Do you think the English, if given a vote, would vote for independence from the rest of the UK?

[Kendodd]

Yabu - No they wouldn't
Yanbu - Yes they would

The break up of the UK seems high chance to me, maybe 60/40 to be voted for within the next ten years. They don't ever seem to ask the English what would you personally vote?

Everyone I am joking! I love Scotland as spouse did masters in Edinburgh University for years. I am based in London and yes Edinburgh would be my second or alternative choice city if only the weather was more manageable.

Scotland has historically produced some amazing inventions and smart minds and without this proud unique part of the UK we would all stand to be less fortunate! Scotland is world class in many products like textiles and food and drink and I can't understand why some Scots dislike a few in Westminster when most English I know love our Scottish friends and neighbours.

We are all United Kingdom!

@LexMitior

Well you can experiment with the name - technically if Scotland left, there would not be Great Britain, but I think you can still have the United Kingdom.. it just runs a bit differently

The United Kingdoms of England and Wales and Northern Ireland. So we are still the UK, but we aren't "Great Britain".

Well you can experiment with the name - technically if Scotland left, there would not be Great Britain,

Yes there would. We wouldn't be moving Scotland anywhere. 'Great Britain' is a geographical term for the largest of the British Isles. The Isle of Wight, for instance, is not part of Great Britain.

@ResIpsaLoquiturInterAlia

How about the one and only separatist to have her own little off shore island! Called it Nicola Sturgeonland or something to befit her ego and the SNP seemingly single purpose party which is possibly only liked by half of Scotland and no friend of all other Brits. The legally binding Scottish referendum speaks volumes as with Brexit. You can't have perpetual no time barred all you can eat referendums until you can eat all the cake (and drink all the whiskey)!

Joking lovely Scots! Just a bit of jest!

Fucking hilarious. Aren't you a hoot

I'm a unionist. I have no time for sturgeon or the snp but my god some of the shite on this thread is showing why some people want independence.

Disgusting the amount of open hatred shown on this thread.
BTW Resp jest or not, it's whisky. Not whiskey

@TheSandman

There is a legal distinction between Great Britain and then in the pure sense of geography - not relevant in the legal sense. The Acts of Union create "Great Britain" as geographic but legal concept. If Scotland left the Union, you would then need to correct the name of the United Kingdom to reflect that the Act of Union no longer operated as law, and that the territorial extent of the United Kingdom excluded Scotland.

That new United Kingdom would for instance, include the Isle of Wight, which does not have a legal status independent of England and Wales and would be subsumed within that territory.

Its only a point as to how you could do it - not a statement of intent. I am pro union.

Not vote to leave, but support independence of the other countries if they wanted it. They seem to bring very little to the table

@morninglive

Not vote to leave, but support independence of the other countries if they wanted it. They seem to bring very little to the table

Comments like this are part of why independence is gaining popularity.

There is a legal distinction between Great Britain and then in the pure sense of geography - not relevant in the legal sense. The Acts of Union create "Great Britain" as geographic but legal concept.

Which it WAS called until 1801 but then became The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and then later The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Most people call it The United Kingdom. The 'great' in Great Britain has never had anything to do with Britain's greatness (in the Trumpy sense) only that it is the largest island in the archipelago.

I would vote to retain the union given the chance.
However, I think the way devolution has happened in the past is flawed. The devolved nations are the child to the Westminster parent. This is not their fault...devolution was not done properly IMO.

I would like to see more of an equal relationship with the devolved administrations being honest about why they need to be part of the U.K. and the U.K. being honest about why they need the DAs.

The relationship would work better if there was accountability on all sides. Currently it feels as though Westminster keeps giving money and is always told it is not enough.

We should alter the way devolution works but keep the union.

@mellongoose did you ever consider that those devolved nations are actually countries in their own right invaded by England? Did you ever consider that the devolved nations might not want to be under the control of their oppressor nor contribute in any way to the furthering of England? England has systematically ensured that the other countries in Britain detest them, England will end up very alone if the citizens continue this way.

England will end up very alone if the citizens continue this way.
We do seem to be going out of our way to piss off everyone around us. I think its absolutely criminal the was we've treated Ireland (all of it) in the last few years. The English are going to have blood on their hands (and I don't mean in an historical sense) and the worse of it, is that we really don't give a shit.

Seems the whole Westminster dark arts machine has been mobilised against Scotxit .. with Michael Gove in charge ...

A furious dispute inside Downing Street over the UK government’s strategy to counter growing calls for Scottish independence has resulted in the departure of Boris Johnson’s chief adviser on the union.

Government officials confirmed Luke Graham, the former MP for Ochil and South Perthshire from 2017 to 2019, was quitting the post and that Oliver Lewis, a key Tory figure in last year’s Brexit trade negotiations, would be leading what one of the officials said would be a “beefed-up union unit”.

