Why independence?

[Leanne]

Scotland would have the political weight of Belgium.

But isn't Brussels head of the EU? lol

[bekisman]

But isn't Brussels head of the EU? lol

'A Committee of Experts deemed Brussels to be the one option to have all the necessary features for a European capital: a large, active metropolis, without a congested centre or poor quality of housing; good communications with other member states' capitals, including to major commercial and maritime markets; vast internal transport links; an important international business centre; plentiful housing for European Civil servants; and an open economy.
Furthermore, it was located on the border between the two major European civilisations, Latin and Germanic, and was at the centre of the first post-war integration experiment: the Benleux. As a capital of a small country, it also could not claim to use the presence of institutions to exert pressure on other member states, it being more of a neutral territory between the major European powers. The Committee's report was approved of by the Council, Parliament and Commissions, however the Council was still unable to achieve a final vote on the issue and hence put off the issue for a further three years despite all the institutions now leading in moving to Brussels.'

[porthos]

Independence is a life goal of almost all living creatures; the right and ability to look after yourself, whilst remaining close to those you love and having the opportunity to help others who are in need.

I think that it is no different for countries. The argument that Scotland cannot fund itself may be a sound one, but surely it deserves the opportunity to find out. History plays a significant role in the psyche of the Scottish nation; the lives that were given to try and secure Scotland's future and the stirring words of the Declaration of Arbroath remain in the forefront of many people's minds:

as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself

The Americans still live their lives by the words set down by those people who secured their independence, but the Scottish equivalent seems to have been lost to time or, in a best case scenario, limited to appearing on postcards and historical television programmes. Yet at every football or rugby match the Scots sing impassionedly that they “can still rise now" and reclaim that independence. Some unconscious yearning is revealed in whatever makes the Scots sing with so much more passion than the English singing God Save The Queen or, for that matter, almost any other country in the world singing their own national anthem.

Scotland is not even tied to its 'mother' country - it is still bound by a union with England that came about in extremely suspicious circumstances and it has watched countries such as Australia and Ireland achieve their independence whilst it remains a part of the “great” British union. But it has the right to be its own country.

It also has the ability to look after itself: I speak from experience when I say that life in Scotland in superior to life in England - the issues that have already been devolved (eg health and education) are so much the better for it. Independence would secure a national feeling of pride and contentment, as well as a nation of people proud to live in a country that looks after its residents.

And just in case I haven't said enough , here's a quote from James Douglas Hamilton, who spoke out against the union of 1707:

Shall we, in half an hour, yield what our forebears maintained with their lives and fortunes for many ages! Are none of the descendants here of those worthy patriots who defended the liberty of their country against all invaders – who assisted the great King Robert Bruce to restore the constitution, and avenge the falsehood of England and usurpation of Baliol?

[Leanne]

Porthos - you can hardly compare Scotland with America...

[RecQuery]

To me it ulimately comes down to the ability for self determination. I don't care about some romantiscised fake version of Scottish history, you can't live in the past.

Beyond a couple of people who are Scottish happening to be members of ruling governments, Scotland really has no say in the matter. In terms of population we alone can't affect a UK referendum, in terms of seats even if every constituency in Scotland went one way we really couldn't overide the UK government on anything.

As for political significance, vetos etc. Scotland doesn't have any of them now. It's analogous to a relationship, where one partner happens to be powerful and rich, they have a lot of fancy toys that you're allowed to watch them use but never touch them, you could maybe give your opinion on how they're used but it'll be ignored. Also is that it because we won't feel like a big powerful person anymore ?!?

The armed forces, well the US has military bases in the UK, the UK has military bases in Germany. As for armed forces well I'd argue Scotland really doesn't need a large one but we'll see what happens on that front.

You should seriously look at other countries or regions that broke away. The same arguments or variations of them were used there, as far back as you'd want to go the same core arguments are there.

Scotland wants to be part of the EU and I'm pretty we'd get in.

RBS is just a name, If Scotland had economic management of them which we'd never have but regardless the policies might have been different.

To use the relationship analogy again Scotland is like a battered partner who has been told they are worthless and could never survive alone so you better stay with me and so many people buy in to this.

Finally Scotlands 'share' of the national debt, which we never had any say in to begin with. To use the relationship analogy one last time. It's like one partner buying something for themselves to use but putting it in your name and expecting you to still pay for it but not have control of it should you ever breakup.

[porthos]

Porthos - you can hardly compare Scotland with America...

Why not???

[FTOF.]

Has anyone considered why so many Scots move to England?

People born in England but living in Scotland 408,948

People born in Scotland but living in England 794,577

Table 9A (Scotland's Census 2001 - Statistics on Migration, by Alan D Fleming)
http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files1/stats/op11-tab9a.pdf

Because most of the decent employment and opportunities for our best and brightest were removed from Scotland and placed firmly in the southern half of England. That's why so many more Scots are forced to move south than the reciprocal. Independance would give us the chance to create and keep employment opportunities in our own backyard instead of watching from the sidelines as the Westminster government panders to the needs of its core voters.

[Walter Ego]

Because most of the decent employment and opportunities for our best and brightest were removed from Scotland and placed firmly in the southern half of England. That's why so many more Scots are forced to move south than the reciprocal. Independance would give us the chance to create and keep employment opportunities in our own backyard instead of watching from the sidelines as the Westminster government panders to the needs of its core voters.

Unfortunately, you appear to be wording this as if somehow there was a forced labour march to the Home Counties. The jobs have always been South. Even in Scotland the best paid jobs tend to be South.

When our young people are offered opportunities, they will take them. All the young people I know who have moved South haven't gone South to England for opportunities, they have moved to the Central Belt or Aberdeen. Hardly a drain on Scotlands' future talent.

(Edit) Although I must say i agree with you in as much that Scotland needs to retain as much of it's young population as possible.

[theone]

You should seriously look at other countries or regions that broke away. The same arguments or variations of them were used there, as far back as you'd want to go the same core arguments are there.

Can you give some examples, similar to our situation?

Finally Scotlands 'share' of the national debt, which we never had any say in to begin with. To use the relationship analogy one last time. It's like one partner buying something for themselves to use but putting it in your name and expecting you to still pay for it but not have control of it should you ever breakup.

The Scottish people had the same say as everybody else in the UK.

You can use your analogies about divorcing people all day long, but, as far as debt is concerned, it is divided equally in any divorce. Scotland can't afford it.

[Humerous Vegetable]

This is a good thread, and a thoughtful debate, but maybe we should wait until nearer the time of the referendum and have heard all the arguements for and against from people who think they know what they're talking about. God knows, the economic situation can change within days of bankers and politicians getting their hands in the till. Who can tell what financial condition Scotland (and the UK) might be in in 2015? Yes, Scotland needs a voice in the UN and the EU Council of Ministers, bacause we are poorly represented by Westminster at the moment. It seems outrageous that, as a nation, we have no voice in agriculture and fisheries for example. I have a feeling that the referendum will be won by whichever side has the most effective spin-doctors.

[FTOF.]

[QUOTE=Walter Ego;847708]Unfortunately, you appear to be wording this as if somehow there was a forced labour march to the Home Counties. The jobs have always been South. Even in Scotland the best paid jobs tend to be South.

Well, I was forced to move to England from the central belt for employment purposes. I moved back to Scotland shortly after the SNP formed its minority government in '07. (co-incidence? perhaps...). At the time, I knew dozens of young Scots in England who had made the same choice to follow the jobs south. The enforced brain-drain in the Thatcher era was a national disaster for Scotland which we still haven't recovered from.

[theone]

Yes, Scotland needs a voice in the UN and the EU Council of Ministers, bacause we are poorly represented by Westminster at the moment. It seems outrageous that, as a nation, we have no voice in agriculture and fisheries for example.

The UK have a much larger influence over agriculture and fisheries than Scotland ever will. The same goes for other matters in the EU.

I have a feeling that the referendum will be won by whichever side has the most effective spin-doctors.

I hope not. I hope it is based on hard facts rather than spin, hype, lies and deceit.

[John Little]

I'm learning a lot here - don't know about how others feel but you folks are doing the best debate I have seen for ages. Please keep it going - at the moment I have a sense that the desire for independence is an emotional one rather than a reaction to grievance.

