I have concluded that the leadership of the SNP (especially Sturgeon) do not really want independence – the reality would be as bad as bad can be.
What they want is the jobs, power and control that comes from campaigning for independence and blaming the English for all their failures. This can go on for years more without them actually having to deliver.
I agree. In which case, yapping incessantly about independence is a depreciating asset. But the incessant unpleasantness is gradually instilling poison into the UK body politic.
This is what I have felt for a while now (about Sturgeon) and I live up here. Salmond was a true believer so, although I loathe him and loathe nationalism, that at least deserves some respect. He also did set about trying to govern when first elected. Sturgeon? Not so. Independence is just too much like hard work. It will go on for years until it’s squarely taken on.
CJ
Cheryl Jones
2 years ago
Separating the UK from 40 years of a non-state (apparently), trade only (guffaw) continental bureaucracy has been a shyte show that Sturgeon has claimed has made Scottish independence even more necessary. Surely it should demonstrate the other way around. After 300 years, being part of the same state, culturally/genetically close peoples and part of the same geographical entity, surely means by now that WE ARE NO LONGER SEPARATE COUNTRIES IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY. Devolution is merely federalism within the same nation state. Wales seems to have largely accepted that. Like Bavaria. Or Brittany. Catalonia has tried and failed. It’s really too late. I think of myself as British rather than English now. Or at least a weird chimera of both. I believe leaving the EU was only possible for us because we’re not in the eurozone and we’re separated by the Channel. And it’s only been 40 odd years. Any later or more integrated and i think it would have been impossible, which makes me feel, as a Remain voter, slightly relieved the Brexiteers took the braver choice. There is something to be said for the parallels between Brexit and Scottish Indy and how upside down it sometimes seems (ScotNats deride Brexit but then use Brexiteer arguments about their own independence and do it without irony) but the EU is not the USA. It is a crawlingly slow oil tanker with no common culture like the USA. Its history is wildly different. It really does more resemble the artificiality of the USSR more than the organic growth and deliberate ‘pledge of allegiance melting pot’ history of the USA. An experiment in nation building that may have had its day in the sun and now appears to be reatomising on ethnic and racial lines. If ScotNats think the EU is Scotland’s future then they really might want to think again.
Very well expressed. I also think that Britain is extremely fortunate in being an island (NI excepted – more below) and that enormous geopolitical asset is not sufficiently recognised, in all the debate about Scottish independence. What might France give for sea borders, or Poland, or Czechoslovakia (as was)! As for NI, look at the problems our international border there is causing us. If it weren’t for the precedent it would set for the Scottish Nationalists, I would apply the geographical argument and let NI go. Land borders are bad news, and Britain is so lucky not to have any (almost none anyway). We should treasure that fact.
PL
Peter LR
2 years ago
Has the SNP produced a document outlining its financial reasons for independence? The one for 2014 relied on oil income which is no longer ‘green’ and largesse from joining the EU would have to wait several years during the application process.
A referendum taken after negotiating with the UK the terms of leaving re: border, debt share, road access to Europe, etc would make the process realistic.
Yes, the Scottish “government” produce a financial statement, every year, to demonstrate how strong the Scottish economy is, and how it will support an independent Scotland, The trouble, for the SNP, is that, after high expectations when first implemented it now, as it has always shown, demonstrates, even with self published gloss and spin, how weak the Scottish economic case for independence is.
I would also see “EU largesse” in a sober light…there is a positive attitude to an independent Scotland rejoining the EU. However, I have read that that welcoming attitude is contingent upon Scotland showing that it can run its financial affairs in a sound way over a number of years. The EU needs another financially incontinent net recipient like it needs a hole in the head and a profligate Scottish government would very quickly exhaust any goodwill.
There are budget deficit rules for states applying for entry, meaning that Scotland would have to get its deficit in check over a number of years, through some sort of austerity measures
Yes, indeed. Whenever I read about the SNP, they seem to be pledging something else that costs a bunch of money, like greening the economy or introducing universal income. Call me crazy but this seems like a great way for the independence movement to shoot itself in the foot. Surely if they were serious about breaking away they’d be reining in expenditure and telling folk that this is what is required for Scotland to make it on its own and possibly rejoin the EU. My logic and SNP logic clearly aren’t overlapping.
That shouldn’t come as a surprise as the SNP are very good as a pressure group. Alas they are useless at/ uninterested in governing, hence… here we are.
There again, they keep being voted in, and you cant even complain they haven’t delivered.
The oil revenues came from fields off Shetland which continue to produce BUT Shetland has indicated that it does not want to be part of an independent Scotland and has a case to remain part of the UK
Orkney and Shetland were only exclusively part of Scotland in the years between 1472 and 1707 – Danish/Norwegian before that (Shetland is nearer Norway than it is the Scottish Mainland) and part of the UK thereafter.
Thus if Westminster ever introduces a bill allowing Scotland an independence referendum, it should contain a clause allowing Orkney and Shetland (singly or together) the choice of staying in the union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland or separating..
Orkney and Shetland and the Western Isles certainly voted heavily NO in the 2014 IndyRef, but then so did everyone in Scotland outside Greater Glasgow and the city of Dundee.
I must take issue with your statement in parentheses though – contrary to popular belief, Shetland is almost twice as far from Norway as it is from the Scottish mainland. “The nearest railway station to Lerwick is Bergen” is something I’ve heard often. No it isn’t – it’s Thurso.
I just don’t get it, why the Scots would want to leave the UK and to join the EU. If the aim is to increase self-determination and improve democratic accountability how can moving from being 5 million voices out of 60 to 5 million in 450 million be an improvement. It is as if they are prepared to suffer any hardship so long as they can be free of the English. Sounds like cutting your nose off to spite your face to me.
