come!

James Brown ● 4693d

My point exactly.Perhaps they have been reading The Sun or The Daily Mail or listening to 'Muppets'.

Nigel Brooks ● 4694d

How can they ask for a 'UK wide' regulatory system when there will no longer be a UK if they leave?

Keith Iddon ● 4694d

Awa an boil yer heed yer muppet!Actually, to develop the theme, while avoiding gratuitous insults, I read neither The Sun nor The Daily Mail.If one simply looks at the flow of ENGLISH investment TO Scotland when compared with the supposed revenue FROM Scotland (do remember that 'your' oil is running out) the economic picture is so skewed that the chances of a truly independent Scotland surviving financially are remote.Such is the frailty of the Scottish banking system that the SNP have called for a 'UK wide' regulatory system 'as protection' (source: Herald Scotland). Sorry, but if Scotland chooses to leave the UK then it has to manage itself, you cannot pick and choose which laws or regulations are of financial benefit. Early signs perhaps that all is not well in the 'Tartan garden'.

Nigel Brooks ● 4694d

No need for that Robert...if you are a Scot and that is a snap shot of your attitude the sooner people who think like you bugger off the better.You see? Anyone can be gratuitously rude.

Keith Iddon ● 4694d

Brooksie...you're an idiot who clearly knows nothing about the independence issue beyond what you've read in the Mail or the Sun. The fact is it's more likely to be England requiring overseas aid than Scotland in five years time!With Muppets like you making such ill informed comments it's little wonder the Scots have a certain attitude towards we English!!

Robert Rosamond ● 4694d

Can I vote now for no Overseas Development Aid being sent to a 'third world' Scotland in about five years time?

Nigel Brooks ● 4694d

Eric,I would put my shirt on the English not getting a say so judges will no be needed.As for the Scots wanting independence I doubt if they will vote that way.We have obviously to wait and see but I think they know when they are well off.

Keith Iddon ● 4694d

A brilliant idea Eric, to have a disinterested unbiased party to judge - from Sweden is excellent(any of the ABBA band!)- "The Winner Takes It All" would be a good guiding philosophy!The Scots are a nuisance really! Why do they want independence?

Gerry Tan ● 4694d

I'm not too sure whether the English will be asked for their views. However it was an Act of Union which got both the Scots and the English in bed with each other. Surely if a 'divorce' is on the cards the 'judge' will want to hear both sides.Seems like we need a judge from a disinterested party to hear both sides of the story. Maybe a judge from Sweden or Finland...The financial settlement details will be interesting.

Eric Alan Leach ● 4694d

I doubt they would vote to leave us Gerry,especially as they would have to negotiate new terms into the EU and would have to adopt the euro.They are too canny for that and I think it would be a real shame to split up the Union.Either way,the West Loathian issue should be put to bed in favour of the English.I don't suppose we English will be asked what we think tho'. We will just be expected to pay for it either way.

Keith Iddon ● 4694d