Scottish Independence?

flogen

I know that the SNP is putting the Independence debate at the core of its campaign for the Scottish elections next year, but I'm trying to figure out what support is like for independence in Scotland at the moment (perhaps Dub In Glasgo might have an idea).

As I count it from these figures, parties supporting independence clock up 30% of the vote in the Parliament there; I'm not sure where the Lib Dems or Labour stand on it (probably a "if enough people want it" approach), although the Cons are linked with Unionists and so they aren't for moving.

The reason I ask is because of this exchange in Westminster last week:

Pete Wishart (SNP):
Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to reassure his Labour colleagues that it will be he who will lead the Scottish election campaign next year, and from the front; that it will be his face that will appear on all the literature; and that he will take full advantage of his personal popularity to put the case for new nuclear build? If he does that, he will have my overwhelming support and that of my hon. Friends.

Tony Blair:
It is very kind of the hon. Gentleman to give me that ringing endorsement. One thing that I and my colleagues will be pointing out is that, as I understand it, the Scottish National party manifesto for the Scottish Parliament says that it would introduce an independence Bill in the first 100 days. Is that right?

(Pete Wishart nods)

Tony Blair:
Well, we will certainly be making a very great deal of that between now and the Scottish elections.

Blair's reply would lead me to believe that the idea of independence is as likely in Scotland as is it in Northern Ireland which is why Blair is going to use it against them in the next elections.

So would 30% be about right, or is it more/less? Anyone know?

I'd say independence in Scotland (even if it remained part of the Commonwealth) would have a significant effect on NI, especially as Unionists up north emphasise their link with Scotland as a justification for UK Unification, I don't think it would bring unification to Ireland (any quicker anyway), but it would change the playing field and any success in an Independent Scotland would be used by SF as a way of showing the merits

Zebra3

flogen wrote:

I'd say independence in Scotland (even if it remained part of the Commonwealth) would have a significant effect on NI, especially as Unionists up north emphasise their link with Scotland as a justification for UK Unification, I don't think it would bring unification to Ireland (any quicker anyway), but it would change the playing field and any success in an Independent Scotland would be used by SF as a way of showing the merits

I agree with your points above and from any Scotish people I've ever met, they always seems to want independence.

It would have a huge effect imo on the north, and I think it could lead to unionists pushing for an independent NI.

If Scotland goes, Wales will go to especially with the huge strides being taken with their language revival.

Expect certain prominent SNP members to be given car crashes courtesy of MI6 (or found dead in a suicide pact with a prostitute) if Scottish independence looks on the cards.

LordSutch

There is as much chance of Scotland breaking up the UK as Gerry Adams becomming President here in the Republic, in other words, amongst SNP supporters its a hot topic & a possability (in their eyes) but in reality ................

If there was any chance of Scotland leaving the UK I suspect that there would be rumblings in the media (which there certainly isnt)!

I must admit however, I did hear a very interesting remark made by one of the DUP in recent months: Obviously he dismissed any thought of a 'United Ireland' outright, but he did mention that if Scotland broke away from the rest of the UK "then Northern Ireland might think about going with them"!!! (hypothetically speaking of course) thereby creating a New Political Union in the British isles (Scotland & N.Ireland) which is a pretty radical thought!

I suspect that in reality both the North & Scotland are staying put in the UK ~ things 'might' be different in fifty years time?

As for Wales, they are a Principality & virtually part of England anyway, therefore the notion that they would leave the UK is just stupid!

flogen

ArthurF wrote:

There is as much chance of Scotland breaking up the UK as Gerry Adams becomming President here in the Republic, in other words, amongst SNP supporters its a hot topic & a possability (in their eyes) but in reality ................

I think the President Adams thing is more realistic than you may think; depending on how NI politics play out in the next 10 years of course!

I must admit however, I did hear a very interesting remark made by one of the DUP in recent months: Obviously he dismissed any thought of a 'United Ireland' outright, but he did mention that if Scotland broke away from the rest of the UK "then Northern Ireland might think about going with them"!!! (hypothetically speaking of course) thereby creating a New Political Union in the British isles (Scotland & N.Ireland) which is a pretty radical thought!

Pretty interesting, but NI would need Scotland more than Scotland would need NI; I wonder how willing Scotland would be to join up with NI, it would be a twisted form of independence, would create new issues for the country and would make the transition more difficult that it's naturally going to be.

As for Wales, they are a Principality & virtually part of England anyway, therefore the notion that they would leave the UK is just stupid!

Yeah, I don't see Wales moving towards Independence for a long time, I'd say it will be at the point that an Independent Scotland proves the split was worthwhile.
At least fifty years? Certainly for NI, will be interested to see how the SNP fare by making independence such a big issue.

lostexpectation

its sorta like catalonia (without any recent terrorist actiivty)

when the votes came close to recognising nationhood the army leaders started to remind people they were there.

Parsley

ArthurF wrote:

a New Political Union in the British isles (Scotland & N.Ireland)

Not a bloody chance. Maybe he means NI would look for independence too, but there is ABSOLUTELY no way the two would become one country!!
Here are some reasons:
1, there is no logical reason for it; 2, there would be no benefit to either side; 3, there's an awful lot of baggage there for Scotland to take up; 4, Scotland won't subsidise NI disgracefully like the UK do; 5, I can't imagine Scots being anything other than bewildered and amused by the idea.

A Dub in Glasgo

Most Scottish people I know regard themselves as Scottish first, British second (some even Irish second). This does not stop them voting for Unionist parties though :eek:

The SNP will struggle in the urban heartlands of the Central belt because the majority of people who vote, will vote for Labour. It will not matter what policies Labour have or what calibre the Labour candidtate is, they will still vote Labour.

My local MP is Tommy McAvoy and his nose is so far up Blairs backside it is unreal. Labour can stand a chimp and people here will still vote for them!! That is the biggest obstacle to Scottish Independence.

As for arthurF, there is absolutely no possibility that Scotland will take NI along should Scotland want independence. NI will have to have their love in with England, go it alone or join with the RoI.

The biggiest movement to Scottish Independence is probably English nationality.. strangely enough.

Victor

Oddly, Labour, in perverse way, are probably the most unionist of all the parties at the moment. Take away Scotland and the Conservatives have a chance of winning the next election.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

The biggiest movement to Scottish Independence is probably English nationality.. strangely enough.

Did that come out right?

seamus

Didn't the bulk of the planters in NI come from Scotland? Hence the scottish-like twang of the Northern accent. I would say some latent support for Scotland would appear in NI, should the independence issue arise, given how many Northerners could trace themselves back to Scottish ancestry.

ScottishDanny

While the planters have a mainly Scottish background there has also been migrations of Irish across the sea to Scotland, as much as 20% of Scots have Irish backgrounds (including myself) look at the football teams (Hibernian, Celtic). Support for the SNP goes up when Scotland are in the World Cup (90 minute nationalists) but they can't count on that for a while!
The idea of a union with NI is a non-runner. Something some NI Unionists want but the majority of Scotland's 5million population would see NI as an expensive embarrassment.
I think support has waned for independence since the Scottish Parliament started as a debacle, vastly overbudget and behind schedule, the MSPs defer any 'tricky' issues to Westminster but are quite happy to vote themselves a pay rise within a year of getting in! Thats the sort of thing that puts people off politics completely. I'd be happy to see Scotland independent within the EU so we would be on an equal footing with Ireland and England. At present Scottish interest for things like fishing rights etc go through Westminster and I can't help but think that the country would be better off negotiating directly with Brussels.

Mucco

There's a feature article in this week's Economist on this issue, I suggest you get a copy. It mentions that devolution hasn't really achieved very much, and that the Scots are subsidised by the rest of the UK (~£1000pp), so are unlikely to want to give that up.

M

Victor

Mucco wrote:

There's a feature article in this week's Economist on this issue, I suggest you get a copy. It mentions that devolution hasn't really achieved very much, and that the Scots are subsidised by the rest of the UK (~£1000pp), so are unlikely to want to give that up.

There is the slight matter of North Sea oil.

ScottishDanny

Oil is a big issue all right. In the 1970's independence was on the agenda and the government published a load of reports about how the North Sea Oil was going to run out within 20 years (Think UK's report on WMDs ready within 45 minutes - Dr David Kelly). The report did the job and the public went off the idea. A lot of Scots look at how Ireland did so well out of Europe and are envious, rural Scotland has the same problems that rural Ireland had (crap roads, no services etc) but the money ain't coming up from London.

Unpossible

When we talk about independance is it in a Republic of Scotland kind of way, or a Scottish free state? (assuming a free state would still be in the commonwealth and would recognise the queen)

As for Wales, they are a Principality & virtually part of England anyway,

Isn't the title "Duke of Edinbrugh" usually given to the brother of the Prince of Wales? or in the current case, the husband of the queen?
Also didnt some scottish king unite the English and Scottish thrones a one or two centuries ago? So it looks like there is a strong royal connection for Scotland too. Will be interesting to see how much of an effect it will have on independance

ScottishDanny

Theres a range of ideas on it. Some folk want a devolved parliament and think thats enough (like now) others want independence within Europe, others want a Socialist Republic (SSP - gaining ground from trad Labour and some trade unions).
I know a few Taffys who wouldn't appreciate the 'virtually part of England anyway' comment
The old Scottish parliament voted themselves out of existence after being bought off by Westminster in 1707 (The Irish did the same in 1801 or 1803 I think). The action of these unelected Lords caused riots in the street of Edinburgh and Robert Burns wrote a poem about it.
Fareweel to all our Scottish fame
Fareweel our ancient glory
Fareweel even to our Scottish Cname
Saefamed in martial story
Now Sark rins to the Solway sands
And Tweed rins to the Ocean.
To mark where Englands province stands
Sic a parcel of rogues in a nation

What force or guile could not subdue
Through many warlike ages
Is wrought now by a coward few
For hireling traitors wages
The English steel we could disdain
Secure in valours station.
But English gold has been our bane
Sic a parcel of rogues in a nation.

I would, ere I had seen the day
When treason thus could sell us
My auld grey head had lain in clay
Wi’ Bruce and loyal Wallace
But pith and power ‘till my last hour
I’ll make this declaration.
We were bought and sold for English gold
Sic a parcel of rogues in a nation.

Unpossible

I see so the preferred state is not clear (or agreed upon).

Slightly off topic, but do you think that an Independant Scotland will try to have stronger relations with Ireland? (I always view Scotland as our "first cousins" )

ScottishDanny

The Duke of Edinburgh title has been given to that eejit Prince Phillip as a wedding gift AFAIK, I suppose to make him sound British rather than Greek.
There have been unions through marraige with the English and Scottish Royal families over the centuries alright but the whole point of the union is that it is (and I suppose never could be) and equal marriage. The English outnumber the Scots 10 to 1. Take a look at the current British Coat of Arms

It signifies the union of the crowns. The unicorn represents (Stewart Dynasty) Scotland and the Lion England.
Notice each animal has a crown but they wear them differently. The English Lion wears his crown proudly on his head, the Scottish Unicorn wears his as a collar around his neck and is chained to the ground. Equal Union?
Every Scot who is a British 'subject' (not citizen) has that image on the front of their passport

flogen

Unpossible wrote:

I see so the preferred state is not clear (or agreed upon).

Slightly off topic, but do you think that an Independant Scotland will try to have stronger relations with Ireland? (I always view Scotland as our "first cousins" )

I'd bet that any independence in Scotland would start off under the commonwealth, like Australia (or dominion status like Canada) and then move further towards a Republic as time and the economy allowed.

I'd say Scotland would probably have better links with ireland than England does, but then again those relations are getting better every year.

ScottishDanny

I'd like to think so, its a shame that the joint Scotland-Ireland bid for the European chamionships in 2008 failed as I think that would get peoples attention onto the concept.
I reckon there are many disparate views on what an independent Scotland would be as is the case within Ireland as to what the republic should be (aren't there some in FG who want o be part of the Commonwealth? Why?).
We are closer than we would be wqith other Celtic regions such as Brittany or Wales (geographically, linguistically etc).
I think you'll see Australia become a Republic before Scotland.

zuma

ScottishDanny wrote:

I'd like to think so, its a shame that the joint Scotland-Ireland bid for the European chamionships in 2008 failed as I think that would get peoples attention onto the concept.
I reckon there are many disparate views on what an independent Scotland would be as is the case within Ireland as to what the republic should be (aren't there some in FG who want o be part of the Commonwealth? Why?).
We are closer than we would be wqith other Celtic regions such as Brittany or Wales (geographically, linguistically etc).
I think you'll see Australia become a Republic before Scotland.

No!
A FF minister by the name of Eamon O Cuiv(?) DeValera grandson or something...ie the Irish Minster!

The Commonwealth....a mere talking shop....of no relevance today as the EU is FARRR more powerfull and important.