AY
Catriona Flear
2 years ago
Tom Nairn had a cheek, considering how many Scots have gone down South and contributed so much to making Britain and all its parts prosperous. Talk about seeing it through one lense…..it’s a cloudy one at that!
Scotland can’t even get enough Civil Servants to collect tax, instead relying on UK government department for this and many other public sector areas.
They had to make a point last year and not run the 10 year census with the other parts of the UK, now they don’t have enough Civil Servants to do it this year…..or maybe even not next. The result is no statistics to know what Scotland needs in the future.
Last edited 2 years ago by Catriona Flear
HO
Hugh Oxford
2 years ago
Having voted for devolution back in 1997, I am increasingly of the opinion that devolution itself was always a project of neoliberal corporate globalist elites.
It’s only a working hypothesis, but it can be easily constructed from the evidence.
First, it was Blair’s project, and he was the neoliberal corporate globalist sans compare.
Secondly, devolution and independence weaken the UK and strengthen the global corporations. Blair would have known that. An “independent Scotland” would be like Ireland: a football to be kicked about by the global elites, a profit centre for their enrichment. A weaker UK would be less capable of self defence.
Thirdly, on all the core ideological issues: abortion, gender ideology, immigration, same-sex marriage and so on, Holyrood might as well be controlled by Goldman Sachs. And when I say Holyrood, I mean Holyrood, not just the SNP.
That hypothesis would concur with the mediocrity of many MSPs, because ultimately these people are wholly reliant on corporate patronage when their political careers fail. They have no other careers to return to.
It also accords with the reality of life in Scotland: neglect bordering on genocide of the white working class population, an almost total indifference to their suffering, whilst Holyrood focusses on implementing neoliberal socio-sexual ideologies and social control.
I think this is where a “follow the money” analysis leads.
Last edited 2 years ago by Hugh Oxford
PM
Pete Marsh
2 years ago
Even the Swedish and the Danes gave up on socialism in the 1970s when they saw their industries stagnating and their economy starting to go the way of the USSR. The Nats would be a Venezuela style disaster.
Not that they could apply the socialist policies, they’re just window dressing to attract votes: An indie Scotland joining the EU would have to implement a harsh Greece style austerity regime, and then battle Ireland to attract US tech companies via ultra low corporation tax.
Last edited 2 years ago by Pete Marsh
MB
Matt B
2 years ago
The antipathy of the SNP to the UK and the culmination under Biden of a 20-yr face-plant of the US-UK special relationship bodes darkly for the Clyde – to the delight of some useful eejuts. While Alex dances at RT will Scotland hold the EU’s northern flank – and budget for it?
Last edited 2 years ago by Matt B
GA
G A
2 years ago
Just let them go.
Beautiful country but they really, really don’t like the English, anecdotally (good enough for me to forge an opinion with).
CW
Chris Wheatley
2 years ago
It is inevitable that Scotland will break from the UK. If it is good for them, then I wish them ‘Bon Voyage’. If it is bad it is their fault – people can always vote ‘No’. The politicians will ensure that they win the referendum, whatever ordinary people think.
Wales will follow soon afterwards. Does it matter? No. It is meaningless.
Us Yorkshire folk are English. That’s how the UK state discriminates against us – no differently to other English people in less fortunate counties. The only part of England that gets the kind of fawning attention that our Celtic appendages get is London.
I don’t see that it is at all inevitable. Objectively and rationally the case for Scottish independence has got very much worse since 2014. You can also look to the Quebec example, that Canadian province got much closer to a vote for independence that the Scots have (so far). The constitution is also a reserved matter for the UK, so a referendum can (legally) be blocked indefinitely.
But should it come to pass, I would advocate that rUK (or whatever we will be called!) should strike a very hard bargain indeed – and that this point, in a very nice manner, be made absolutely clear to the Scots. For example, the Barnet formula, an internal administrative and financial matter for the UK government, be stopped or phased out rapidly as soon as a ‘yes’ vote is registered. The ‘have cake and eat it’ fantasies of SNP politicians, taking all the credit for UK spending while none of the blame, need be indulged no longer. Another is the inevitable hard border.
I like Scotland and have Scottish friends, and such a divorce would in my view be something of a tragedy. However you maybe right that the constitutional air needs to be cleared – this could otherwise go on for years. Of course all democrats should respect such a vote.
I agree that people vote primarily for emotional reasons, and there’s nothing wrong with that, although I’d hope that the emotion hasn’t been created on the basis of lies and distortion of facts, and on events of hundreds of years ago rather than months.
However, it seems to me sensible that when the time comes for the UK government to discuss and negotiate a second referendum, they insist on a preparatory period during which the future situation is agreed on and implemented to some degree, e.g. ending the Barnett formula, and constructing border posts and procedures to allow the EU will be able to prevent England’s access to the Single Market.
The cost of reversing it in the event of a ‘no’ decision would be worth it if the electorate had become wiser, and useful if they haven’t.
I think you are forgetting one important thing – boredom. Right now, especially after lockdowns, life is a bit boring. Why not make it more exciting with flags and music and demonstrations. Everybody will be talking about it and will want to join in. The reality will not be important.
What would be fun is if Joxit were on a regional basis. The border regions with England are all unionist and probably so would the Shetlands and Orkneys be. They should be allowed to stay for the same reasons that the rest should be allowed to go.
What actually departed would the stupid basket case regions that blame England for everything but that are subsidised by England. That would of course end so that within at most 2 to 3 years Scotland would be like East Germany without the nice weather.
And people will still vote Labour, especially in the populace areas, as a protest against…er….Margaret Thatcher. As these oldies die off the young are being brainwashed in the belief that language = freedom. This is why it will happen.
If there was a decent port in Wales, it might not be a bad thing. But without a port there would be two hard borders for everything coming in.