Also is 'independence' the correct term or an emotionally loaded one?

We all have 'independence' in the UK but do we mean 'self determination'?

After all, England is no more independent than Scotland within the UK - it is the UK that is independent.

If England were to abrogate the union would that mean self-determination for England, or independence? And from what?

From ourselves? Or from Scotland?

[Leanne]

Also is 'independence' the correct term or an emotionally loaded one?

Maybe the term 'devolution' the government uses is less emotive.

[Humerous Vegetable]

[QUOTE=theone;847715]The UK have a much larger influence over agriculture and fisheries than Scotland ever will. The same goes for other matters in the EU.


And I don't know why that would be, considering that Scottish registered vessels accounted for 65% of the weight landed and 60% of the total value of UK landings in (I could only Google) 2009. In which other countries, do you suppose, would an industry achieving 60% of total earnings have no "influence" over policy and funding whatsoever? Another example of mismatched and unequal bed mates? There are 3 in this marriage, to quote another subordinate partner, and the third one here is Arrogance.

[pmcd]

Whether or not Independence takes place, will the young people of Scotland continue to seek out the bright lights, and the places of opportunity, where the streets are paved with gold, and where there are hugely attractive delights such as clubs and pubs and giant shop chains catering for the young, which don't look like abattoirs: where there is instant fun just like it appears on the telly, and where the opportunities are limitless, as opposed to just the chance of taking over as 4th apprentice junior cow-poker after Auld Jock snuffs it....?

Independence or no, the young will always be attracted to "where the action is", exactly in the same way as us "wrinklies/crumblies" are happy to face our remaining days with a gummy smile and a wee tear in the ee looking fondly at Caithness sunsets, and marvelling at the beautiful and slow-moving (by comparison) quality of life to be found in this exquisite part of the world....

Now THAT'S going to take some changing! Will Independence help?

[John Little]

Maybe the term 'devolution' the government uses is less emotive.

Ah but devolution does not mean the same as independence and does not necessarily imply self determination in all things.

Which raises all sorts of interesting matters. Both England and Scotland would have to renegotiate entry and access to the EU. Then there's the question of a seat on the UN Security Council, for I cannot see why either should continue to hold a veto.

I see that Mr Salmond has made statements about getting rid of nuclear weapons - so the relationship with the USA would also have to be considered.

And, as someone else mentioned, what if the Union gets thrown into the melting pot, will be the position of Orkney and Shetland? If self-determination within the EU is to rule the game then how would they fare as an independent and potentially oil rich archipelago.

And would the people of the Highlands who are a minority, have to redefine their relationship with the central belt, where most Scots live?

And will the new Scotland be Gaelic- speaking in the end?

Fascinating stuff - a few generations to work it through I think.

[Corrie 3]

We were once a proud Nation, hard working, creative and had lots of clever people who invented everyday things. I can see no reason why we cant again turn our Nation around and make it great, something for all of us to be proud of.
Locally I would like to see Rob Gibson do his best to get Caithness onto the tourist map instead of just a place that people travel through on their way to Orkney. Lets have some tourist attractions so that people come and stay in Caithness.
I hope we have a Nation to be proud of in my lifetime, I hope I live long enough to see it!!!

C3.....

[John Little]

We were once a proud Nation, hard working, creative and had lots of clever people who invented everyday things. I can see no reason why we cant again turn our Nation around and make it great, something for all of us to be proud of.
Locally I would like to see Rob Gibson do his best to get Caithness onto the tourist map instead of just a place that people travel through on their way to Orkney. Lets have some tourist attractions so that people come and stay in Caithness.
I hope we have a Nation to be proud of in my lifetime, I hope I live long enough to see it!!!

C3.....

Now I really am puzzled. From where I sit Scotland is all those anyway. Inventive, innovative, clever, hard working etc etc. You mean more so?

And that last bit!

You mean you aren't proud of Scotland?

I would be.

[Leanne]

We were once a proud Nation, hard working, creative and had lots of clever people who invented everyday things. I can see no reason why we cant again turn our Nation around and make it great, something for all of us to be proud of.

Have you ever read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand?