Can Scotland Go It Alone?

As much as I like the English (and dislike their need to feel superior to the Scots and Welsh at every major sports tournament) I think Scotland can be confident enough in her major industries to actually stop paying her taxes and oil income to the English coffers and GO IT ALONE!

I just looked at the figures and they make interesting reading:

Top five export industries
£million
Food and Beverages
(including distilled potable beverages) 3,565
(3,055)
Chemicals (including Petroleum Products) 1,780
Office Machinery/Computers 1,710
Business Services 1,575
Radio/TV/Communications Equipment 1,290



Top five export destinations
£million
USA 2,095
Netherlands 1,650
Germany 1,380
France 1,225
Spain 800

In other words, and this is deleberately over-simplifying the issue, we don't need the English to import Scottish goods. The whiskey, financial and tourist industries can provide sufficient income to drive the economy.

So, sons of Scotland...

I'm a Scottish-American... maybe Scotland can become a U.S. state!

At least that'd probably reduce the taxes I have to pay for Scotch!!!

We've debated this one to death numerous times before

Try digging through some of the old threads in this forum, especially the ones in the run-up to the Scottish Elections back in May. You'll find pages and pages to keep you happy.

Out of interest, however, where did you find those figures?

reply to post by Ste2652


I didn't realise that this topic has been done to death. However, I fell that Scotland is already devolved in terms of : finance, education, legislation and is more or less independent in name. All it needs is a little boost by shaking off the English Parliament and I am sure the English would not disagree. The Scots are culturally and socially separate from the English and just need the impetus of independence to become a new Sweden for example.

The figures come from Scottish Enterprise - I think the figures are three years old but still give a snapshot of a country that exports all over the world and has a healthy tourist industry...

Link to Figures

The problem is that we celebrate our differences. The English are closest culturally to the Dutch. Gimme a break, its you and the Welsh (I'm keeping the province of Northern Ireland out of this for reasons I'm sure you'll understand). We tried to represent you by giving you more Members of Parliament than your numbers deserve, now devolution. I don't mind, I'm confident you'll come back. Once the oil has run out.

I would be entirely confident that Scotland can go it alone, after all if nations such as Togo, the Ivory Coast and Guatemala can survive independently why not Scotland?

The question in my mind is would you, or the rest of the UK be better off and I'm struggling to think of any single reason why the nation would be improved by losing the the Scottish character which is, I believe, integral to Britishness, (just as Englishness is).

There would,of course, be some financial readjustment and let's not kid ourselves that Scotland would be entering some kind of financial golden era, (you are at least 30 years too late for that even assuming that the Shetlanders would have gone with you at that time), but my guess is that we would all be poorer, spiritually if nothing else.

As for sporting competition, well I'm sorry that we tend to be better than you but I can't argue that we are altogether to fond of reminding you at every opportunity.

...and to be pedantic please bear in mind that there is no "English Parliament" to shake off, in fact we are the only nation in the union without our own representative body; what is more the UK Parliament in Westminster seems to involve an inordinate number of Scotsmen.

Those nations ARE NOT surviving ... they are 3rd world dumps.

Why do you think the Guatemalans are sneaking into Mexico to sneak into the US? Why do you think the Ivorians are sneaking into France and having a coup once a month?

As for Scotland, they are a part of the UK the same as NY is a part of the US so I dont see why they want to be independent. All this nationalism in Europe is not a good sign if you ask me.

I'm English and hope one day Scotland go it alone, infact id be in favour to break the union altogether.

Its only the English who class themselfs as 'British' anyway

(example) the national anthem of Britain is 'God save the Queen' and national anthem of England is also 'God save the queen' (Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland have their own).

as said in another thread too, you'll never get a scotsmen saying they are 'British' if someone asks what nationality they are.

so it would be nice to have our national identities backs, i think its the union thats slowing England down anyway, Scotland/Wales/N.Ireland would be lost without the union not the other way round.