ScottishDanny

Are you sure it was FF? Sounds more like an FG policy to me, after all Fianna Fáil are trying to take support from the Shinners by calling themselves 'The Republican Party', so I don't see how that would work if they're trying to get cosy with Britain.
Anyhoo, I think the independence situation is 'watch this space', its not an issue thats going to go away.

darkman2

Reading this and other debates I realise how lucky we are to have independence. We controll all of our affairs and we are better off for it. Any observer can see, when you consider Glasgow and Cardiff for example are two of the most deprived cities in Europe. Thats because the wealth flows to the Southeast of England. The Scottish have been taken for fools over their oil resources.

zuma

ScottishDanny wrote:

Are you sure it was FF? Sounds more like an FG policy to me, after all Fianna Fáil are trying to take support from the Shinners by calling themselves 'The Republican Party', so I don't see how that would work if they're trying to get cosy with Britain.
Anyhoo, I think the independence situation is 'watch this space', its not an issue thats going to go away.

Absolutely positive:
http://www.google.ie/search?q=eamon+o+cuiv+commonwealth&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

LordSutch

darkman2 wrote:

Reading this and other debates I realise how lucky we are to have independence. We controll all of our affairs and we are better off for it. Any observer can see, when you consider Glasgow and Cardiff for example are two of the most deprived cities in Europe. Thats because the wealth flows to the Southeast of England. The Scottish have been taken for fools over their oil resources.

So how lucky were we for the first eighty years of independence? Not very lucky at all thank you very much, admittedly since the Birth of the Celtic Tiger we are doing very nicely, but do remember that for the first eighty years of independence we were an economic backwater in Europe!

I am not suggesting that Scotland would suffer the same fate, because I suspect that if they were to leave the Union they would do it in a political & civilised fashion & dare I say that they would also remain within the Commonwealth ~ We, on the other hand threw out the baby with the bathwater and ensured bad feeling/ bad faith/ and the permanent split between ourselves/ the North & Britain until very, very recently!

Thankfully now after those eighty years, we are again building-up a very good relationship with all concerned and thats a good thing.

Scotland is free to leave if they wish & so is the North, but only if they vote to leave the UK ...................

(No sign of either leaving the UK in the forseeable future).

Flex

ArthurF wrote:

So how lucky were we for the first eighty years of independence? Not very lucky at all thank you very much, admittedly since the Birth of the Celtic Tiger we are doing very nicely, but do remember that for the first eighty years of independence we were an economic backwater in Europe!

Thats true, because prior to independence we had a booming economy, it just took a sharp nose dive after independence :rolleyes:

I am not suggesting that Scotland would suffer the same fate, because I suspect that if they were to leave the Union they would do it in a political & civilised fashion & dare I say that they would also remain within the Commonwealth ~ We, on the other hand threw out the baby with the bathwater and ensured bad feeling/ bad faith/ and the permanent split between ourselves/ the North & Britain until very, very recently!

Scotland has the choice to leave the union if it wants, we didnt. And the Scots are different ,for example, from the point of view theyre British, whereas we arnt. Anyway, Im proud of the way we became free from Britain, and the bad feeling in the North was already there unfortunately (ie. formation of the UVF to start a civil war in the event of Home Rule). I dont know what you mean by 'throwing out the baby with the bathwater' though?

LordSutch

"The Baby with the bathwater" I refer to was leaving the Commonwealth as well as leaving the UK, and I suspect that this was as big surprise to many here as it was to many up North, and it really did send a message to all concerned, in the North & in Britain that we wanted to CUT all ties "completly" with the rest of the British isles! thereby copperfastening the division on this Island and the division between ourselves and Britain (more Bad feeling) and shooting ourselves in the foot 'economically' in the process once again!

darkman2

ArthurF wrote:

"that we wanted to CUT all ties "completly" with the rest of the British isles! !

I think we were right at the time to sever all ties, and you must remember that the willing to do so was born out of 800 years of blatant oppression. I think the only relationship this country should have with the UK is an economic one, as its in our interests. Politically I am convinced that independence was the correct path, and we are reaping the benefits now. I seriously doubt that Ireland would enjoy the economic bouyancy it does now if it remained under the union. As for commonwealth membership, I think you and I both know that institution is a joke and simply a throwback to the bad old days of 'the empire'. All it is, is a talking shop. The only positive I could say for the commonwealth is that it incorporates alot of different cultures. As for Scotland getting independence Im not sure whether its ecomically viable at the moment. One could argue quite successfully that the reason it is an economic basketcase akin to the North (but obviously not as bad) is because both Scotland and Wales are hindered by an uncompetitive tax regime. Take a look at corporate taxes for example at just over 30%. Compare that to 12.5% here and you can see we have the edge. Its simple things like that, that make a huge difference. Of course, their greatest asset, and one that would have made them rich - oil is running out in the North Sea. So Im not sure whats in Scotland interests now. They seem to have left it so long that independence now woulod leave a generation (similar to Ireland) haqving to deal with harsh realities to get the country on its feet. So I think they may aswell remain part of the UK.

