Forum menu
Scotland’s doesn’t need a federal UK. It needs to be independent and a member of the EU.
Anti-English sentiment has always been a part of Scottish life, it’s a low key marker of frustration. But it’s not the driver for independence. The driver for independence is the unbalanced power relationships that have existed historically between Westminster and the Scottish people.
Brexit has demonstrated a significant cultural divide across the UK. It’s not unreasonable to ask the question whether it wouldn’t be appropriate for the Scots, Irish and Welsh to seek common purpose. What that might look like is an open question.
ctk
Also I think a federalised England plus Wales, Scotland & NI would be a better way to go.
With the best will in the world, it wouldn't work.
To address the issues we currently have, the states would have to have equal weight in a joint senate, and that would be unfair to England because democratically it outweighs all the others.
That is why we need independence, because at the moment England interests rightly get priority (democracy) within the UK, hence the situation where Scotland's democratic interests get over-ridden and we get taken out of the EU against the express will of Scotland's population.
I don't see any need for a Celtic Union when there is the EU or EFTA.
It’s not for nothing, however, that Pembrokeshire gets called ‘Little England Beyond Wales’. Rich Home Counties folk who buy second homes in Cornwall, then retire there, don’t become Cornish just because of their new postcode either.
Pembrokeshire is called that because of its history - nothing to do with second home owners.
@epic when I said a federalised England I meant England being split up to parts aswell.
London, SE, SW, Midlands, NE, NW or whatever makes sense population wise maybe the Midlands need to be split in half aswell?
we get taken out of the EU against the express will of Scotland’s population
There are other parts of the UK that feel just as strongly. I guess for all of them the question is whether there is a legal, viable and justified administrative reorganisation that can address the grievance.
Anti-English sentiment has always been a part of Scottish life, it’s a low key marker of frustration.
Speak for yourself, because you're certainly not speaking for me or anyone I know.
Yet you are allowed to speak for everybody in Scotland.
Anti-English sentiment has always been a part of Scottish life, it’s a low key marker of frustration.
Its wrong to deny it exists among the population. Its not particularly widespread or overt.
My personal preference is for a properly federal uk. As Ctk said - an England split into it parts - units of 5-10 million perhaps? Northumbria Wessex etc- revive the old names Greater london becomes a city state in effect.
However thats pie in the skye and I have never seen a federal UK solution that look remotely feasible
Otherwise Scotland will vote for independence sooner or later and personally - I'd rather do it sooner. the less time we spend out of the EU the better.
I am sure a united Ireland is not far away as well
Bit of a silly idea, particularly since an IS would rejoin the EU anyhow. So a Celtic union is a bit redundant.
And Wales, looks like is forever locked to England anyhow..
Basques
The Basques aren't Celtic.
In that case let's forget about Celtic and make it all about Totally Awkward Bastards. Kills three birds with one stone- broadens the possible partnerships, maintains the essential trade access to Mondraker bikes, and means that TJ will always have a home here regardless of extradition treaties, pogroms etc.
The Huns will never go for it.
🙂
My mistake Seosamh.
And Wales, looks like is forever locked to England anyhow..
Maybe, maybe not.
The U.K. / England has a weird relationship with the Celtic Nations. Whenever Independence or devolution comes up it’s always “you’re a drain on the rest of us, you get more than you put in, you’ll be doomed without us” you’d think they’d being dying to get rid.
If Scotland goes, and I reckon given a ref they will and the Eu welcomes them with open arms, Wales my follow.
If there’s a fundamental difference between England and the rest of the U.K. it’s that England is the only part that wants to a big deal on the world stage. A lot of the rest would be happy being a smaller nation that doesn’t ‘have’ try to throw its weight around on the world stage.
P-jay
...A lot of the rest would be happy being a smaller nation that doesn’t ‘have’ try to throw its weight around on the world stage.