---
population of the UK - 61 million

(England) 50+ million
(Scotland) 5 million
(Northern Ireland) 1.7 Million
(Wales) 3 million

shows who basicly holds 'Britain' together

[edit on 25-10-2007 by st3ve_o]

reply to post by st3ve_o


Have you never heard someone from Scotland identify themselves as British? I have... quite a lot, actually.

If you want a high profile example, cast your eyes no further than the current occupant of 10 Downing Street. He's as Scottish as they come, yet he's a staunch defender of the union.

ChrisF231, I agree with you - this nationalism in Europe is getting ugly and dangerous. I'm not sure how many of you have been following the news from Switzerland, but Swiss nationalists have been rioting on the streets of Berne. You've also got the Basques in northern Spain setting off bombs and assassinating politicians, the Poles have just got rid of a populist nationalist as their Prime Minister, and let's not forget our own experiences on the receiving end of nationalism... remember the IRA, anyone?

I can simply see no logical argument for dissolving the union. The only suggestions people put forward are on vague, my-country's-better-than-yours terms. None are based on solid facts or evidence. The population statistics you put forward, st3ve_o - well, so what? England has always been much larger than Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Population numbers in themselves don't mean very much; it's how the population is put to work that matters.

No one's yet proven that the Home Nations would be richer/safer/healthier/cleaner/more able to combat things like climate change than they are together - and surely these are the things that matter, not harking back to some 'nationalistic utopia' that's the product of spin and selective memories. It didn't exist in the first place.

Oh, and by the way, 'God Save the Queen' was written after the Act of Union (there isn't a separate national anthem for England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland and never has been - they just play different songs, usually patriotic songs associated with each of the Home Nations, before football matches. Technically it should be God Save the Queen for all of them). And 'Rule Britannia' was written by a Scotsman.

To go back to the original post... could Scotland go it alone? Yes, I don't see why not. I think the picture that the SNP paints is a very optimistic (and therefore unrealistic one); some of the facts and figures they've put out are a bit dubious.

Should it go it alone? No. There is no logical reason for Scotland to leave the union. Hark on all you like about oppression or imperialism or what have you, it's all in the mind.

Just to point something out too with regards to the export figures in the original post: The stuff that Scotland sends to the rest of the UK won't be included in those figures since it isn't being exported anywhere. England isn't an independent nation, it's part of the same country that Scotland is. It's likely that internal trade is just as important (perhaps more so) than exports.

[edit on 25/10/07 by Ste2652]

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Those nations ARE NOT surviving ... they are 3rd world dumps.

ahem... I know, (I sometimes think subtlety is wasted here). As for the comparison to NY, I think the situation may be easier to understand if you used the example of Quebec and Canada.

All that has been said about the lack of distinction between England and Britain is entirely correct, (God knows I have to explain it to my US colleagues often enough), but doesn't detract from the fact that I would miss the Scottish input to the UK, if nothing else they act as a safety valve for our pomposity.

reply to post by Ste2652


I am American, so you'll assume I know nothing of the United Kingdom..

I have, for a while now, been trying to move to either the UK or Ireland.. in my research I found a bit of information on Welsh sepperatist movements and Scottish sepretist movements.. from all the facts I have seen, given income data, English tax scams (like a worker in Wales paying their income tax to England because the corporate HQ is in London) and the amount of money each country needs to survive. It would be apparent that England needs far more money for yearly maintance with its much larger population and higher homelessness.. other factors like the welfare programs consume much more in England, bringing in the money from Wales, North Ireland and Scotland. It almsot appears that England depends on them to support the larger population .. Wales, only a little over 2 million people can pay for all its social needs through its industry, has a lower unemployment then the national average of the UK .. they wouldn't be rich if they where on their own ... but after looking at the region they aren't rich now .. so what would change? .. Scotland has existed on its own before, why couldn't now? It has a strong industry sector, and again, they may have to drop some social programs, but they also wouldn't have to pay for England's welfare programs, OR keep up the armed forces, which is a pretty big budget in its self. North Ireland I am not so sure about .. alone it would probably become politically unstable depleting any tourism income, leaving it with its industry which probably couldn't hold the country above water.

