An Independent England

[D_Relentless Original]

I think that Immigration and more border control should be looked at and tightened up;at least the countries would have a better start than being milked dry.

 

[mitchymo]

N. Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales, they should stick together, it's quaint that they remind me of a compass.

 

[B_nyvin]

Pretty much all of the oilfields are north of the scotland-england border...meaning that if scotland did become independent and if it had ANY maritime boundaries at all, it would include the vast majority of the oilfields. I don't know how you can possibly argue that most of them are in english waters when they are all north of their border...?

 

[Jason]

Pretty much all of the oilfields are north of the scotland-england border...meaning that if scotland did become independent and if it had ANY maritime boundaries at all, it would include the vast majority of the oilfields. I don't know how you can possibly argue that most of them are in english waters when they are all north of their border...?

The sea border would not go along a line of latitude but as a diagonal. Take a map of the British Isles, look at the SW-NE line of the England-Scotland border and continue the trend line out through the North Sea - that's how sea borders are determined in international law. There are issues of detail about just how the trend should be continued, but the broad thrust is a straight line from Berwick to just south of Bergen. Areas of sea which are geographically closer to Scotland than England would be classed as English. Most of the oil and gas is technically English, even though presently landed in Scotland.

Curiously the location of the former Scottish town of Berwick now in England makes a lot of difference. If Berwick were part of Scotland it would change the trend line a lot. But Berwick is firmly in England.

On the west coast the issue is complicated because of the settlement the UK reached with Ireland in the 1920s. The border is still technically in dispute. The division of Ireland was originally defined in terms of parliamentary constituencies which have no existence beyond the low water line and may seem to mean that Ireland has ownership of no waters whatsoever. In practice Ireland has territorial waters of three miles (though extant disputes in Lough Foyle and Carlingford Lough). The area is a minefield. Were Scotland to split from the UK there is little doubt that the UK would advance a maritime claim to many waters north of Ireland (and therefore west of Scotland). And the UK probably does have a valid claim to a large area.

In the event of a split Scotland has to expect the UK to seek to define the sea border in the interests of the UK. The wildcard is Rockall. There are good arguments for considering this strategic rock as part of Scotland, but I bet the UK lawyers could think up a reason for considering it part of the UK.

If there is a break-up, surely Scotland doesn't think the rest of the UK will play nice? :wink:

 

[B_nyvin]

http://img.tfd.com/thumb/1/1f/UK_exclusive_economic_zone.jpg

This is one of about three maps I saw on economic zones...all three generally show the same thing, the vast vast vast majority of the oilfields are in Scottish waters. You'd have to make some extremely imaginative line drawing to include "most" oilfields in english waters considering almost all of them are up north even past glasglow. England would get a few yes, but the majority? I REALLY doubt it.

Not to mention most of the pipelines running through aberdeen

 

[Jason]

I don't know who has produced this map (is it a political organisation?) but it certainly does not reflect the UK position on borders in the Irish Sea - basically it is wrong. Fundamentally the point is that a sea border betwen the UK and Scotland has not yet been drawn, and if we get that far the UK will argue for the most favourable line for the UK. Undoubtedly the line the UK would argue would have a severe northward pull. An extreme view would be that Scotland has 3 miles off its coast and the rest is UK water, the solution we pushed on Ireland. Where the oil is landed does not change the ownership of the oil. It may also be possible to do a deal - give 100% of the oil and gas to the UK and receive some reduction in the Scottish bank debts to be dumped on a Scottish balance sheet.

With North Sea oil running out I'm not sure how much this matters. The new issue is ownership of oil around the Falklands - which of course belongs to the UK, not to a bit of the UK that breaks away.

 

[123scotty]

the problem with the north sea yes the border would make england take part of the north sea reserves. but there are more reserves north of shetland. and reserves in the atlantic are greater than the north sea. at present not economical to recover. i have emailed the following questions to the scottish conversation for independence. rbe debt and north sea fields and which fields fall into englands jurisdiction. and i will post the replies good or bad

 

[123scotty]

It's a well known fact that England is richer than Wales, Scotland & Northern Ireland.
Its unemployment rate is lower - its education results better, its crime rates lower, its life expectancy higher.
The English tax payer on average pays in more and takes out less from the Central pot than our celtic cousins.

Cities like Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol and Leeds are ignored, whilst the glorified towns of Cardiff, Edinburgh & Belfast have massive redevelopments, get public sector buildings built, in some cases tram systems, just because they happen to be capitals; at a nationwide cost.

If England was independent, taxes would be lower due to the reduction in benefits. And the money saved from keeping Glaswegians alive past 50 could bring a benefit to us.

Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland are leeches - England keeps them propped up.

What are people's views on this?

well i just dont know where to start but the keeping glaswegians alive is just insulting and a biased mush. i think you have more than your fair share of people on benefits. as for unemployment less education better and life expectancy higher can you please back up with figures. as for england propping up scotland yes like the thatcher government. please come back to the real world thanks

 

[shaguar]

Here you go, this will add up
Only America can end Britain's Trident folly | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian

And I think Argentina needs the Falklands back, oil or no oil. It will reestablish Argentina in the continent, Russia will stay back because the US will. It's just what is needed to unite the Argies, oil or no oil. Is Rooney even good enough to sniff Messi's jockstrap? No time like the present.

 

[Jason]

The future of the UK is election dependent.