Flex

ArthurF wrote:

"The Baby with the bathwater" I refer to was leaving the Commonwealth as well as leaving the UK, and I suspect that this was as big surprise to many here as it was to many up North, and it really did send a message to all concerned, in the North & in Britain that we wanted to CUT all ties "completly" with the rest of the British isles! thereby copperfastening the division on this Island and the division between ourselves and Britain (more Bad feeling) and shooting ourselves in the foot 'economically' in the process once again!

Why exactly should we have or want to have any political ties whatsoever with Britain? We arnt British; never were, never will be. There should never have been any political 'ties' between Ireland and the 'British isles'. British involvement in Ireland throughout history overall was a bad thing. And how did leaving the commonwealth change the status of partition?

darkman2

Flex wrote:

Why exactly should we have or want to have any political ties whatsoever with Britain? We arnt British; never were, never will be. There should never have been any political 'ties' between Ireland and the 'British isles'. British involvement in Ireland throughout history overall was a bad thing. And how did leaving the commonwealth change the status of partition?

Add to that they manufactured a statelet up north to screw us up for generations. Yeh weve left alot behind, how stupid of us.

murphaph

Flex wrote:

Why exactly should we have or want to have any political ties whatsoever with Britain? We arnt British; never were, never will be. There should never have been any political 'ties' between Ireland and the 'British isles'. British involvement in Ireland throughout history overall was a bad thing. And how did leaving the commonwealth change the status of partition?

Throughout history? That's some statement to make in fairness. 800 years is one thing, but for thousands of years prior to that we formed a tight economic group. We are very similar ethnically to the people of Britain. They have proven that the vast bulk of people in Britain have DNA origins which stretch back before the inward migrations of the Romans/Angles/Saxons/Normans, as do we, right back to the prythonic peoples. We are not a bunch of celts and them a bunch of anglo-saxons. It is much more complex than that. We were essentially the same people 2000 years ago, speaking similar languages, so please don't try to claim that these islands never enjoyed good economic and political ties when the scholars say differently. Absolutes are easy, the grey areas aren't.

Also, just on the whole north sea oil thing. A lot of north sea oil comes from fields off the north east coast of England and would not belong to Scotland if she were independent. Also, having oil reserves and exploiting them to make a profit and a good life for your people are two different things. How much is the irish state getting out of Statoil and Shell for the Corrib gas field again???? (hint, the norwegian people will do a lot better out of our gas than us, as Statoil is a nationalised company, owned by their government!!). Scotland may have never had the funds to exploit the north sea on its own. The notion that all scotland's ills would have been solved had they only kept their own oil is very naive.

Flex

murphaph wrote:

Throughout history? That's some statement to make in fairness. 800 years is one thing, but for thousands of years prior to that we formed a tight economic group. We are very similar ethnically to the people of Britain. They have proven that the vast bulk of people in Britain have DNA origins which stretch back before the inward migrations of the Romans/Angles/Saxons/Normans, as do we, right back to the prythonic peoples. We are not a bunch of celts and them a bunch of anglo-saxons. It is much more complex than that. We were essentially the same people 2000 years ago, speaking similar languages, so please don't try to claim that these islands never enjoyed good economic and political ties when the scholars say differently. Absolutes are easy, the grey areas aren't.

Of course we are similar ethnically to other peoples of western Europe. Racially we are different in that we are mainly Celtic (and some Norse.... and whatever else) whereas they are mainly Anglo-Saxon (and some Roman, Norse, Germanic tribes, people of other races who emmigrated to Britain from the British empire... and whatever else). The Priteni who settled in some places around Ireland and some places around Britain and some places around Europe really dont have too much relevance today because of the fact that very few (if any) would regard themselves as being Priteni, or speak or learn their language, etc. It doesnt make sense to have a desire to be ruled by another country on the fact that 3000 years ago a similar group of people who largely dont exist anymore in any way, shape or form inhabited some area within both countries. BTW, I thought the Celts came to Ireland around 2500 years ago, so I doubt we were the same people 2000 years ago.

As for economic ties, sure Britain made alot of money out of Ireland over the last few centuries and at the time Britain was ruled by the Romans I believe a good bit of trade went on, I dont really know what good political ties came out of it though. As I said, imo, British involvement in Ireland has overall been a bad thing. What do the scholars say?