Readers' Letters RSS Feed


Questions to answer over independence

THREE-hundred years ago, on January 16, 1707, the Scottish Parliament voted in favour of ratification of the Treaty of Union with England. On April 28 the Scottish Parliament was dissolved by proclamation. Three days later the state of Great Britain formally came into existence.

As a newborn, independent nation, Scotland would have to have its own currency. Which currency would it have? Not the pound underwritten by the Bank of England, perhaps the euro with all of its frailties and uncertainties? Or how about its own currency? How would that work? Would The Royal Bank of Scotland be the equivalent of The Bank of England? Well no, because the taxpayer has an interest in the bank after Fred the Shred ran the bank into the ground with some “unusual”

banking practices that relied upon Westminster for a bailout in order to survive.

Would Scotland apply for Commonwealth membership or qualify for EU membership? The track record of the EU appears to allow in any country that is lacking politically and economically, so perhaps they would be granted membership and qualify for billions of euros of aid, just like Ireland did.

It is likely that Scots would have to have some sort of identification. A Scottish passport, or a Scottish drivers’ licence for starters. Would Scots be entitled to benefits? People from a country outside the EU may not qualify. What about residency qualifications? Would Scottish prisoners in jails be sent back home? What of Scots serving in the armed forces? Would they be employed as mercenaries?

What of other crown jobs such as the civil service, intelligence services, naval dockyard workers etc? Would Westminster repatriate jobs and employment back to England, Wales and Northern Ireland? Near full employment at the expense of the Scots would perhaps be a by-product of independence.

The instability that independence could cause to Scotland could inhibit investment in such an unstable economy. While in England, growth and prosperity through a vibrant banking and financial system, with the money that was ploughed into the Scottish economy through of the Barnet Formula now possibly spent in England on free care, perscriptions and tuition fees as the Scots previously enjoyed sounds good.

In my view, devolved governments for all four home nations and an elected upper house would offer stability and strength for the coming challenges that face us all.

John Edwards, Hampshire chairman, English Democrats

Comments(2)

Home Rule for England says...
12:55pm Tue 24 Jan 12

Polls consistently show that English voters are fed up with the current devolution settlement. Many want an English Parliament and an English Government headed by an English First Minister to stand up for England. So what do Westminster politicians do? Respond sensibly with proposals to satisfy voters wants? No, they stick their fingers in their ears and pretend nothing is wrong.

Linesman says...
1:35pm Tue 24 Jan 12

With Scottish passports, would there be Scottish embassies, and how much would that cost to set up?

Who would be entitled to vote in this referendum?
Would Tax Exiles like Sean Connery get a vote?
If he does, what about Scots that have settled South of the border?
If residence is a qualification, would all the English submariners at Fasland be regarded as residents and get a vote?
Perhaps there would be a language qualification, and only those who spoke 'Jockanese' would get the vote.

click2find

Most popular






About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree