Don't know much about this at all. IF Scotland was to have another referendum, has anything in their economy changed to put them in a stronger position. At face value , and as I said I don't know a lot about the details, could they end up in a 'lose-lose' situation? Again, these may not be true and are just assumptions on my part: 1 Declining oil revenues (far lower than the SNP claimed during the independence referendum) 2 Loss of financial support from Westminster 3 Not sure if Scotland are Asset rich enough to stand alone without oil revenue. Whilst they punch above their weight when it comes to Entrepreneurial spirit, engineers, scientist etc. what revenue earning exports do they have besides whisky, fishing industry (Steel and shipbuilding long since declined) tourism excellent universities to draw foreign students. Can they generate enough income to go it alone? 4 Naval dockyards would relocate to UK so loss of jobs 5 Probably no automatic right to inherit EU membership so would have to initiate process and pass all checks for suitability so no EU grants supports etc for the duration (No idea how long it takes even BBC unclear as to fast track timeframe) 6 The costs of setting up a new currency (pretty sure the SUK would not countenance them using Sterling) 7 Presumably border controls would have to be set up as not only would they be outside the SUK but EU members (assumng they are accepted) when SUK is outside the EU Perhaps someone with more knowledge and understanding of these points can confirm or dismiss but it appears to me that their decision to leave if taken would be heart over head
I agree, it would be heart over head, and we all know how dangerous that sort of decision can be, don't we.
It depends on what trade agreements we can squeeze out of the EU. If they aren't too good and Scotland can access single market then we could lose a lot of trade to them. Scottish people voted to remain believing it to be the best economic option. So I guess it would be a mixture of both head and heart.
Tell you what, that one would be just as complex to negotiate as the Article 50 terms! All the arguments would resurface about who 'owned' the oil, and whether one country should reimburse the other for development costs, etc. There was debate last time about whether oil revenue would make Scotland independently viable - but we're two years further down the 'declining supplies' road and the price per barrel is lower than it was then. Of course there's the decline of the £ against the $ since Friday to factor in - Scotland said last time it would keep the £! There are many many more factors, but economically I think they'd struggle.
In order to keep the Union together we are left hoping that financially Scotland would be up the creek without a paddle if they separate. However, they're going to lose a lot in EU subsidies. I don't know the way it's weighted I'm afraid. I'm pretty sure that of the 350 million we spent and got half straight back a chunk went to underdeveloped UK regions. Scotland will now be reliant on Westminster to continue allocating it to them from the savings. But...hang on......the 350 million....that's all going on the NHS isn't it? I was born British, love Scotland as a country, have always seen myself as British rather then English and now it looks like we've done our best to bundle them towards the exit door. I guess it's fitting. The English have clearly demonstrated they don't like foreigners.
I'm not sure Scots necessarily voted for the economic option..had the debate with Arabian Ian...I'd noticed that the Remain vote was identical to the Yes to independence vote ...1.6 m , I wonder if it's possible that that vote was largely the SNP voter...endorsing the SNP? The turnout in Scotland was much lower for this referendum with almost a million fewer people voting....votes that might suggest they were committed enough to the Union...but for whatever reason not committed to either Leave or Remain ...it's a conundrum Nicola Sturgeon will have to consider more carefully than any she has done before.
