[MP-Ryan]

Since this is a topic I have not really followed and genuinely don't know much about, could some of our UK residents explain if there is an actual sensible reason Scotland wants to leave the UK, or if this is typical nationalist BS that makes no economic sense a la Quebec?

Because from what I'm reading, I cannot fathom why a group of 4 million people inside a country of 60 million want to go it alone and endure the economic hell that independence is ultimately going to spawn, at least in the short term.

Anyone?

[General Battuta]

Every Scots person I know, including the really smart ones (RIP Iain Banks) has been pro-independence. And that's about all I know on the topic.

[StarSlayer]

If the Scotts secede does the Union Jack revert to the Cross of St George?

[butter_pat_head]

The latest on the issue is all about Scotland keeping the Pound Sterling if they go independent.  The SNP says that if they are successful then they will negotiate a currency union with the rest of the UK like a mini Euro arrangement.  This has made the Conservatives, the Lib-Dems and Labour say in a nutshell 'LOL! NOPE!'

The theory is that if Scotland goes independent and manages to get a currency union (lol we don't want to be ruled by you guys, but we got to have your spiffy money guarantees and so on...) then it will have to be under some pretty unpopular terms for the Scottish populace and eventually demands to split from the currency union would rise.  This would most likely lead to a run on the Scottish banks which would eventually lead to the UK treasury bailing them out, which they don't want to do... as some bloke on Radio 4 said as I was driving home from work this evening.

The scuttlebutt I have head from some people is that some well known brands may decide to pull out of Scotland if the vote goes YES.

[Flipside]

I've got no problem with Scotland wanting s referendum on Independence, God knows after the way they've been treated in the past (And no, not Braveheart past, Poll Tax past), they certainly have a right to have an axe to grind.

My concern is that some members of the SNP seem to be behaving like a kid throwing a tantrum in a Woolworths PicknMix.

SNP : We want Sterling!
Westminster : It's a bit more complex than that...
SNP : You're oppressing us!
Westminster : No, but the wider fiscal effects....
SNP : Now you're bullying us!
Westminster : Look, lets discuss....
SNP : FREEDOM!!!

[Dragon]

I, for one, don't think it's a good time to mess with economy in general and Pound Sterling in particular. It's a good, stable, very strong currency. I don't know how exactly the secession of Scotland would affect the Pound, but I don't think it will be for the better. The world economy is still shaken after the crisis, and because of that, seceding now might not be good for Scotland (TBH, I don't see the currency union happening). Scots do have reasons to want independence, but economically speaking, it could be wiser to wait a while with that.

If the Scotts secede does the Union Jack revert to the Cross of St George?

Probably so. Perhaps they would re-design the flag to include Welsh dragon after that, but they might as well go with the Cross of St. George.

Also, I wonder what kind of government would Scots want? They may go with a republic, but a constitutional monarchy seems to work quite well. It'd certainly be interesting to see another European monarchy. I imagine the king would be somebody from Clan Stuart, they seem to be the most appropriate, historically speaking. There are still people who'd like to see descendants of The Bonnie Prince on the throne, afteall. While a republic seems the most likely choice, monarchy has a long tradition in UK, and I think it'd be a bit of a shame to see it gone from Scotland.

[The E]

Also, I wonder what kind of government would Scots want? They may go with a republic, but a constitutional monarchy seems to work quite well. It'd certainly be interesting to see another European monarchy. I imagine the king would be somebody from Clan Stuart, they seem to be the most appropriate, historically speaking. There are still people who'd like to see descendants of The Bonnie Prince on the throne, afteall. While a republic seems the most likely choice, monarchy has a long tradition in UK, and I think it'd be a bit of a shame to see it gone from Scotland.

Ahaahahhahahahahahahahahaaha

The SNP (the driving force behind the referendum) is currently advocating for a "Realm of the Commonwealth" model similar to Canada or Australia. Others are in favour of abandoning rule by the crown entirely.

Also, Monarchy is a laughably terrible form of government. Constitutional monarchies only very slightly less so.

[Flipside]

As I understand it, the Monarchy is another item on their wishlist that they want to keep, which really struck me as odd. I can't quite understand how they can define it as Independence when both currency and Monarch are based in a different country.

Basically what happened is, when the Referendum was agreed, the SNP came up with a list of what they would like to see in an Independent Scotland. Not surprisingly it was weighed heavily in Scotlands favour. Rather than treating this list as a negotiable starting point for the whole process, they instead seem to think that it is a list of irrefutable rights that any discussion over is just an attempted attack on Scotland.

It's getting kind of tiring seeing the 'English Oppressors' mentality pulled out every single time the UK Government starts to debate from their own point of view on the matter.

[SF-Junky]

What I find very interesting about all those rationalistic movements (it's not just Scotland, also Basque country and South Tirol) is that they want to become independent from their current national states, but still want to be member of the European Union. A lot of the promoters of regional independence even want their wanna-be-countries immediately become members of the Euro Area, as far as I know.

I am personally of the opinion that such regionalism (we also see this in Bavaria in a way weaker form) is kinda dumb backward-looking. The national state, in my opinion, is a phase-out model, especially in Europe. But I also think that if most of the people want it so badly, becoming independent, they should get it. You cannot force people to live in a they don't recognize. This never worked in the past and it'll never work in the future.

As for the specific situation in Scotland I cannot say very much about it. The arguing about a possible currency union, however, is interesting, because technically GB cannot forbid Scotland to use the GBP. Scottish banks would have no access to the central bank, but theoretically it could work. Kosovo, for example, does use the Euro as official currency without being a member of the Euro Area.

[karajorma]

They can't stop them using it. But I see no reason whatsoever why after giving them independence they should be allowed to have any control over Sterling. Control should remain in the hands of the Bank of England. The main reason the UK didn't join the Euro was precisely to avoid the kind of shenanigans that go on when you have independent countries using the same currency.

[Black Wolf]

Also, I wonder what kind of government would Scots want? They may go with a republic, but a constitutional monarchy seems to work quite well. It'd certainly be interesting to see another European monarchy. I imagine the king would be somebody from Clan Stuart, they seem to be the most appropriate, historically speaking. There are still people who'd like to see descendants of The Bonnie Prince on the throne, afteall. While a republic seems the most likely choice, monarchy has a long tradition in UK, and I think it'd be a bit of a shame to see it gone from Scotland.

Ahaahahhahahahahahahahahaaha

The SNP (the driving force behind the referendum) is currently advocating for a "Realm of the Commonwealth" model similar to Canada or Australia. Others are in favour of abandoning rule by the crown entirely.

Also, Monarchy is a laughably terrible form of government. Constitutional monarchies only very slightly less so.

The current monarch is just as much Scotlands as England's - since the Stewart dynasty unified the thrones, where they live is barely relevant. We in Australia don't care that the Queen lives in England, no reason the Scots should.

As for your beliefs on constitutional monarchy, I disagree wholeheartedly E - constitutional monarchy is the best system,of government in the world, because it leads to a powerless and truly independent technical executive, while unifying real executive power with the legislature. Add in a decent house of review (in Australia that's the senate) and a strong, independent judiciary, and you get a functional, safe government with a full set of checks and balances and no instance of the executive fighting with the legislative branches (and therefore, no resultant gridlock like you see in America).

I don't really,give a crap about the individuals that make up the royal family - they're just meaningless faces. But the role they play by safely absorbing loose political power as pure figureheads means I'm a staunch monarchist out of pure pragmatism.

[The E]

You also create a situation where there's a glass ceiling between citizens who are able to ascend to the highest offices, and citizens who aren't. In addition, a monarchy gets into trouble as soon as the succession is unclear; democracies have that part pretty well covered.

Historically, monarchies have been hilariously unstable and prone to a variety of failure conditions. That isn't to say democracies are perfect, as we're seeing right now, they're all too vulnerable to turning into oligarchies, but I nevertheless prefer them to systems that already start off as one.

[Hades]

As someone who lives in the US, I'm of the opinion that a large deal of our gridlocking comes from the two parties blocking anything else the other one puts out in Congress, not a branch-v-branch sort of deal as BW has put it. It's simply more of a thing of party politics.

[SF-Junky]

They can't stop them using it. But I see no reason whatsoever why after giving them independence they should be allowed to have any control over Sterling. Control should remain in the hands of the Bank of England. The main reason the UK didn't join the Euro was precisely to avoid the kind of shenanigans that go on when you have independent countries using the same currency.

