Why Alex Salmond is scarily wrong about the SDF

[Saracen]

So-called legal recognition is unimportant. Wales is a Country with its own unique heritage, language, culture and people.

Dismissiveness and insults are part of the reason why the Union is being strained to the limit.

Hello Mr Pot, Meet Mr Kettle.

I agree about Wales, though. Legal status isn't really the point. The point (IMHO) is about a sense of national identity, about tradition, language, heritage, etc.

My view is that I'm English and British, but nonetheless, definitely English, and proud of it. And I would say the English are, or at least were, less consciously English than the Welsh are Welsh, or the Scots Scottish. But the more the Scots, or a subset of them, go on about being Scottish not British, the more I'm English, not British. Why should the Welsh be any less national-minded?

I still think, though, the clue is in the name .... United Kingdom. I'm English, but part of a union. The Welsh are Welsh but part of a union. And the Scots, at least for a while yet, are Scottish but part of the union. If they want out of that, well, it diminishes us all, but .... so be it. If.

[santa claus]

Hello Mr Pot, Meet Mr Kettle.

A fair cop but sometimes one has to defend one's honour .

ps agree with all the rest you said.

[Andy3536]

The strange thing to me appears that Scotland, or at least Alex Salmond is pushing the independance, and 'freedom' that would give. But wants to remain part of the EU.
If Scotland vote for independance they won't get a say on the EU, and arguably would have alot of restrictions kept for Europe.
Where as if they remain part of the UK, and the UK votes to leave Europe, then there are far more freedoms from that surely?

Mabee we'll just be the odd southerners that eat odd shaped fruit and veg?

[Geist]

While I've not looked into this issue as much as I should have. What worries me is if the vote is close. 51% vote yes for example. I don't believe anything good will come from that, but I don't think it will be a close vote.

The basic information on those articles doesn't surprise me in the slightest; nor to anyone who has knowledge of the forces I would think. It is one of the main reasons why I will be voting no.

I did get a very nice couple page newspaper with reasons to vote yes the other week. Lots of large print quotes of "We're a rich nation." or words to that effect. The timing of the paper was perfect, I was just painting some of the doors in the flat.

[Saracen]

The strange thing to me appears that Scotland, or at least Alex Salmond is pushing the independance, and 'freedom' that would give. But wants to remain part of the EU.
If Scotland vote for independance they won't get a say on the EU, and arguably would have alot of restrictions kept for Europe.
Where as if they remain part of the UK, and the UK votes to leave Europe, then there are far more freedoms from that surely?

Mabee we'll just be the odd southerners that eat odd shaped fruit and veg?

Well, one way of looking at it is that currently, Scotland is part of the UK which is part of the EU, so, whether Scotland is independent of Westminster or not, it is bound by EU laws whether part of the UK or as an Independent Scotland, in the EU. So there's no difference.

But one of the issues is that if Scotland leaves the UK, and if what just about everyone bar the SNP, says is correct and it has to apply to rejoin the EU, what terms will it join under? Accession to the EU requires, as I understand it, unanimous consent from member states. That includes recent joiners that didn't have the terms that the UK has, like, Shengen (open borders) opt-out, a Eurozone opt-out, or the rebate, and others.

Why would recent small joiners agree to Scotland, as an applicant, getting a sweetheart deal that they couldn't have? No doubt Scotland would qualify, and no doubt it'd get in, but .... under what terms? And how many years would it take? A conservative guess is, several years. So what about the meantime?

As for "freedom", well, quite. But again, an independent Scotland can set it's own tax rates and spending plans. A Scotland as part of a currency union, be it pound or Euro, can't. It certainly can't set it's own interest rates. Nor, given 2007/08's events, is there any chance it can set it's own banking regulation if it expects to be part of a currency union where either the BofE or ECB is underwriting those banks.

So Scotland could set many of it's own laws and policies if truly independent, both of the UK and EU, but then it's well and truly out in the economic cold, with an unkniwn currency, or currency history or even independent trading history, and it would be hugely exposed to market forces .... and vultures. But politicians in Edinburgh get to make laws, not those in Westminster. At least, they do until someone signs a lot of economic independence away by joining a Stetling currency union, or the EU/Euro.

In other words, the whole 'freedom' shtick from the SNP is, essentially, a populist conjuring trick, unless the Scottish people really want to find out how cold it can be out there, on their own.

And, by and large, a one-way choice, too. If they are out for a few years and decide for whatever reason it was a mistake, there is no predefined route back in, and absolutely no certainty the rest of the UK would agree to it, any more than there is if the UK leaves the EU then decides ut wants back in. And if the UK did want back into the EU, I'll bet my left eye in won't get back in with the terms and opt-outs it has now, let alone the rebate. That would well and truly be toast.