Just out of interest I looked at Facebook about a month before the recent election and one of the Labour members was saying that the UK was obviously anti-Wales because BJ had not bothered to learn the Welsh language. This was removed the next day.
Well, if that`s true it confirms what I said, that they really are a joke.
its not Margaret Thatcher, its the huge mounds of money the Assembly keeps throwing at those poor downtrodden folk in the valleys, while happily ignoring serious social, economic and health issues in the rest of Wales because they cannot be assured of buying votes there.
There are seeds of revolt, there are folk waking up, the last national vote was affected by the Pandemic and “the better the devil you know syndrome”.. Overtime all it needs is a Welsh Conservative Party willing to act with confidence,never backing off, keep shrugging off the media flak, and keep calling these Welsh Labour idiots out!
ER
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
2 years ago
I bet that some of Nairn’s best friends are English
HJ
Jon Redman
2 years ago
Scots enthusiasm for leaving the UK is closely correlated with North Sea oil revenue. Both have been a thing since the mid-70s and will fizzle accordingly. It’s about how long it takes Scotland to notice.
Scotland wouldn’t see any of the oil revenues anyway, as they are apportioned to the UK by 1965 treaty. The treaty doesn’t mention Scotland, and the UK will still exist, so the treaty will continue to apply meaning the revenues will still be the UK’s.
Oil companies are hard-headed realists. The oil comes ashore in Scotland and that is to whom they will pay the revenues, they are not going to build fresh infrastructure to land it in Newcastle. It would be up to the government of continuity-UK to challenge this under international and maritime law. It would take decades to reach a judgement. The UK will settle for a small compensation and walk away.
Reference to oil however is interesting. Norway had an oil boom and used the revenue to build up infrastructure and a sovereign wealth fund. The UK under the Tories used the money to pay compensate workers for the destruction of industrial jobs, particularly in the North to smash Trade Unions, Scotland will have realised that.
Welll, no. The principal North Sea grades are Brent (around 6 cargoes a month), Forties (15 to 20), Ekofisk, Oseberg (3 to 5 each) and Troll (10 to 15). The first two load in Sullom Voe and Hound Point, which are in Scotland, but Ekofisk loads in England, Oseberg and Troll in Norway. The non-Scottish-landed oil is already more than half, but even that’s assuming the Shetlands want to become part of Little Scotland. If they vote to stay with the UK, then they will stay whatever the SNP would like. Nicola’s not exactly in a position to send troops to annex the Shetlands, is she? Then of course there is the fact that the Scottish production is declining. “Decades to reach judgment” are exactly what Scotland does not have. In effect the SNP has a last chance to lie to the “vooters” about Scotland’s economic prospects before the one and only – and highly contentious – source of revenue simply dries up. Scotland will then basically have no industry left to speak of, and of course once the defence industry, and all the higher earners individually, head south.
The UK under the Wilson Govt’s of 1964-76 closed more coal mines than Margaret Thatcher did. The Blair/Brown Labour gov’t did not repeal any significant industrial relations legislation brought in under previous 18 years of Tories.
Industrial relations in 1970’s Britain virtually destroyed our economy. Healey as chancellor in 1976 had to go to the IMF for a bail out loan.
Years of poor management, lack of investment and militant union striking left swathes of British industry outdated and uncompetitive by the 1980’s. Thatcher enabled new small businesses to thrive and create jobs, financial services sector to massively grow and generate wealth and employment.
The Left was the first to complain if workers made unemployed were not paid benefits. Britain is hugely better off without dominant trade unions wielding power, the remaining public sector and rail unions dominated by their marxist leaders are evidence of that.
PM
Peter Mott
2 years ago
But is it now, itself, in the kind of decline it attributes to England? That’s another day’s work.
I suspect it is. The UK governemt just needs to keep saying “No” and in time it will just fade away – because there is nothing in it really. But I shall await a follow-up piece.
Last edited 2 years ago by Peter Mott
CB
Christopher Barclay
2 years ago
There is another possible future for Scotland – as a Chinese colony on the edge of Europe. Or as a country threatening to be so and blackmailing England into continuing to subsidise Scotland.
EK
Earl King
2 years ago
If many think the hard border in Northern Ireland with Ireland is a difficult unsolved problem with the EU what he hell is Scotland going to do with Briton? LOL barbed wire and watchtowers as Scotts smuggle larger electric British Tea Pots across it? It is as absurd as people in Texas talk about succeeding from the US. If Scotland is hell bent on become connected to the EU again…..I cannot figure out why? Uninhibited travel? Do they want more muslim refugees? I don’t think Briton would prohibit Scotland from hosting some Afghan refugees. I get the divide. Texas wouldn’t want any of CA policies. None of them….but surely Briton and Scotland can find a way to allow them more Independence. For example a ban on Churches Fish Chips stores….
JK
Zorro Tomorrow
2 years ago
There are more differences between the south and the north of England; London and ‘not’ London, than between England and Scotland. Twice as many people vote Labour than the population of Scotland of whom over 50% don’t want independence. That an independent Scotland will be austere indeed is a fact not an opinion unless the EU, Russia or China decide on a bail out; the real reason Westminster doesn’t want a referendum. The sociology and the politics wouldn’t be pretty.
Last edited 2 years ago by Zorro Tomorrow
HB
hugh bennett
2 years ago
y
Last edited 2 years ago by hugh bennett
MB
Milos Bingles
2 years ago
I don’t blame the Scots for wanting independence from England’s Eton-educated rabble. Good luck to them. The Scandinavians are far more progressive than our Governments Little Englander mentality.
