Seil Chat

My feeling is that Independence is both welcome and increasingly inevitable.
A Tory victory in the upcoming General Election is, in my opinion, certain. That will mean that we will have a governing party which is virtually unrepresented in Scotland and the logic of Independence will become overwhelming.
So.
Anyone care to indulge in a little speculation as to what Independence will look like?
For a starter; how will the common assets of the U.K be divided?
Will they just be retained by the ongoing U.K. (England, Wales, and Northern Ireland) ?
Will we go through the same process as when British India was divided up into India and Pakistan?
Then common assets were divided up on basis of population. Civil Servants calculated, for example, the number of library books in British India and, then, on the creation of Pakistan they were crated up and delivered to each new country in proportion to their respective populations.
Would that be how it happens here?
If so our share would be about 5%
So, speculating, if The Royal Navy has 20 fisheries protection vessels we would get 1 and the U.K. would get 19.
Also, would the liabilities of the U.K be divided up according to population?
If so we would take on an immediate debt of roughly £50 billion (5% of U.K.'s current debt of roughly £1 trillion)
Anyone else care to have a go at this speculation game?

Wow, big questions even to start speculating on, Longshanks. Need some time to ponder...be back in a couple of days, assuming my head doesn't explode in the interim.

The Scottish share of the UK debt would be pleasantly offset by gains from North Sea oil revenues; plus the Scottish wish not to spend truly vast sums of public money on nuclear weapons and international warfare (other than within a shared European context) would further bolster the budget relative to that of the rest of the UK. Yes, the positive resources could be split according to population, in which case I think that you are underestimating Scotland's share (more than 8%). Whatever, it's an exciting prospect. The inappropriateness of Tory rule in Scotland is highlighted today by their intention to penalise the ordinary punters at the expense of the bonus-earning bankers and big business men. We really do need to make our own decisions based on our own resources. Longshanks, thought you were off to Oz? Now there's a democracy to envy, eh?! They deserve you!

Hmm. These scenarios will depend upon who is in power in Westminster, what bargaining powers are brought to the table in the ensuing Gordian knot of horse-trading, and what the economic climate is at the time, and no doubt a raft of other things too. There are known knowns, and there are known unknowns, etc…

Regarding things like fishery protection, would one way to divvy up that not be in terms of the relative lengths of coastlines, rather than per head of population? In terms of financial debt, well, that would really, you’d think, have to be done in terms of population. As Scotland’s GDP (new figures will be out on Oct 21, I think, sans oil revenue) is actually generally fairly reasonable, we could probably deal with a debt of £50b. But there is also the possibility of Westminster and the treasury trying to financially hobble Scotland between now and then, as, I believe, was the case in the Dunfermline Building Society affair.

What should be kept out of the whole thing are emotive political appeals to ancient history, tradition, flag waving, bloodlines, etc., by all the political parties. These things are best left to the tourist industry. But should does not mean that these things won’t happen, of course, for as sure as Scotch eggs are Scotch eggs, they will, unless something radical happens in the political world between now and then.

But bearing in mind the distinct Scottish education and legal systems, not to mention the general secularism prevalent on both sides of the border here, I can’t foresee an India/Pakistan scenario developing in the follow up to, or aftermath of, any potential move towards autonomy (in as much as there can be such a thing as autonomy in these days of globalization). And, anyway, there seems little doubt that an independent Scotland would seek a place in the EU, and seek to adopt the Euro. If so, so be it.

But the point is, I think, that it would be good in the long run for the people of Scotland, of whatever origin, to feel that they were in some way more capable of self-determination; a loosening-off of the shackles of the past, of bad feeling and the tendency to negative self-definition based on who we are not. (And if we can get rid of that woeful song ‘Flower of Scotland’, so much the better; how about a tune that can actually be played properly on the bagpipes all the way through?)

Softly softly, catchee monkey…

RE: Fishery Protection

England doesn't currently have any fishery protection vessels per se...Defra hire the Royal Navy to do that for them...Scotland, on the other hand, has 4 dedicated FPV's and a couple aircraft...

I think it's also general knowledge that the majority of the UK's tonnage landed each year is done from Scottish waters and into Scottish ports...it'd be counter intuitive to divide the fishery protection assets thus...if you can call them assets...

Mind you, it’s maybe jumping the gun to assume that the Tories will certainly win the next Westminster election, although it does look somewhat likely. Going by their conference (even by the vacuous boot-camp-rhetoric and lowest-common-denominator-populism standards of political conferences) they really seem to be jumping the shark this year. Probably just following the increasingly execrable decline (if such is possible) of their blessed Telegraph over the last few months. But then, they have the readers of the Sun to pander to now, as well. Come to think on it, are there any decent newspapers left in Britain ?