Especially when that involves killing people in distant countries in their own homes.
epicyclo
Subscriber
P-jay
…A lot of the rest would be happy being a smaller nation that doesn’t ‘have’ try to throw its weight around on the world stage.Especially when that involves killing people in distant countries in their own homes.
Aye the Scots have never been involved in that. 😆
seosamh77
Aye the Scots have never been involved in that.
Indeed, we were sold that as Britannia bringing enlightenment and civilisation to the savages while we ripped off their resources, and I'm sure we still have some knuckle-dragging types who think that's a good thing.
But nonetheless, being able to avoid being party to extra-territorial aggression and wars with our large neighbour for the [s]benefit of large corporations[/s] glory of the Empire can only be a good thing.
If there’s a fundamental difference between Tory England and the rest of the U.K. it’s that Tory England is the only part that wants to a big deal on the world stage. A lot of the rest of the population of the uk inc a fair amount of English would be happy being a smaller nation that doesn’t ‘have’ try to throw its weight around on the world stage.
FTFY.
Wee Krankie wants to be the first president of that there Scotland, not some spread-out Union.
globalti
Wee Krankie...
Sure you want to out yourself as a Daily Mail reader? 🙂
TBH he already has.
epicyclo
Subscriber
seosamh77
Aye the Scots have never been involved in that.Indeed, we were sold that as Britannia bringing enlightenment and civilisation to the savages while we ripped off their resources, and I’m sure we still have some knuckle-dragging types who think that’s a good thing.
But nonetheless, being able to avoid being party to extra-territorial aggression and wars with our large neighbour for the benefit of large corporations glory of the Empire can only be a good thing.
I wouldn't rule it out tbh, not beyond the imagination that scotland will be up for tagging along on a few jollies.
seosamh77
I wouldn’t rule it out tbh, not beyond the imagination that scotland will be up for tagging along on a few jollies.
I suspect we'd sooner spend the money making life better for our own people rather than spending it on ending the lives of people living in distant lands.
Three countries that are physically unconnected would struggle to form a union.
Add in their geopolitical disadvantages and it looks somewhat harder.
That’s why nearly all the small central and Eastern European countries are acutely aware of how important it is for them to be integral members of the EU and NATO
This exactly.
Let's not forget that as independent countries they would need some form of military even if they weren't planning on going to war.
epicyclo
I suspect we’d sooner spend the money making life better for our own people rather than spending it on ending the lives of people living in distant lands.
You would, didn't know you spoke for the whole voting public though...
Alot of things will happen post independence that I suspect alot of nationalists are gonny take the hump at!
Alot of things will happen post independence that I suspect alot of nationalists are gonny take the hump at!
I look forward to that day Seosamh, Scotland can then start to function like any normal country
If you look at the more genuinely Welsh areas
You just need to look across the water to see how arguments like that work out.
Where is the new boarder(s) going to be, or are you just suggesting ethnic cleansing?
Let’s not forget that as independent countries they would need some form of military even if they weren’t planning on going to war.
Ireland has an army which deploys regularly for the UN, not a massive one but Ireland is a neutral state.
From the op;
equitable political union.
I would say not a chance.
It’s all quite a novel idea, Scotland and Wales never gave much of a toss, quite the opposite when they as Britain occupied Ireland, but now you’ve shot yourselves in the foot that was just an English thang and we’re all celts together 🙂
seosamh77
You would, didn’t know you spoke for the whole voting public though…Alot of things will happen post independence that I suspect alot of nationalists are gonny take the hump at!
I don;t speak for the whole voting public, just like you don't. But as you well know there is little support for offensive military spending amongst those supporting independence, eg opposition to Trident, seeing no point in having aircraft carriers etc so we can "punch above our weight".
I don't know any independence supporters who are not realistic about post independence. For starters the Frankenstein party of the SNP will fracture along normal political lines, but the nice thing is we'll be getting the government we choose.
Independence is normal.
From a neutral (live in Manchester) point of view I'm not sure what a celtic union would practically improve because all nations within it would want their own parliament, unless it's just to share a President ? It'll be hilarious watching the royal family get the hump when they realise they aren't going to be wanted in Scotland. Take Balmoral and all the land back 🙂
Ads678 got it right, most people in England are thoroughly dissatisfied with the Westminster clique too.
all nations within it would want their own parliament, unless it’s just to share a President
That's the biggest thing I have never understood about the UK: the non-federalist assumption.
In Canada, where I originally come from, you have ten provinces and three territories. The provinces each have their own parliamentary assemblies with their own prime ministers, their own tax-raising powers, their own approach to education (the limits for which seem to be imposed by Canadian convention alone), their own right to budget for and administer 'medicare' (as long as every citizen can access it free at point of use), etc., etc.
The Parliament in Ottawa, then, deals with monetary policy, foreign affairs, the military, the national police and security, facilitating inter-provincial relations, national highways, national parks, etc.
And to be clear, not every province is even close to equal in terms of population, history, economy, etc. Appointments to the Upper Chamber (the Senate) equalise the regions at the national level, as to 'equalisation payments' to the provinces from national coffers, in order to bolster the economic life of provinces with smaller budgets.
Why couldn't this work in a hypothetical Celtic Union, or even in today's UK? We make such a big deal of devolution, but it actually works in federated countries. Then Scotland could fly the EU flag all it wanted, because it would have right to do so.
You have not explained why, after hundreds of years of fighting for independence, one million dead in the famine a massive diaspora but now a relatively vibrant, much more tolerant than the UK, society Ireland would want to throw its hat back in with 2/3s of the oppressors when it is perfectly happy with the EU.
I thought Quebec wanted out anyway?
Good point Saxon, probably should have adopted that model when setting up the Scottish and welsh assemblies and done it properly for all regions of the UK - but of course the Westminster gravy train would be examined as a result...
I thought Quebec wanted out anyway?
Quebec has wanted out at times, and there remains a strong minority of folk in Quebec who still do. There are, however, a number of features to the Quebec situation that need to be made sense of when thinking about them in relation to the UK.
What Quebec has always wanted - primarily - is to be recognised as the nation it is. For whatever reason, this has been important to the Quebecois(es), and when Canada passed a motion to this effect, it softened quite a bit of dissatisfaction.
What keeps Quebec onside is precisely the fact that it can do what it wants, even to the point of having only one official language when the provinces have two. This is something they can do legitimately on the basis of the 'Notwithstanding Clause' in the Canadian Constitution. On top of this, they also have their own trade offices in places like New York and Paris, and act pretty much like an autonomous country.
What they could not do on their own, for example, is to reject the Crown, as that would be a Federal matter.
In any case, what I am saying is that federalism seems to work, even when using Quebec as an example.
epicyclo
Subscriber
seosamh77
You would, didn’t know you spoke for the whole voting public though…Alot of things will happen post independence that I suspect alot of nationalists are gonny take the hump at!
I don;t speak for the whole voting public, just like you don’t. But as you well know there is little support for offensive military spending amongst those supporting independence, eg opposition to Trident, seeing no point in having aircraft carriers etc so we can “punch above our weight”.
I don’t know any independence supporters who are not realistic about post independence. For starters the Frankenstein party of the SNP will fracture along normal political lines, but the nice thing is we’ll be getting the government we choose.
Independence is normal.
Posted 3 days ago
I know, but independence supporters are only half the equation, never mind being a diverse bunch within themselves.
Not arguing against independence, just saying I do think some people will get a bit of a reality check when it happens.
I'm a completely pro nuclear independence supporter for example. I wouldn't spend money on trident, but I would quite happily rent out faslane though, and build mixed renewables and nuclear energy system.
gordimhor
I look forward to that day Seosamh, Scotland can then start to function like any normal country
Me tae.