RS
Richard Slack
2 years ago
60 years ago, when Trinidad and Tobago became independent, the first Prime Minister, Eric Williams said “yes, an independent Trinidad will make mistakes but they will be our mistakes and we will be able to take responsibility for them.” Williams was a historian who analysed the legacy of slavery, indentured labour and colonialism and concluded that an independent country could not do any worse.
Probably the biggest recruiting sergeant for Scottish Independence is the current PM and his cabinet. The English, I suspect, love a roguish toff, a weakness Orwell pointed out is his wonderful essay on Boys’ Weeklies “the weeklies serve the function of instilling into the minds of young boys the ideas that “the problems of our time do not exist, that there is nothing wrong with laissez-faire capitalism, that foreigners are unimportant comics and that the British Empire is a sort of charity-concern which will last forever”. In the final paragraph he summarises by writing “All fiction from the novels in the mushroom libraries downwards is censored in the interests of the ruling class. And boy’s fiction above all … is sodden in the worst illusions of 1910”
It is possible that the Scots, or at least some of them once had the same opinion, after all the Scottish Tory party was once described as “all lairds and baillies” but I suspect not anymore. They will have looked at the current Government with its rampant cronyism, incoherence, chaos, outmoded pompous procedures and dishonesty and formed the view that they could do better. It is hard to argue against such a view.
Those advancing the cause of Brexit frequently dismissed their critics as peddling “project fear”. It is intersting now to seen largely the same people using the same approach, to scare the Scottish people into staying in line.
They will have looked at the current Government with its rampant cronyism, incoherence, chaos, outmoded pompous procedures and dishonesty and formed the view that they could do better. It is hard to argue against such a view.
Well, other than by pointing at the SNP, obviously.
What I know of the Scottish Assembly strikes me about how adult its procedures are and far less anachronistic than the “Mother of Parliaments”. The Prime Minister at Westminster can openly, intentionally lie to the House with no come-back whereas someone pointing out that he is lying has to stand on the naughty step for a day.
The Scottish Parliament appears grown up in the same way the Chinese People’s Congress does
CB
Catherine Barton
2 years ago
Breaking away from the UK is seen as a serious proposition and desired by the majority of Scots, including and especially, by the ‘new Scots’ now living here since 2016 – 80% of my associates in Glasgow are the new Scots moved up from London looking for a more balanced work-life existence.
They have bought their property – some of them even bought two properties! – and would prefer to base themselves here in Glasgow than in the ever growing caustic Brexit Britain that has been created over the years. Its us lot up here that need to be convinced its realistic. And thus far, the SNP are doing a ‘no bad’ job on the whole, but there are many unanswered questions. Lets see what her document produces and we can go from there.
Opine away everyone – but it’s Scotland’s choice. We know it and they know it. And the more Westminster MP’s speak to elected Scottish MP’s like dirt on their shoe – the more rage against the Union is conjured up here. So step carefully i’d say to them if they want to hold on to a Global Britain where Scotland is part of it.
I’m on the fence until I see the plan.
What would be the best reason you would make to the rest of Britain for us to regret the departure of Scotland from the UK? You’re not likeable, but are you in any way necessary or useful?
The parochial solipsism of Scotch nationalism is its downfall. If you want to leave, you should be campaigning for a UK wide referendum, not one in Scotland. You’d be expelled by a landslide.
I was born in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. A part of me deeply regrets that in the years between 1870 and 1916 political judgement in Westminster caused the loss of Ireland and with it a chunk of shared history. The decision to keep the 6 Counties in the EU Customs Union and Single Market ultimately will place their presence in the United Kingdom at risk. With it goes the red diagonal cross in the Union Flag.
I am as English as anyone. My politics are well left of centre though I have lived all of my life within a 40 milie radius of Chelmsford in Essex but my England is the England of Bunyan, Milton, Shakespear Elgar not the strangulated public school braying of Boris Johnson. England without the rest of the United Kingdom with be hugely diminished and I would mourn that. It would also be a laughing stock amongst the nations.
So Brexit Britain is caustic? Yes, that is true, and mostly because those who fervently wish to remain in the EU have fought a long and dirty campaign to do so, much to the delight of EU negotiators, but it seems to me that the campaign for Scottish independence has spawned similar antagonism. It seems to me that Sturgeon and her party are rude and disrespectful at every opportunity. I sometimes think that everyone has become too inured to it.
I agree – it’s a divisive subject and raises lots of tempers and blood pressures. But it’s often argued from the point that leaving the UK means being anti English – and that’s just not true. Please stop taking offence that we want to leave the UK. We just don’t vote Conservative.
For the rising numbers of Yes Voters of late, it’s all about Westminster. We are as mortified about this lot as a good number of English people are. But Scotland has never voted for a Conservative government for a long long time. It’s not democratic. The policies are from two separate worlds. We are different. Simple.
As for being more rude and and disrespectful – not true either – it comes from both sides – hence the Anti English nonsense. I could list the scuffles in Westminster between the parties, but there’s not enough hours.
No one is really anti English – only the dumb few, who do get called out for their blatant bad judgement.
We are Anti English – that’s only in Sport for goodness sake.
You don’t merit all those unlikes! The UK position that is emerging is that there must be a settled will for a 2nd referendum, which is indicated by 60% being in favour over a period of time. That is the democratic route to independence. Many will protest this, but power lies with the UK and short of terrorism (cf. Ireland 1921) the UK Parliament will set the terms.
FM
Francis MacGabhann
2 years ago
This reads like it was written by a department at MI5 staffed by graduates of one of the lesser public schools, one of the ones where they didn’t teach understatement and that less is more.
It is interesting sometimes going in some depth to the intellectual roots of a current issue. Tom Nairn was, in my view unfortunately, undoubtedly very influential.
I have concluded that the leadership of the SNP (especially Sturgeon) do not really want independence – the reality would be as bad as bad can be.
What they want is the jobs, power and control that comes from campaigning for independence and blaming the English for all their failures. This can go on for years more without them actually having to deliver.
I agree. In which case, yapping incessantly about independence is a depreciating asset. But the incessant unpleasantness is gradually instilling poison into the UK body politic.
This is what I have felt for a while now (about Sturgeon) and I live up here. Salmond was a true believer so, although I loathe him and loathe nationalism, that at least deserves some respect. He also did set about trying to govern when first elected. Sturgeon? Not so. Independence is just too much like hard work. It will go on for years until it’s squarely taken on.
Separating the UK from 40 years of a non-state (apparently), trade only (guffaw) continental bureaucracy has been a shyte show that Sturgeon has claimed has made Scottish independence even more necessary. Surely it should demonstrate the other way around. After 300 years, being part of the same state, culturally/genetically close peoples and part of the same geographical entity, surely means by now that WE ARE NO LONGER SEPARATE COUNTRIES IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY. Devolution is merely federalism within the same nation state. Wales seems to have largely accepted that. Like Bavaria. Or Brittany. Catalonia has tried and failed. It’s really too late. I think of myself as British rather than English now. Or at least a weird chimera of both. I believe leaving the EU was only possible for us because we’re not in the eurozone and we’re separated by the Channel. And it’s only been 40 odd years. Any later or more integrated and i think it would have been impossible, which makes me feel, as a Remain voter, slightly relieved the Brexiteers took the braver choice. There is something to be said for the parallels between Brexit and Scottish Indy and how upside down it sometimes seems (ScotNats deride Brexit but then use Brexiteer arguments about their own independence and do it without irony) but the EU is not the USA. It is a crawlingly slow oil tanker with no common culture like the USA. Its history is wildly different. It really does more resemble the artificiality of the USSR more than the organic growth and deliberate ‘pledge of allegiance melting pot’ history of the USA. An experiment in nation building that may have had its day in the sun and now appears to be reatomising on ethnic and racial lines. If ScotNats think the EU is Scotland’s future then they really might want to think again.
Excellent summary.
Very well expressed. I also think that Britain is extremely fortunate in being an island (NI excepted – more below) and that enormous geopolitical asset is not sufficiently recognised, in all the debate about Scottish independence. What might France give for sea borders, or Poland, or Czechoslovakia (as was)! As for NI, look at the problems our international border there is causing us. If it weren’t for the precedent it would set for the Scottish Nationalists, I would apply the geographical argument and let NI go. Land borders are bad news, and Britain is so lucky not to have any (almost none anyway). We should treasure that fact.
Has the SNP produced a document outlining its financial reasons for independence? The one for 2014 relied on oil income which is no longer ‘green’ and largesse from joining the EU would have to wait several years during the application process.
A referendum taken after negotiating with the UK the terms of leaving re: border, debt share, road access to Europe, etc would make the process realistic.
Yes, the Scottish “government” produce a financial statement, every year, to demonstrate how strong the Scottish economy is, and how it will support an independent Scotland, The trouble, for the SNP, is that, after high expectations when first implemented it now, as it has always shown, demonstrates, even with self published gloss and spin, how weak the Scottish economic case for independence is.
I would also see “EU largesse” in a sober light…there is a positive attitude to an independent Scotland rejoining the EU. However, I have read that that welcoming attitude is contingent upon Scotland showing that it can run its financial affairs in a sound way over a number of years. The EU needs another financially incontinent net recipient like it needs a hole in the head and a profligate Scottish government would very quickly exhaust any goodwill.
There are budget deficit rules for states applying for entry, meaning that Scotland would have to get its deficit in check over a number of years, through some sort of austerity measures
Yes, indeed. Whenever I read about the SNP, they seem to be pledging something else that costs a bunch of money, like greening the economy or introducing universal income. Call me crazy but this seems like a great way for the independence movement to shoot itself in the foot. Surely if they were serious about breaking away they’d be reining in expenditure and telling folk that this is what is required for Scotland to make it on its own and possibly rejoin the EU. My logic and SNP logic clearly aren’t overlapping.
They will fuel the Green Economy with taxes from the oil industry which they have vowed to destroy.
Dumb as boxes of rocks then
That shouldn’t come as a surprise as the SNP are very good as a pressure group. Alas they are useless at/ uninterested in governing, hence… here we are.
There again, they keep being voted in, and you cant even complain they haven’t delivered.
The oil revenues came from fields off Shetland which continue to produce BUT Shetland has indicated that it does not want to be part of an independent Scotland and has a case to remain part of the UK
Orkney and Shetland were only exclusively part of Scotland in the years between 1472 and 1707 – Danish/Norwegian before that (Shetland is nearer Norway than it is the Scottish Mainland) and part of the UK thereafter.
Thus if Westminster ever introduces a bill allowing Scotland an independence referendum, it should contain a clause allowing Orkney and Shetland (singly or together) the choice of staying in the union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland or separating..
Orkney and Shetland and the Western Isles certainly voted heavily NO in the 2014 IndyRef, but then so did everyone in Scotland outside Greater Glasgow and the city of Dundee.
I must take issue with your statement in parentheses though – contrary to popular belief, Shetland is almost twice as far from Norway as it is from the Scottish mainland. “The nearest railway station to Lerwick is Bergen” is something I’ve heard often. No it isn’t – it’s Thurso.
Emotion beats this hands down. Most people will not be interested in the detail, only the excitement.
I just don’t get it, why the Scots would want to leave the UK and to join the EU. If the aim is to increase self-determination and improve democratic accountability how can moving from being 5 million voices out of 60 to 5 million in 450 million be an improvement. It is as if they are prepared to suffer any hardship so long as they can be free of the English. Sounds like cutting your nose off to spite your face to me.
