News Scotland Seceding: Can UK Survive Without Scotland?

[PeroK]

There's a lesson to be learned here from Quebec, but no one seems to have learned these lessons. Quebec regularly has referendums on withdrawing from Canada. This regularly causes economic harm to Quebec and to Canada as a whole.

Losing such a referendum is but a minor setback for the pro-separatists. Some set of events will eventually result in the general Quebecois populace once again being upset with being Canadians. Another referendum is just a downturn away; maybe the separatists will win the next time around. They only need to win once. I suspect it would be very hard to put Humpty Dumpty back together again after a separatist win, even if the Quebecois find that living separately from their former countrymen turns out to be a bed of thorns rather than a bed of roses.

Or turns out to be just a different bed. Maybe a bit more comfortable than the old one, or maybe not, but your own bed nevertheless.

 

[mheslep]

OK, but it means that first decision of independent Scotland is to invade Norway, to get the fields that you mentioned here. :D

The UK oil and gas production is in decline.
http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=uk

I believe the UK and Norway share the same hydrocarbon bearing geology in the North Sea. If this is in fact the case, then before invading Norway the UK/Scotland might consider drilling some more wells out there.

 

[CWatters]

Westminster have offered Scotland more powers if they vote no. My concern is that they might be offering too much given that public spending is already higher in Scotland than in England by quite a margin. This may lead to considerable resentment in the rest of the country.

There is also the issue that Scottish MPs can vote on all legislation that affects England but English MPs can't vote on all Scottish legislation.

 

[CWatters]

As I understand it North Sea assets won't automatically belong to Scotland. They will presumably form part of the negotiation process just like the national debt. The profits made by English oil companies operating in the north sea will also be taxed in England.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Westminster have offered Scotland more powers if they vote no. My concern is that they might be offering too much given that public spending is already higher in Scotland than in England by quite a margin. This may lead to considerable resentment in the rest of the country.

There is also the issue that Scottish MPs can vote on all legislation that affects England but English MPs can't vote on all Scottish legislation.

Over 80% of MPs represent English constituencies, having a separate English parliament just to take away 20% of the votes seems excessive. Especially considering that few acts of parliament affect just England by itself.

If anything regardless of the outcome this whole affair has highlighted the discontentment with centralised government. The promises parties are giving now in terms of relinquishing powers may put devo max back on the table. Hell over the past couple of weeks I've head or Cornish and Yorkshire independence movements, sounds crazy but IMO the UK could do with taking a look into federalising into districts of ~5 million.

 

[SteamKing]

I think the English are learning belatedly what 'Taxation without representation' really means. The English get to pay for the party in Scotland, but the English don't get much a say in who gets the party favors.

 

[Czcibor]

I can't see how you can have real independence over economic policy without your own currency or interest rates. In recent years the Bank of England has switched to using interest rates to control inflation. If you cannot use that mechanisim you better be careful what you do with public spending as that also affects inflation. In short everything is linked.

As a a person who finished a postgraduate course in monetary policy, I see it a bit differently. Real independence of monetary policy is hard nowadays. Already before euro Holland has a policy of "German shadow" when they were mimicking policy of Bundesbank.

Nowadays:
-Lithuania has a currency board (so all local currency is backed by euro kept by their central bank; in the past all Balts had currency bound with German Mark)
-Kosovo and Montenegro unilaterally adopted euro.
-Denmark has a defined band where their Crown can deviate +/-2.5%

Executive summary: small countries tend to sacrifice their monetary independence for sake of stability. That can a realistic fate for independent Scotland. Yes, such policy can be very awkward for time to time.

I believe the UK and Norway share the same hydrocarbon bearing geology in the North Sea. If this is in fact the case, then before invading Norway the UK/Scotland might consider drilling some more wells out there.

So why UK exploitation is in decline while Norwegian is growing? (not challenging, just start being curious) I assumed the simplest solution that's just matter of amount of untapped reserves. Possibly I'm wrong - do you have any data here, more explanatory than just the trend I linked?

Anyway, I think that Scots should avenge the Viking raids. ;)

 

[PeroK]

I think the English are learning belatedly what 'Taxation without representation' really means. The English get to pay for the party in Scotland, but the English don't get much a say in who gets the party favors.

It may surprise you to learn that the Scots pay income tax, Vat (sales tax) and other taxes that go directly to the UK Government. There are people like you who hold the bizarre belief that all this taxation is rightfully English and that any money put back into Scotland is purely through the generosity of the English. It's pure hokum. If England really was subsidising Scotland in its entirety would it not be glad to get rid of its leeching neighbour?

 

[SteamKing]

It may surprise you to learn that the Scots pay income tax, Vat (sales tax) and other taxes that go directly to the UK Government. There are people like you who hold the bizarre belief that all this taxation is rightfully English and that any money put back into Scotland is purely through the generosity of the English. It's pure hokum. If England really was subsidising Scotland in its entirety would it not be glad to get rid of its leeching neighbour?

Well that's an interesting question. The English politicians are apparently hoping beyond hope that Scotland stays, which is why you see all the pandering going on. But the question in this referendum is not being put before the average Englishman in the street, so to speak. What would happen if this referendum were truly national, where all UK voters got to decide: Scotland, in or out? Would Scotland get voted off the island, so to speak?

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Well that's an interesting question. The English politicians are apparently hoping beyond hope that Scotland stays, which is why you see all the pandering going on. But the question in this referendum is not being put before the average Englishman in the street, so to speak. What would happen if this referendum were truly national, where all UK voters got to decide: Scotland, in or out? Would Scotland get voted off the island, so to speak?

Why on Earth should everyone get a vote if a minority secedes? That's completely nonsensical, if bizarrely a common view.

 

[SteamKing]

Why on Earth should everyone get a vote if a minority secedes? That's completely nonsensical, if bizarrely a common view.

Gee, IDK, because that's how things are supposed to be done in a democracy, or at least, it used to be the deal.

If Scotland wishes to go it alone, that's fine, but let's not pretend that such a split will be without consequence to the rest of the UK. There are a whole raft of issues which remain to be dealt with assuming a 'Yes' vote from the Scots.

What would be the harm in extending the referendum to the whole of the UK? There's always a chance that a majority of the whole electorate might want Scotland gone, contrary to the wishes of Westminster. After all, is the UK a 'unitary state', as has been asserted, or not?

There's apparently more than a few in the UK who don't like the EU and wish the UK to leave the EU. Why aren't these people, and these alone, allowed to vote in a referendum to decide this question?

 

[Czcibor]

Why on Earth should everyone get a vote if a minority secedes? That's completely nonsensical, if bizarrely a common view.

Because if they are no safeguards you would vote in home with your family members whether you should form an independent country or not? ;)

 

[Astronuc]

Decision Day For Scotland: Voters Go To Polls
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/scottish-independence-decision-day-voters-233035341.html

 

[CWatters]

There's apparently more than a few in the UK who don't like the EU and wish the UK to leave the EU. Why aren't these people, and these alone, allowed to vote in a referendum to decide this question?

The government had promised one if they cannot get EU rules changed.

 

[mheslep]

Gee, IDK, because that's how things are supposed to be done in a democracy, or at least, it used to be the deal.

If Scotland wishes to go it alone, that's fine, but let's not pretend that such a split will be without consequence to the rest of the UK. There are a whole raft of issues which remain to be dealt with assuming a 'Yes' vote from the Scots.

What would be the harm in extending the referendum to the whole of the UK? There's always a chance that a majority of the whole electorate might want Scotland gone, contrary to the wishes of Westminster. After all, is the UK a 'unitary state', as has been asserted, or not?

There's apparently more than a few in the UK who don't like the EU and wish the UK to leave the EU. Why aren't these people, and these alone, allowed to vote in a referendum to decide this question?

Baffling. Clearly, not everyone in every jurisdiction votes on every local issue, nor are they entitled to. Where in the world's democracies are issues ever decided as you suggest?

Many outside the UK may feel consequences of this vote. Should Belgians have a vote? Why not me, in the U.S., a NATO member? US subs still dock in Faslane, yet Yes Scotland claims it will be nuclear free.

 

[D H]

Where in the world's democracies are issues ever decided as you suggest?

Texas, for one. Texas has some rather bizarre rules on annexation and disannexation, particular for "home rule cities". Once a home rule city indicates a desire to annex some territory, the people who live in that territory have lost the war. They can't say "NO! We like things just the way they are." They can't say "NO! We're going to form our own city so you can't annex us."

Once annexed, it's even harder to get out. The residents might have a chance if they can prove without a doubt that the city is treating them and nobody else worse than dog doo, but all the city has to do is prove they are treating some other part of the city (e.g., the inner city ghetto) even worse. Otherwise, the residents of the affected area have to plea for a general election all in which all citizens of the city get a vote on whether the affected area should be disannexed.

 

[Ken Natton]

Well that's an interesting question. The English politicians are apparently hoping beyond hope that Scotland stays, which is why you see all the pandering going on. But the question in this referendum is not being put before the average Englishman in the street, so to speak. What would happen if this referendum were truly national, where all UK voters got to decide: Scotland, in or out? Would Scotland get voted off the island, so to speak?

Not sure how seriously people are taking this point but here’s how I see it. It is less than entirely fair on the rest of the citizens of the UK that this vote is open only to Scottish people. But the idea that the whole of the UK should vote on the specific issue of Scotland’s independence is about as sensible as your average reality TV show. If the vote was to include all citizens of the UK then it would have had to be about the break-up of the whole of the UK into constituent countries. I’m not suggesting that such a vote should have taken place. But then, I suppose my feeling is that this vote should never even have taken place…

 

[D H]

Polls close in just a few minutes. How long is it before election day polling results start coming out? (Or does Britain not allow that kind of polling?)

 

[Ken Natton]

Polls close in just a few minutes. How long is it before election day polling results start coming out? (Or does Britain not allow that kind of polling?)

Yes they are allowed, in the UK they are called exit polls, (voters are asked how they voted as they leave the polling station) but they are notoriously unreliable. It would seem that a high proportion of those so approached tend to be 'economical with the actuality'. It is expected that the true result will be known by about 7:00 am UK time tomorrow - in the small hours for you.

 

[Ken Natton]

Polls close in just a few minutes. How long is it before election day polling results start coming out? (Or does Britain not allow that kind of polling?)

I have just heard the first prediction based on a poll conducted today (an online poll rather than a traditional exit poll) and the prediction was 54% - 46% for No.

 

[D H]

It's been widely written that Cameron's future is in doubt if the vote is in favor of secession. I haven't seen anything about Salmond’s future should the vote be against secession.

From what I've read, the Scottish National Party was viewed as a fringe party until recently, and Salmond was viewed as one of the fringier members of that party. Will the Scottish National Party (and Salmond) survive a no vote?

 

[AlephZero]

There isn't an alternative party to the SNP. The Scots have completely given up on the Conservatives, and pretty much given up on Labour. The "western fringes" are the only core Liberal Democrat supporters, just as in England.

Of course Labour committed self-immolaton over that, when Blair set up the Scottish Parliament. If he thought the deal was a rock solid 50-seat "labour rotten borough" in Westminster, that was just another in his catalog of wrong calls.

IMO the best long-term result for England would be a yes vote. Take the political and economic hit in the short term, and wish them good luck and good riddance. When the reality of "negotiating a settlement" on the basis of being a 10% minority kicks in, they will need the luck.

The worst possible result for Engliand would be a narrow no victory. Westminster will be falling over backwards to bribe them, and we can look forward to doing it all again in a few years, whatever people have said about it being a "once in a lifetime" decision.

 

[KL7AJ]

I won't enter that argument...I could get kilt! :)

 

[AlephZero]

First result. Clackmannanshire: no 19,036, yes 16,350, turnout 88.6%.

Very close to the final opinion poll of 54% - 46%.

 

[mheslep]

It's been widely written that Cameron's future is in doubt if the vote is in favor of secession. ...

Such talk is always available circa big events, but only deserves serious consideration when it is followed with unanimous opinion about the viability of an alternative. Without Scottish MPs, Miliband is not viable.

 

[lisab]

I won't enter that argument...I could get kilt! :)

OK, full disclosure: I don't know all the finer details (are they even knowable?), but I hope it goes "No" and the union holds.

And I also hope this sends a message to Westminster that the status quo must change.

 

[D H]

we can look forward to doing it all again in a few years, whatever people have said about it being a "once in a lifetime" decision.

The only way this will be a "once in a lifetime" decision is if the outcome is yes. It the outcome is no, the correct term is neverendum, not once in a life time.

 

[Ken Natton]

And so now that it is over the thing I find myself wanting to do is to speak in praise of Gordon Brown and believe me, I never saw that coming. I was no fan of Gordon Brown during Labour’s years in power. But those speeches he made in the last few days showed all of the passion and charisma he seemed to be so utterly devoid of during his years as Chancellor and as Prime Minister. His defence of the Scottish people who intended to vote against independence and general highlighting of all of the disinformation put about by the nationalists was key. Well done Gordon. Every citizen of the UK owes you a huge debt. Whether they realize it or not.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The only way this will be a "once in a lifetime" decision is if the outcome is yes. It the outcome is no, the correct term is neverendum, not once in a life time.

Mr. Salmond seems to understand this. His opposition has to win every time, while he only has to win once.

 

[Astronuc]

From yesterday

High turnout seen in Scotland's independence vote
http://news.yahoo.com/polls-open-historic-scottish-independence-vote-060354002.html

Scotland's independence vote puts UK union on edge
http://news.yahoo.com/scotlands-independence-vote-puts-uk-050318769.html


Today - Scotland votes 'No': Salmond accepts defeat as Cameron says debate has been 'settled for a generation'
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/scottish-...pendence-as--no--vote-triumphs-043827993.html