Assuming we get a Conservative and Unionist victory (and with the pact with UUP we are back to the Unionist word) then we have a party pledged to maintain the Union. Curiously the Conservatives are the party most hurt by the Union, as were Scotland to go its own way there would be a substantial reduction in Labour MPs, and it is hard to see how Labour would get into power again. Presumably Conservatives would end the over-representation of Scotland at Westminster, which looks like a framework for a much more equitable Union.

If Labour are in we are probably looking at a drift towards Scottish and Welsh independenc with more and more powers transferred. However it would not suit Labour to resolve the West Lothian question, so frictions would remain. I see a Labour victory as tending towards a UK breakup.

A hung parliament is interesting. In the first instance Gordon Brown as sitting PM would try to form a government, even if his party came second. He might in theory do this with a pact with the Lib Dems - though they have said they would not prop up a party in second place. I suspect a pact wouldn't happen. The chattering classes seem to feel that the Conservatives would not do a deal with the Lib Dems. By contrast they have a pact with the UUP and would work with the DUP. Rather Conservatives would try for a minority administration. To make a minority administration work they might have to work with SNP (who of course don't like Labour). This would be the logic of my enemy's enemy is my friend. The SNP presumably want an independenc vote, and with a Conservative minority government they would probably get it very quickly.

 

[tomthelad91]

well i just dont know where to start but the keeping glaswegians alive is just insulting and a biased mush. i think you have more than your fair share of people on benefits. as for unemployment less education better and life expectancy higher can you please back up with figures. as for england propping up scotland yes like the thatcher government. please come back to the real world thanks

Men in Glasgow's east end have life expectancy of 54 - The Daily Record
Life expectancy for men in Glasgow: 54.

All this is pretty much irrelevant anyway.
Only 31% of scots even want independence. Because they know that the Union is beneficial to them.

 

[dandelion]

The future of the UK is election dependent.

Assuming we get a Conservative and Unionist victory (and with the pact with UUP we are back to the Unionist word) then we have a party pledged to maintain the Union.

Interestingly support for an independent Scotland fell sharply after Labour granted Scotland its own partial independence via its own parliament. It is generally thought that this act by labour increased the likelihood that Scotland will remain part of the UK, whereas the conservatives continually resisting reasonable demands was driving Scotland away. It did not help that the conservatives tried out the poll tax first in Scotland. All this goes a good way towards explaining why Scotland returns mainly labour MPs when it used to have a fair proportion of Tories. The number of Scottish MPs was not raised as an issue in the days when the Tories had some.

To make a minority administration work they might have to work with SNP (who of course don't like Labour).

The Scottish parliament has 47 labour, 46 SNP and 36 others. Labour and SNP are therefore forced to get along. It is a shame we do not have similar proportional representative elections to westminster which would force some realism onto political parties.

 

[123scotty]

Men in Glasgow's east end have life expectancy of 54 - The Daily Record
Life expectancy for men in Glasgow: 54.

All this is pretty much irrelevant anyway.
Only 31% of scots even want independence. Because they know that the Union is beneficial to them.

well this is the first time the daily record has been used as a reference. not that they are a sensationalized or biased paper. 31% scots want independence then how come the snp have a government in scotland. wait till election time to see.

 

[justasimpleguy]

The amount of history between the countries that make up the UK that's being ignored in these posts is staggering.

 

[TomCat84]

sounds like the problem we're having -- massive influx from the failed policies of the liberal welfare States on either coasts (New York & California) flooding into the only State of the Union that had positive job growth during the last few years (Texas)

secession and independence might be good idea for both England and Texas

Read somewhere that for every $1.00 California sends to the Federal Govt, we get less than $0.75 back. For Texas, it's something like $0.95 for every dollar sent. So, there

 

[Jason]

The amount of history between the countries that make up the UK that's being ignored in these posts is staggering.

If we took note of the history we would be here forever!

One argument is that we have been together as the UK for a very long time, and no one alive today can remember anything different. The UK is an enduring concept.

The alternative argument is that the national differencs and frictions are extensive and have a long history. The Normans tried to establish a single country, but a thousand years later we have still not forged their single identity.

The political settlement that is the UK is complex. That complexity gives it smooth running despite the strains. It is a matter of perspective whether it is seen as smoothly running or full of strains. Probably the reality is that it is both at the same time.

 

[superbot]

If Scotland gained independance then who would they then hate,the English now being gone?.... (as it were) that's what I want to know!!!!!!

 

[Jason]

If Scotland gained independance then who would they then hate,the English now being gone?.... (as it were) that's what I want to know!!!!!!

At the moment the Scots tend to blame the English for everything that is wrong in Scotland. Sometimes they are right, sometimes wrong. An independent Scotland would have to start blaming Scotland for everything that is wrong in Scotland.

Please can the English have a vote on Scottish independence?

 

[hud01]

sounds like the problem we're having -- massive influx from the failed policies of the liberal welfare States on either coasts (New York & California) flooding into the only State of the Union that had positive job growth during the last few years (Texas)

secession and independence might be good idea for both England and Texas

And you do know that the northeast is a net exporter of tax dollars to the rest of the country. If New England, New York and New Jersey left the union, our tax rates would be significant'y lower.

But Texas ignorance has always topped that.

 

[123scotty]

If Scotland gained independance then who would they then hate,the English now being gone?.... (as it were) that's what I want to know!!!!!!

this scottish hate english people becomes quite wearing. it is not english people that are to blame its the westminster system. what other country has no control over its own resources and tax. scottish people are fed up watching the big strings being pulled by westminster. and yes when scotland becomes independent maybe the fact there is only ourselves to blame might just get thing s working again. ps if there were no germany who would england hate ? and also no scotland would probably mean a torry government for shure in england for years to come.