Tom Nairn had a cheek, considering how many Scots have gone down South and contributed so much to making Britain and all its parts prosperous. Talk about seeing it through one lense…..it’s a cloudy one at that!
Scotland can’t even get enough Civil Servants to collect tax, instead relying on UK government department for this and many other public sector areas.
They had to make a point last year and not run the 10 year census with the other parts of the UK, now they don’t have enough Civil Servants to do it this year…..or maybe even not next. The result is no statistics to know what Scotland needs in the future.
Having voted for devolution back in 1997, I am increasingly of the opinion that devolution itself was always a project of neoliberal corporate globalist elites.
It’s only a working hypothesis, but it can be easily constructed from the evidence.
First, it was Blair’s project, and he was the neoliberal corporate globalist sans compare.
Secondly, devolution and independence weaken the UK and strengthen the global corporations. Blair would have known that. An “independent Scotland” would be like Ireland: a football to be kicked about by the global elites, a profit centre for their enrichment. A weaker UK would be less capable of self defence.
Thirdly, on all the core ideological issues: abortion, gender ideology, immigration, same-sex marriage and so on, Holyrood might as well be controlled by Goldman Sachs. And when I say Holyrood, I mean Holyrood, not just the SNP.
That hypothesis would concur with the mediocrity of many MSPs, because ultimately these people are wholly reliant on corporate patronage when their political careers fail. They have no other careers to return to.
It also accords with the reality of life in Scotland: neglect bordering on genocide of the white working class population, an almost total indifference to their suffering, whilst Holyrood focusses on implementing neoliberal socio-sexual ideologies and social control.
I think this is where a “follow the money” analysis leads.
Even the Swedish and the Danes gave up on socialism in the 1970s when they saw their industries stagnating and their economy starting to go the way of the USSR. The Nats would be a Venezuela style disaster.
Not that they could apply the socialist policies, they’re just window dressing to attract votes: An indie Scotland joining the EU would have to implement a harsh Greece style austerity regime, and then battle Ireland to attract US tech companies via ultra low corporation tax.
The antipathy of the SNP to the UK and the culmination under Biden of a 20-yr face-plant of the US-UK special relationship bodes darkly for the Clyde – to the delight of some useful eejuts. While Alex dances at RT will Scotland hold the EU’s northern flank – and budget for it?
Just let them go.
Beautiful country but they really, really don’t like the English, anecdotally (good enough for me to forge an opinion with).
It is inevitable that Scotland will break from the UK. If it is good for them, then I wish them ‘Bon Voyage’. If it is bad it is their fault – people can always vote ‘No’. The politicians will ensure that they win the referendum, whatever ordinary people think.
Wales will follow soon afterwards. Does it matter? No. It is meaningless.
But when is Yorkshire getting a vote?
People in Yorkshire are more streetwise. Something about which side of the bread is buttered.
Us Yorkshire folk are English. That’s how the UK state discriminates against us – no differently to other English people in less fortunate counties. The only part of England that gets the kind of fawning attention that our Celtic appendages get is London.
I don’t see that it is at all inevitable. Objectively and rationally the case for Scottish independence has got very much worse since 2014. You can also look to the Quebec example, that Canadian province got much closer to a vote for independence that the Scots have (so far). The constitution is also a reserved matter for the UK, so a referendum can (legally) be blocked indefinitely.
But should it come to pass, I would advocate that rUK (or whatever we will be called!) should strike a very hard bargain indeed – and that this point, in a very nice manner, be made absolutely clear to the Scots. For example, the Barnet formula, an internal administrative and financial matter for the UK government, be stopped or phased out rapidly as soon as a ‘yes’ vote is registered. The ‘have cake and eat it’ fantasies of SNP politicians, taking all the credit for UK spending while none of the blame, need be indulged no longer. Another is the inevitable hard border.
I like Scotland and have Scottish friends, and such a divorce would in my view be something of a tragedy. However you maybe right that the constitutional air needs to be cleared – this could otherwise go on for years. Of course all democrats should respect such a vote.
People don’t vote objectively and rationally, though.
I agree that people vote primarily for emotional reasons, and there’s nothing wrong with that, although I’d hope that the emotion hasn’t been created on the basis of lies and distortion of facts, and on events of hundreds of years ago rather than months.
However, it seems to me sensible that when the time comes for the UK government to discuss and negotiate a second referendum, they insist on a preparatory period during which the future situation is agreed on and implemented to some degree, e.g. ending the Barnett formula, and constructing border posts and procedures to allow the EU will be able to prevent England’s access to the Single Market.
The cost of reversing it in the event of a ‘no’ decision would be worth it if the electorate had become wiser, and useful if they haven’t.
I think you are forgetting one important thing – boredom. Right now, especially after lockdowns, life is a bit boring. Why not make it more exciting with flags and music and demonstrations. Everybody will be talking about it and will want to join in. The reality will not be important.
What would be fun is if Joxit were on a regional basis. The border regions with England are all unionist and probably so would the Shetlands and Orkneys be. They should be allowed to stay for the same reasons that the rest should be allowed to go.
What actually departed would the stupid basket case regions that blame England for everything but that are subsidised by England. That would of course end so that within at most 2 to 3 years Scotland would be like East Germany without the nice weather.
Love “Joxit”! Did you invent?
And people will still vote Labour, especially in the populace areas, as a protest against…er….Margaret Thatcher. As these oldies die off the young are being brainwashed in the belief that language = freedom. This is why it will happen.
If there was a decent port in Wales, it might not be a bad thing. But without a port there would be two hard borders for everything coming in.
Just out of interest I looked at Facebook about a month before the recent election and one of the Labour members was saying that the UK was obviously anti-Wales because BJ had not bothered to learn the Welsh language. This was removed the next day.
Well, if that`s true it confirms what I said, that they really are a joke.
its not Margaret Thatcher, its the huge mounds of money the Assembly keeps throwing at those poor downtrodden folk in the valleys, while happily ignoring serious social, economic and health issues in the rest of Wales because they cannot be assured of buying votes there.
There are seeds of revolt, there are folk waking up, the last national vote was affected by the Pandemic and “the better the devil you know syndrome”.. Overtime all it needs is a Welsh Conservative Party willing to act with confidence,never backing off, keep shrugging off the media flak, and keep calling these Welsh Labour idiots out!
I bet that some of Nairn’s best friends are English
Scots enthusiasm for leaving the UK is closely correlated with North Sea oil revenue. Both have been a thing since the mid-70s and will fizzle accordingly. It’s about how long it takes Scotland to notice.
Scotland wouldn’t see any of the oil revenues anyway, as they are apportioned to the UK by 1965 treaty. The treaty doesn’t mention Scotland, and the UK will still exist, so the treaty will continue to apply meaning the revenues will still be the UK’s.
Oil companies are hard-headed realists. The oil comes ashore in Scotland and that is to whom they will pay the revenues, they are not going to build fresh infrastructure to land it in Newcastle. It would be up to the government of continuity-UK to challenge this under international and maritime law. It would take decades to reach a judgement. The UK will settle for a small compensation and walk away.
Reference to oil however is interesting. Norway had an oil boom and used the revenue to build up infrastructure and a sovereign wealth fund. The UK under the Tories used the money to pay compensate workers for the destruction of industrial jobs, particularly in the North to smash Trade Unions, Scotland will have realised that.
Welll, no. The principal North Sea grades are Brent (around 6 cargoes a month), Forties (15 to 20), Ekofisk, Oseberg (3 to 5 each) and Troll (10 to 15).
The first two load in Sullom Voe and Hound Point, which are in Scotland, but Ekofisk loads in England, Oseberg and Troll in Norway. The non-Scottish-landed oil is already more than half, but even that’s assuming the Shetlands want to become part of Little Scotland. If they vote to stay with the UK, then they will stay whatever the SNP would like. Nicola’s not exactly in a position to send troops to annex the Shetlands, is she?
Then of course there is the fact that the Scottish production is declining. “Decades to reach judgment” are exactly what Scotland does not have.
In effect the SNP has a last chance to lie to the “vooters” about Scotland’s economic prospects before the one and only – and highly contentious – source of revenue simply dries up. Scotland will then basically have no industry left to speak of, and of course once the defence industry, and all the higher earners individually, head south.
The UK under the Wilson Govt’s of 1964-76 closed more coal mines than Margaret Thatcher did. The Blair/Brown Labour gov’t did not repeal any significant industrial relations legislation brought in under previous 18 years of Tories.
Industrial relations in 1970’s Britain virtually destroyed our economy. Healey as chancellor in 1976 had to go to the IMF for a bail out loan.
Years of poor management, lack of investment and militant union striking left swathes of British industry outdated and uncompetitive by the 1980’s. Thatcher enabled new small businesses to thrive and create jobs, financial services sector to massively grow and generate wealth and employment.
The Left was the first to complain if workers made unemployed were not paid benefits. Britain is hugely better off without dominant trade unions wielding power, the remaining public sector and rail unions dominated by their marxist leaders are evidence of that.
I suspect it is. The UK governemt just needs to keep saying “No” and in time it will just fade away – because there is nothing in it really. But I shall await a follow-up piece.
There is another possible future for Scotland – as a Chinese colony on the edge of Europe. Or as a country threatening to be so and blackmailing England into continuing to subsidise Scotland.
If many think the hard border in Northern Ireland with Ireland is a difficult unsolved problem with the EU what he hell is Scotland going to do with Briton? LOL barbed wire and watchtowers as Scotts smuggle larger electric British Tea Pots across it? It is as absurd as people in Texas talk about succeeding from the US. If Scotland is hell bent on become connected to the EU again…..I cannot figure out why? Uninhibited travel? Do they want more muslim refugees? I don’t think Briton would prohibit Scotland from hosting some Afghan refugees. I get the divide. Texas wouldn’t want any of CA policies. None of them….but surely Briton and Scotland can find a way to allow them more Independence. For example a ban on Churches Fish Chips stores….
There are more differences between the south and the north of England; London and ‘not’ London, than between England and Scotland. Twice as many people vote Labour than the population of Scotland of whom over 50% don’t want independence. That an independent Scotland will be austere indeed is a fact not an opinion unless the EU, Russia or China decide on a bail out; the real reason Westminster doesn’t want a referendum. The sociology and the politics wouldn’t be pretty.
y
I don’t blame the Scots for wanting independence from England’s Eton-educated rabble. Good luck to them. The Scandinavians are far more progressive than our Governments Little Englander mentality.
60 years ago, when Trinidad and Tobago became independent, the first Prime Minister, Eric Williams said “yes, an independent Trinidad will make mistakes but they will be our mistakes and we will be able to take responsibility for them.” Williams was a historian who analysed the legacy of slavery, indentured labour and colonialism and concluded that an independent country could not do any worse.
Probably the biggest recruiting sergeant for Scottish Independence is the current PM and his cabinet. The English, I suspect, love a roguish toff, a weakness Orwell pointed out is his wonderful essay on Boys’ Weeklies “the weeklies serve the function of instilling into the minds of young boys the ideas that “the problems of our time do not exist, that there is nothing wrong with laissez-faire capitalism, that foreigners are unimportant comics and that the British Empire is a sort of charity-concern which will last forever”. In the final paragraph he summarises by writing “All fiction from the novels in the mushroom libraries downwards is censored in the interests of the ruling class. And boy’s fiction above all … is sodden in the worst illusions of 1910”
It is possible that the Scots, or at least some of them once had the same opinion, after all the Scottish Tory party was once described as “all lairds and baillies” but I suspect not anymore. They will have looked at the current Government with its rampant cronyism, incoherence, chaos, outmoded pompous procedures and dishonesty and formed the view that they could do better. It is hard to argue against such a view.