Peter C wrote:What should be kept out of the whole thing are emotive political appeals to ancient history, tradition, flag waving, bloodlines, etc.,

Yes, Peter, lets try to keep all of that out of this discussion. Its been flogged to death anyway.
Lets work on the lines of answering the question "What will independence feel like?"
The only British cultural precedent we have to work from is the division of British India when all assets and liabilities were divided in proportion to respective populations.
Lets use that as a guide and use Spidey's figures of 8% Scotland, 92% the ongoing U.K.
Can we also assume that all current assets and liabilities (except legal and educational) are attributable to the current U.K as a whole?
So, here goes another speculation:
CURRENCY
As I see it we will have three options.
1. A purely Scottish currency.
Pros: We can control our own economy through interest rates and money supply.
Cons: Having to exchange money when leaving Scotland, exchange rate risks, isolation in times of economic crisis.
2. Continue using the pound sterling.
Pros: Backed by the financial strength (!!) of the U.K., trade with England and Wales and N.I simplified.
Cons: We don't have control of our own economy, it remains with Westminster.
3. Adopt the Euro
Pros. Backed by the financial strength of Frankfurt, easier trade with the EU.
Cons: We don't have control of our own economy
Problem: We may not be immediately allowed to join the E.U and the Euro because there are strict financial conditions in place before a country can join. There is always a lead in time to allow conditions (eg GDP/debt ratios, core inflation etc) to be met by the applicant
Personally, my opinion is that on independence we will have our own currency pro-tem while we go through the E.U and Euro application phases over a couple of years.
That's what I think Indepence will look like in terms of the money in our pockets

Nostra Shanks (profit by choice)

ps Spidey. I'm not off quite yet. It takes about nine months to get all the approvals, legal work etc done. Did I say Oz? Bonzer country, you may be right or maybe not.

so how do you intend peter without politicians
to negotiate an independent country.

you believe that people better qualified can do this
scottish generals are few in number and we dont want to go down that route anyway.

also it seems that the sheer human factor of greed will bring not politicians but their equal
out of the woodwork all over the place.

the english can be a pain but so too can of whatever race or religion
the bigot.

why not all pull together and get one set of beliefs on track before we
collectively or individually louse it all up for our children

teddy

Aye, Teddy. My comments re. the political class were largely, but not solely, aimed at Westminster, and not entirely at overthrowing, as it were, politicians, but to suggest that we have very good reasons to formulate an alternative in the face of the dogmatically held ‘democracy-through-party-political-governance-is-the-only-way’ stance. Because of the complete lack of an alternative, they do pretty much as they please. And, absolutely, with regards to not messing things up for our children, the future lies in an educational system which, from the earliest years, should incorporate critical thinking, to encourage children to question the media, not just to accept things because someone says it is so, and to consider to what consequences action X might lead. It has/is being tried, for example in Alloa, and the effects on learning and behaviour are promising, because children are learning of the positive value of considering others, and also of the consequences of their own actions.

Also, a number of people with considerable experience have left/been forced to leave institutions and organisations, despite proposing projects, in, say, prison reform, which have been proven to work, because ultimately politicians had turned a deaf ear to their proposals or vetoed them outright for political reasons. Many of those who could and would initiate real valuable and positive changes for society, and thus for the future of our children, are not the ego-driven types that modern politics demands, all flash and media-friendly pseudo-confidence. To initiate real change, a soft but steady and sure touch is preferable to the stomp and bluster of the specious sound-bite. Those with that steady touch and ability are effectively discriminated against in the current political climate.

The bases for getting everyone on the one track are known, for everyone has the same basic emotional value-system. These value-systems circle around ideas of respect and self-fulfilment. (I would direct anyone interested to Brooks and Goble’s The Case for Character Education: The Role of the School in Teaching Values and Virtues (1997), and to James Gilligan’s Violence: Reflections on Our Deadliest Epidemic (2000) for full explorations of some of the ideas being addressed here.) Money and possessions alone cannot fulfil these needs, as the ultimate failure and lie of retail therapy bears witness to. Also, deny people the right to be heard early in life, and their voice may rise through time to an angry resentful roar, and then to the language of violence. Violence thus creates anxiety, which creates more violence, etc. To quote Tom Hodgkinson, speaking at a conference on child safety and risk in Stirling a couple of days ago, ‘anxious people make the best consumers - but it is most decidedly not good as far as our mental health goes.’ The trouble is that education is now dictated by league tables and targets, as endorsed by politicians. And these league tables and targets are the products of economic models which bear no relation to how people really are. Thus the politicians that we elect are colluding in treating people, children, not even as people, but as numbers, as statistics. And we know where that can lead.

Eh?

Yes indeed, Mona. Looks like an interesting resource. Thanks.

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/

Ugh!

maybe orwell had it right
all animals are equal
but some are more equal than others.

alternative version for mona

ahm bigger than ye do as ye are tolt

teddy

Ouch!

Zzzz!

I tried, Eric

Without moral and intellectual independence, there is no anchor for national independence ~

Ben Gurion

Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

G.B.S.


TEDDY

.

Without moral and intellectual independence, there is no anchor for national independence

I thought this was a very relevant quote from Teddy, but no response for nearly a week. I finally couldn't resist the yachting metaphor

So - how well is the Scottish anchor set? Will it hold in the forthcoming storm of independence?

Lets hope admin that the

anchor for scottish independence is not the normal

W for politician.

TEDDY

Scottish share of the UK debt would be pleasantly offset by gains from North Sea oil revenues; plus the Scottish wish not to spend truly vast sums of public money on nuclear weapons and international warfare (other than within a shared European context) would further bolster the budget relative to that of the rest of the UK. Yes, the positive resources could be split according to population, in which case I think that you are underestimating Scotland's share (more than 8%). Whatever, it's an exciting prospect. The inappropriateness of Tory rule in Scotland is highlighted today by their intention to penalise the ordinary punters at the expense of the bonus-earning bankers and big business men. We really do need to make our own decisions based on our own resources

I suppose that all toxic debt incurred by the RBS group would of course be bourne by the english

TEDDY