But that's my view, as an outsider looking to move.. the current system benefits everyone in many ways, it is complete ignorance to say that England upholds everyone and takes nothing back .. in reality England does hold up the smaller states to an extent, but it also takes a big share for doing so..

I've noticed there is a strong sentiment of English pride for the very fact that they are England.. and in the States when we think of the UK about 90% automatically say England, not the UK or Britain, and I doubt very many even know where Scotland, Wales are, North Ireland because its a given, if they can even find Ireland..

But anyways.. yeah.. English nationalist can eat my thread now...

Originally posted by Rockpuck
I am American, so you'll assume I know nothing of the United Kingdom..

Then I'll forgive you, but there are some very serious misconceptions in your post.

English tax scams (like a worker in Wales paying their income tax to England because the corporate HQ is in London)

All UK income tax goes to the UK Treasury, there is no such thing as Welsh income tax. Public spending is generally controlled from the UK central Government, (prior to devolution at least), and spending per head is significantly higher in Wales and Scotland than in England. The Scottish Parliament does have the power to raise taxes to a very limited extent, (and that money is spent in Scotland), but any suggestion that England is creaming off the wealth of other nations through a tax scam is an appalling distortion of the facts which does slightly irritate the English taxpayer who has supported Welsh and Scottish public services for decades.

The only serious bone of contention on this front is the so called Scottish oil revenues which the SNP would like to "repatriate". It's a nice idea but by the time the English have "repatriated" all of the historic excess spending on Scotland in recompense then there won't be a lot left.

If we're going to be silly and childish about who owns what in the UK then it works both ways.

factors like the welfare programs consume much more in England

Yes, but the massively bigger population pays for that and more besides, (like the welfare programmes in Scotland and Wales for instance).

Scotland has existed on its own before, why couldn't now?

That was 300 years ago - things have changed a little since then.

they also wouldn't have to pay for England's welfare programs, OR keep up the armed forces,

No, but they'd have to start paying for their own welfare, although you seem to be assuming that they would be able to sponge off an independent England's defence budget for their national security under your model?

I don't doubt that Scotland could survive on its own but, as I said above, I honestly don't see any benefit in doing so for the Scots or any other UK citizens. Put simply we are a stronger and better nation as a Union despite the petty nationalism that sometimes infects us all.

reply to post by Rockpuck


Where have you been reading these figures, RockPuck?

As timeless pointed out, taxes go to the UK Treasury before being either spent by the UK Government (on things like the NHS or defence) or allotted to the devolved governments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland who then spend it as they wish. The imbalance isn't that large, actually - I think each of the Home Nations (especially Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) get most of the tax money they input into the Treasury back to spend how they like, sometimes more.

Oil revenues and output from the North Sea are dwindling - only yesterday, I was reading that British oil giant BP announced it was cutting 350 jobs from its North Sea oil operation and that its profits from the North Sea had dropped by a whopping 45% in the third fiscal quarter of this year. In 2004, 550,000 barrels of oil each day were being extracted - this year it's averaged at 350,000 and is expected to continue to decline. (Read the full article here or here).

A disproportionately large amount of the UK's tax revenues come from the South East of England, mostly because of London - it's Europe's equivalent of a financial centre like New York, with all the stock exchanges and big banks and businesses as well as the lucrative tourist industry based there (when most people from abroad think of the UK they think of London - Buckingham Palace, Tower of London and so forth).

Rockpuck, I suggest you read up on the Barnett Formula and the West Lothian Question.

That will highlight the fact that, contrary to your "research", England actually supports the other Union members quite significantly through quite big differences in spending per head, plus gets shafted in Politics as they are the only nation without an independent Parliament/Assembly.

Scottish MP's can vote on law that only affects England, but English MP's cannot vote on Scottish issues. This is compounded by the fact that there are far more Scots MP's in Parliament than their population should allow.