Those advancing the cause of Brexit frequently dismissed their critics as peddling “project fear”. It is intersting now to seen largely the same people using the same approach, to scare the Scottish people into staying in line.
Well, other than by pointing at the SNP, obviously.
What I know of the Scottish Assembly strikes me about how adult its procedures are and far less anachronistic than the “Mother of Parliaments”. The Prime Minister at Westminster can openly, intentionally lie to the House with no come-back whereas someone pointing out that he is lying has to stand on the naughty step for a day.
The Scottish Parliament appears grown up in the same way the Chinese People’s Congress does
Breaking away from the UK is seen as a serious proposition and desired by the majority of Scots, including and especially, by the ‘new Scots’ now living here since 2016 – 80% of my associates in Glasgow are the new Scots moved up from London looking for a more balanced work-life existence.
They have bought their property – some of them even bought two properties! – and would prefer to base themselves here in Glasgow than in the ever growing caustic Brexit Britain that has been created over the years. Its us lot up here that need to be convinced its realistic. And thus far, the SNP are doing a ‘no bad’ job on the whole, but there are many unanswered questions. Lets see what her document produces and we can go from there.
Opine away everyone – but it’s Scotland’s choice. We know it and they know it. And the more Westminster MP’s speak to elected Scottish MP’s like dirt on their shoe – the more rage against the Union is conjured up here. So step carefully i’d say to them if they want to hold on to a Global Britain where Scotland is part of it.
I’m on the fence until I see the plan.
What would be the best reason you would make to the rest of Britain for us to regret the departure of Scotland from the UK? You’re not likeable, but are you in any way necessary or useful?
The parochial solipsism of Scotch nationalism is its downfall. If you want to leave, you should be campaigning for a UK wide referendum, not one in Scotland. You’d be expelled by a landslide.
I was born in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. A part of me deeply regrets that in the years between 1870 and 1916 political judgement in Westminster caused the loss of Ireland and with it a chunk of shared history. The decision to keep the 6 Counties in the EU Customs Union and Single Market ultimately will place their presence in the United Kingdom at risk. With it goes the red diagonal cross in the Union Flag.
I am as English as anyone. My politics are well left of centre though I have lived all of my life within a 40 milie radius of Chelmsford in Essex but my England is the England of Bunyan, Milton, Shakespear Elgar not the strangulated public school braying of Boris Johnson. England without the rest of the United Kingdom with be hugely diminished and I would mourn that. It would also be a laughing stock amongst the nations.
We have lost nothing by the departure of Ireland. We’d only gain by the departure of Scotland.
and Serbia has gained from being the bit remaining after the rest of the former Yugoslavia dropped off?
England won’t be Serbia. Scotland will be Serbia, but without the cuisine, the beaches or the weather.
Where are Serbia’s beaches? The country is entirely landlocked! ( I recommend the purchase of an atlas).
Whoooooooooosh
Serbia’s beaches indeed!
Boris Johnson is just a passing phase… you cannot have a long term policy based on him!
Yes, I agree. Especially Scotland has provided a socialist anchor and alternative for the UK. Labour is a pale relice without them.
So Brexit Britain is caustic? Yes, that is true, and mostly because those who fervently wish to remain in the EU have fought a long and dirty campaign to do so, much to the delight of EU negotiators, but it seems to me that the campaign for Scottish independence has spawned similar antagonism. It seems to me that Sturgeon and her party are rude and disrespectful at every opportunity. I sometimes think that everyone has become too inured to it.
I agree – it’s a divisive subject and raises lots of tempers and blood pressures. But it’s often argued from the point that leaving the UK means being anti English – and that’s just not true. Please stop taking offence that we want to leave the UK. We just don’t vote Conservative.
For the rising numbers of Yes Voters of late, it’s all about Westminster. We are as mortified about this lot as a good number of English people are. But Scotland has never voted for a Conservative government for a long long time. It’s not democratic. The policies are from two separate worlds. We are different. Simple.
As for being more rude and and disrespectful – not true either – it comes from both sides – hence the Anti English nonsense. I could list the scuffles in Westminster between the parties, but there’s not enough hours.
No one is really anti English – only the dumb few, who do get called out for their blatant bad judgement.
We are Anti English – that’s only in Sport for goodness sake.
The SNP detached some 50 socialist inclined member and left the Labour party helpless and unable, of course, to form a coalition.
As a remain voter I have been ashamed by the behaviour of many remainers
You don’t merit all those unlikes! The UK position that is emerging is that there must be a settled will for a 2nd referendum, which is indicated by 60% being in favour over a period of time. That is the democratic route to independence. Many will protest this, but power lies with the UK and short of terrorism (cf. Ireland 1921) the UK Parliament will set the terms.
This reads like it was written by a department at MI5 staffed by graduates of one of the lesser public schools, one of the ones where they didn’t teach understatement and that less is more.
As a scholarship boy from a minor public school, I’d have to ask why we’re getting the flak? From Eton to the local comprehensive we’re all idiots.
People come here to escape Twitter.
I confess I started skipping through the article faster and faster. My loss, no doubt.
It’s a good read, excepting the awful American phrase ‘people of colour’
It is interesting sometimes going in some depth to the intellectual roots of a current issue. Tom Nairn was, in my view unfortunately, undoubtedly very influential.
But an epic pi11ock too. Why anyone pays any attention to anyone who professes Marxism I can’t imagine.