The point is that Scotland would not have control over the Pound Sterling. They wouldn't if the made a formal currency union with GB and they would have even less if they just used the GBP without a formal currency union.

A monetary union, by the way, can work, even between sovereign nations. It primarily depends on whether they a) manage to equalize their inflation rates and b) have convergent business cycles. But I don't have any information about the Scottish economy and any specific differences between it and the economy in the rest of GB, so I cannot give a professional opinion on that.

[Flipside]

The problem is the left wing/right wing divide as you move from North to South in the UK. Scotland has, I think, one MP that is a member of the party that currently controls a lot of Scotlands financial and social policy, and those policies tend to be centered around a more Right-Wing mentality, so there is definitely an issue there that needs dealing with.
Also, there is the question of pride, from both the SNP and the Westminster, they both decided to show how 'determined' they are by marking out territories before the vote has even taken place, and have both trapped themselves in a corner out of sheer stubbornness. To put it another way, they've got so wrapped up in Politics, they forgot its twin brother, Diplomacy.

[Luis Dias]

A long time ago I had this thinking that well, if all the monarchies I see in Europe are all wealthy and with good living standards, surely it is the case that monarchies are probably the best political system available.

Then I grew up and developed the kind of thinking you need to understand several phenomena, like say Evolution and Natural Selection, and realised it was the exact other way around: the only monarchies that survive in Europe so far are precisely the richer countries because in all of the others some kind of angry revolution over the human conditions they were in smashed their monarchies and substituted them for a Republic. You could consider Spain a sort of an exception, except that it is a very special case indeed. Spain had its monarchy dissolved by Franco, but in a smart political move they were able to come back due to some contingent necessities at the time. Were the King a bit less charismatic and it wouldn't have happened.

[Gray113]

The whole point of a currency union is that it only lasts over the short to medium term in order to limit the impact on trade. Estimates released from the SNP are between 5 - 10 years before market confidence is at the level were Scotland can successfully float its own currency or properly prepare the country for entry in to the eurozone. This Benefits both the newly independent Scotland as well the remainder of the UK as:

• the markets are not spooked
• Scottish exports (and natural resources) continue to back up the pound (without these the UK would have a massive trade deficit which would weaken the UK economy)
• Trade between the countries that make up the current UK would continue unimpaired (Scotland and England are each others largest trading partners)

Personally I would rather just join the euro as soon as we are able and tie our currency to the pound in the meantime. The SNP however are trying to make independence appear as painless as possible and senior economists from the no camp have stated that an ongoing currency union would be the best path in the short term following a yes vote for the reasons stated above. In the event of a yes vote this would probably be the most likely outcome depending on who is doing the negotiations. (The SNP would not be the automatic government of Scotland following a yes vote - there would have to be further elections to form the first government)

[karajorma]

The problem is that after the problems the Euro has had recently, I can't see the population of England, Wales and Northern Ireland going for it.


I did meet a Scotsman in a bar last week who agreed with me that having a referendum was one of the dumbest decisions the Scottish ever made.

If they win, they've actually voted to be part of the UK for the first time ever. If they lose, they can no longer blame the English for their problems.

[Flipside]

I think the problem is that 15 years ago, the First Minister was saying that Sterling was a 'Millstone around Scotlands' neck' (http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/salmond-in-call-to-dump-millstone-of-the-pound-1.263204), and whilst I can understand that markets change and the sensible thing is to change with them, the fact that the SNP are picking what suits them best depending on the circumstances, a sensible move when viewed dispassionately, doesn't come across quite so clinically when the charged emotions involved with the Referendum are concerned.

To be honest, I don't see any real way forward for Independence unless Scotland use Sterling in the interim, but when you get two people that are, at heart, as similar as the English and the Scottish, particularly in their pride in their own bloody-mindedness, the discussion is likely to turn into both sides banging their heads together until necessity overrules any other choice.

[Gray113]

There are lots of differing opinions in this debate Karajorma - The guy you met in a pub probably is not the best place to start

A few recomendations from all sides of the debate would be:

http://www.allofusfirst.org/what-is-common-weal/
http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.bettertogether.net/
http://www.newstatesman.com/subjects/Scottish%20independence
http://www.jrf.org.uk/blog
http://wingsoverscotland.com/
http://devolutionmatters.wordpress.com/
http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom