Scotland's Place in the UK

[Stag Nation]

On 13/12/2019 at 17:35, Hedgecutter said:

How do you see Scotland's place within the UK?  Are we merely another part of the UK fortunate to have a devolved government (similar to London) that should suck up to whatever the UK voted for as a whole?  Or does the UK comprise 4 equal nations that during the current Brexit stand-off should have equal weighting, regardless of population bias?

 

Going by the early 1707 designs for the Union Flag during the initial Act of Union, this key constitutional question has obviously been around for a while.

 

So what's your answer?

The flag designs don't suggest a constitutional question. They're akin to the new shirt designs posted every season by fans with too much time on their hands, and which have no influence whatsoever on their clubs.

[Stag Nation]

On 14/12/2019 at 08:31, Dunfermline Don said:

Scotland’s place in the UK is at the very North of it!

It’s To provide the rest of the UK with our natural resources, water, oil etc. And a nice wee base for its nuclear weapons.

 

And the recipient of a substantial subsidy from the more prosperous areas of the Union. That is not an anti-Scottish comment: it also applies to some regions of England.  And it's no bad thing: there are parts of Scotland which must be heavily subsidised by the big cities. Once you start sub-dividing the UK, where do you stop?

BTW I may be wrong, but I don'r believe water is exported to England. Except bottled water, which is a commercial venture. English, French, Italian etc. water is also imported to Scotland.

[Granny Danger]

5 minutes ago, Stag Nation said:

And the recipient of a substantial subsidy from the more prosperous areas of the Union. That is not an anti-Scottish comment: it also applies to some regions of England.  And it's no bad thing: there are parts of Scotland which must be heavily subsidised by the big cities. Once you start sub-dividing the UK, where do you stop?

BTW I may be wrong, but I don'r believe water is exported to England. Except bottled water, which is a commercial venture. English, French, Italian etc. water is also imported to Scotland.

I’d be happy to stop at the Scottish border, though I would hope the rights of the Welsh and Irish would be respected if they chose independence.

[Fullerene]

1 hour ago, Dunfermline Don said:

I know where you are coming from.
That is their equivalent of the Lords and there are 50 states as against 4 in the UK. A similar scenario would only work in the UK if England was regionalised and I can’t see that happening!

Yes.  It is utterly bizarre.  England naturally splits into Northumbria, Mercia and Wessex (or something like that) but refuses to do so.

Then the North and the Midlands decide that they have had enough of the South bossing them about and the only solution is to leave the EU.  Go figure.

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, Stag Nation said:

And the recipient of a substantial subsidy from the more prosperous areas of the Union. That is not an anti-Scottish comment: it also applies to some regions of England.  And it's no bad thing: there are parts of Scotland which must be heavily subsidised by the big cities. Once you start sub-dividing the UK, where do you stop?

BTW I may be wrong, but I don'r believe water is exported to England. Except bottled water, which is a commercial venture. English, French, Italian etc. water is also imported to Scotland.

Energy from water certainly is, and why should there be so much concentration of public sector jobs in where you live? Despite the massively disproportionate infrastructure spending you get, house prices are way beyond affordability of most people working there. London sucks spending from the rest of the UK because Governments have decided to stay close to Soho and the banks and company HQ's followed suit. Now that location is less important it will quickly change. Why would staff and companies want to pay the huge surcharge of basing in London when there's no benefit? 

[Sir Tarmo Kink]

It may not seem like this going by seats won, but the SNP and Scotland are by far the Tories’ biggest opposition right now and they know it. I was willing to wait a generation for indyref2 as I thought that was the most fair and democratic route, but Brexit definitely brings it forward for me. We are undeniably completely different politically to the rest of the UK.

#WarNicola

[git-intae-thum]

15 hours ago, Stag Nation said:

And the recipient of a substantial subsidy from the more prosperous areas of the Union. That is not an anti-Scottish comment: it also applies to some regions of England.  And it's no bad thing: there are parts of Scotland which must be heavily subsidised by the big cities. Once you start sub-dividing the UK, where do you stop?

BTW I may be wrong, but I don'r believe water is exported to England. Except bottled water, which is a commercial venture. English, French, Italian etc. water is also imported to Scotland.

You are wrong. Very wrong. There is no substantial subsidy.

You are basing your figures on GERs. These show Scotland's position in union (ie assuming a population based share of UK debt).

GERs itself cannot include variables such as the Luxembourg and multiplier effects

We are allocated a population based share of UK debt. On the other side of the book, we are not allocated any share back.....let alone population based, of the revenue generated from the economic activity that the debt built and thereafter continues to service. That wealth is funnelled through London and the SE. It's one of the major reasons that GER figures are so skewed against the regions.

With regards income.....well no independent nation would count for it's key taxation revenues in the way Scotland does just now (ie....we don't). There is no way to accurately differentiate our figures from rUK and it's all a bit of a guess.

On top of all this GERs figures simply do not allow for differing fiscal policies pursued by an iScotland.

The figures do what they are designed  to do, which is provide an indicator for economic performance for a region within a larger entity.

As GERs itself in its opening blurb, and all sensible commentators point out.....THEY DO NOT AND CANNOT REPRESENT THE FINANCES OF AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND!!

Edited December 16, 2019 by git-intae-thum

[Mastermind]

Scotland's place in the UK ? To serve as a tartan theme park and Brigadoon fantasyland for the world's tourists. To tug our forelocks when British Royalty holidays here.

To provide a ready supply of young people as cannon fodder for UK military misadventures. Above all, to know our place.

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

[Mark Connolly]

3 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

You are wrong. Very wrong. There is no substantial subsidy.

You are basing your figures on GERs. These show Scotland's position in union (ie assuming a population based share of UK debt).

GERs itself cannot include variables such as the Luxembourg and multiplier effects

We are allocated a population based share of UK debt. On the other side of the book, we are not allocated any share back.....let alone population based, of the revenue generated from the economic activity that the debt built and thereafter continues to service. That wealth is funnelled through London and the SE. It's one of the major reasons that GER figures are so skewed against the regions.

With regards income.....well no independent nation would count for it's key taxation revenues in the way Scotland does just now (ie....we don't). There is no way to accurately differentiate our figures from rUK and it's all a bit of a guess.

On top of all this GERs figures simply do not allow for differing fiscal policies pursued by an iScotland.

The figures do what they are designed  to do, which is provide an indicator for economic performance for a region within a larger entity.

As GERs itself in its opening blurb, and all sensible commentators point out.....THEY DO NOT AND CANNOT REPRESENT THE FINANCES OF AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND!!

Yeah but £12.6bn, mate

[GordonS]

On 14/12/2019 at 12:41, Stinky Bone said:

But can they actually repeal it though?  I posted on the other thread about the Scotland Act, and as far as I am aware they can amend it.  

I don't know for sure though. 

 

On 14/12/2019 at 12:59, The Skelpit Lug said:

I honestly don't know either, just going on the rumour that a Sunday paper might be running a story on a UK gov threat to Scottish power and Holyrood. Could be the start of a chipping away at the legitimacy of Holyrood perhaps.

Anything created by primary legislation can be taken away by primary legislation. The only exceptions to that in UK constitutional law is where the thing could not in practice be repealed, eg the Acts establishing Canada and Australia. Only recently did courts start striking down primary legislation because it wasn't compliant with EU or human rights law - but it's always been open to parliament to end that by repealing the European Communities Act 1972 (which has happened) or the Human Rights Act.

Devolution could be abolished by a two clause act of parliament. Whether they would ever do it is another question, but it's entirely with the powers of the UK parliament to abolish or modify devolution any way they like, and short of a federal constitution, that's how it will always be.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

Johnson managed the easy bit last Thursday. He will very soon be fighting on four fronts; wrangling with the EU, dealing with restless natives in Scotland and Northern Ireland and somehow trying to produce tangible benefit for those who placed their trust in him at the ballot box.

I imagine a military strategist might describe that as ' challenging'.

[beefybake]

1 hour ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

Johnson managed the easy bit last Thursday. He will very soon be fighting on four fronts; wrangling with the EU, dealing with restless natives in Scotland and Northern Ireland and somehow trying to produce tangible benefit for those who placed their trust in him at the ballot box.

I imagine a military strategist might describe that as ' challenging'.

Let him swim in his own shit. 

[Fullerene]

3 hours ago, oaksoft said:

The Union will and can only operate when it serves all the constituent nations.

When one nation decides to leave it should be free to do so whenever it's electorate chooses to do so regardless of how the other nations feel about that.

I'm not really sure what the Tories, the LibDems and Labour are struggling with on this concept. It's just simple democracy.

If Scotland was independent but Shetland wanted to be independent - would that be demoracy?

If Shetland was independent but then Mid Yell wanted to be independent of Shetland.  What then?

I am talking as someone who has been to Mid Yell.

[git-intae-thum]

7 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

If Scotland was independent but Shetland wanted to be independent - would that be demoracy?

If Shetland was independent but then Mid Yell wanted to be independent of Shetland.  What then?

I am talking as someone who has been to Mid Yell.

Yeh....if that is what the people who live on Shetland or indeed Mid Yell want. 

What's the problem?

[John Lambies Doos]

If Scotland was independent but Shetland wanted to be independent - would that be demoracy?
If Shetland was independent but then Mid Yell wanted to be independent of Shetland.  What then?
I am talking as someone who has been to Mid Yell.

Shetland isn't a country

[welshbairn]

11 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

41 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

If Scotland was independent but Shetland wanted to be independent - would that be demoracy?
If Shetland was independent but then Mid Yell wanted to be independent of Shetland.  What then?
I am talking as someone who has been to Mid Yell.

Shetland isn't a country

Neither's Catalonia, never has been. Free Mid Yell!!!!!!!!!

[Hedgecutter]

3 hours ago, Fullerene said:

If Shetland was independent but then Mid Yell wanted to be independent of Shetland.  What then?

Edited December 16, 2019 by Hedgecutter

[wastecoatwilly]

On the anniversary of the Boston tea party are the 47 SNP MP's sons of liberty or Scottish patriots?
Is Scotland a colony or no taxation without representation?
Throwing our tea into the Clyde and Forth just isn't enough.

[Lurkst]

1 hour ago, wastecoatwilly said:

On the anniversary of the Boston tea party are the 47 SNP MP's sons of liberty or Scottish patriots?
Is Scotland a colony or no taxation without representation?

It'd be a bit odd for a Westminster MP to claim "no taxation without representation".

 

[John Lambies Doos]

On the anniversary of the Boston tea party are the 47 SNP MP's sons of liberty or Scottish patriots?
Is Scotland a colony or no taxation without representation?
Throwing our tea into the Clyde and Forth just isn't enough.

48