ORIGINAL: IronDuke
All you need is a common enough Demos. Where do you stop? Cornwall? Yorkshire? Devolution has been driven by fear of the right in Scotland. It isn't hard to see that sort of movement start in Northern England or parts of the Midlands. We have a democratic right to a vote, but then a democratic obligation to abide by it.
You don't split the country up because you don't like the current government.
It's not a question of not liking, it's a question of being ruled by what someone sees as a foreign power, which is going to get people's backs up. If your argument held sway nobody would ever secede, which is obviously false.
And I got no problem with an independent Cornwall if enough Cornish wanted as much. Who is to tell them they shouldn't? And what happens then if they don't listen to you? Tanks over the Tamar?
I disagree regarding open borders. SNP policy included a requirement to increase the influx of immigrants to make up for an aging population. England would not (indeed could not) have an open border with a country whose immigration policy was different to our own. Had the Scots gone on to join the EU, it is an open question whether they would have been obliged to apply the Schengen agreement (incorporated into EU LAW by the Amsterdam treaty as I understand it). We have an opt out, but would have been unable to compel Scotland to seek the same (I am not actually sure whether it is possible to opt out now).
The SNP would not necessarily be in charge of Scotland forever. Once independence was achieved the main purpose for their existence would be gone, in fact.
Also I'm not seeing a difference with British policy here. [:D]
Border controls would have been open within months of official separation if not before. The position of Ireland doesn't support your argument, since they opted out of Schengen area because they understand opting in would have meant ending the common travel area with Britain because it had opted out.
And no reason why Scotland can't do the same. Yes, I am aware of the treaties. The EU never really has done very well on being sticklers for procedure. Greece joined the Euro after all despite being in flagrant violation of the rules. With Scotland independent then deals would be made and rules bent, thats how the EU works. Bent, that is. [:'(]
There's no way the EU would go out of its way to punish Scotland. On the contrary, the EU would be eager to gobble Scotland up. The Spanish can moan about it but once Scotland is independent their views are irrelevant, it would no longer be a potential to be afraid of, but a fact of life to live with.
The Mutual defence arrangements were also a non starter. The Faslane issue would have poisoned any chance of that, and given the SNP have often been opposed to foreign intervention, the idea we could have had a common defence is a non starter. What if we had wanted to use the Army against IS but Scotland didn't?
Scotland would end up in NATO, so for wars that REALLY matter, ie wars of national survival, they would be there. Faslane, well, having our nuclear deterrent in a foreign country sounds crazy to me anyway, so yes, the nukes would have to be moved even from a friendly Scotland. Hardly the end of the world.
I think border controls were inevitable, and given the Scots were threatening to renege on the debt, this would have been a bitter separation that could have led to all sorts of things.
If the Scots reneged on the debt then it would be 'on' as they say, at least for a while. Of course for there to be an amicable divorce both parties need to be sensible. If they were not sensible then whatever, their loss, 5 million Scots vs 55 million English in a dispute, I know where my bets are being placed.
However, again look at Ireland. Civil war, bad blood aplenty, but relations were normalised very quickly. Mutual self interest will win out in the end.