The Number 10 row which resulted in Mr Graham’s exit erupted last Friday — a day after Mr Johnson visited Scotland to bolster support for the three centuries old union.

“It was fairly brutal,” admitted one government insider. Mr Lewis’s role will be central to Number 10’s efforts to counter the Scottish National Party.

One Scottish Tory said: “Luke was the only one who gets Scotland in there, it’s a big shame he’s gone and speaks to their total lack of a strategy on how to deal with the SNP.”

Mr Graham will now move to Scotland to assist the Scottish Tory party’s campaign for May’s Holyrood elections.

Thing is, I don't know why the Tories want to preserve the Union. Polling of their members shows they don't care. If they do break up the union, that basically means Tory rule in Westminster for ever, they will have worked this out. The problems untangling it of cause remain, but I don't thing they'd care very much.

It's basically because Scotland brings more to the table than they dare to admit. The politicians know it.

Why do you think Boris used to be very anti-Scotland, calling the Union 'laughable', but now that he's in a position to be given more information, is fighting to save it?

Too many valuable assets would have to be negotiated and potentially lost or partially lost depending on the settlement. Oil of course, but also fishing waters, Trident (there is no suitable location in England), Crown Estate land, etc.

What England would do with Trident isn't Scotland's problem to be honest.

How would assets be 'lost'? What would happen to them? Surely the oil and fishing waters and land would still be there? Who would lose them?

@OlmostOlwyn

Too many valuable assets would have to be negotiated and potentially lost or partially lost depending on the settlement. Oil of course, but also fishing waters, Trident (there is no suitable location in England), Crown Estate land, etc.

Luckily Brexit has demonstrated that nothing is too difficult if it's the will of the people, so that's a non issue.

I don't think its impossible to deal with these matters, is it? You can work around them. An independent England would have to make some difficult decisions. Yes you would need to maintain a nuclear presence elsewhere. I've no doubt that the decision to maintain the Union is chiefly because the costs of handling Scotland leaving outweigh any current imbalance of what Scotland can contribute to the UK. That is the point of the Union after all.

Anyway, Scotland would be very limited in what it could do while it did "negotiate" its way out. Its one thing that seems never to really be discussed and is slightly odd. There is an implicit assumption it would be done in a friendly way or some basis of equality - I don't think so on the basis of the current situation.

An independent England would have to make some difficult decisions.

That's not really the issue. The issue is that an independent Englands decisions will only shit on the English - and that's what the Tories are terrified of. They'll have run out of places to hide the blame sausage anymore.

Well that is politics, isn't it? You will piss someone off. Politicians do this all the time. If independent England has advantages (for the people that politicians feel matter) then it will happen. Any political decision has disadvantages.

Also the Tories have a pretty good line in being quite nasty in England - I don't think history looks like they are too worried about that. Part of the complaint is sometimes we are innately "conservative with a small c".

I get that politicians don't want it, but actually, they are not in charge of this. Voters are.

Think all 4 nations are stronger in what has been a hugely successful and long lasting Union, but the north of England/ South West does worse than the countries taking a significant subsidy from the South East, and there is a relative democratic deficit in England (MPs from other nations potentially voting on English issues).

Be great if devolved parliaments weren't so incentivised to moan about London politicians while running their public services into the ground and frittering cash from taxpayers in other parts of the country.

Given current oil prices, and the glut, plus the growth of renewables, North Sea Oil isn't financially viable. The Barnett Formula pays £1,800 pa per capita more towards Scottish taxpayers than English. The nuclear bases would likely move to the SW (where the Navy wanted them in the 1960s), and there are a lot of questions to be answered about a future Scottish currency. It's by no means certain that Westminster would wish to share sterling. And the really large elephant in the room: does the EU want another non-contributory member?

@Kendodd

Thing is, I don't know why the Tories want to preserve the Union. Polling of their members shows they don't care. If they do break up the union, that basically means Tory rule in Westminster for ever, they will have worked this out. The problems untangling it of cause remain, but I don't thing they'd care very much.

I agree with you, but I think it boils down to two things. First, it would be hugely expensive and create endless headaches, a big distraction from the usual Tory agenda. Second, it's terrible for UK prestige abroad, losing part of your own country.

I think the Tories could muddle through a united Ireland, its members really do not care about Northern Ireland, there is a geographic separation, Ireland would end up bearing so many of the costs. The Tories might even get a boost internationally for supporting a peaceful process. But Scotland and Wales leaving would be a nightmare on many fronts.

I agree with you, but I think it boils down to two things. First, it would be hugely expensive and create endless headaches, a big distraction from the usual Tory agenda.

See also: Brexit

Second, it's terrible for UK prestige abroad, losing part of your own country.

See also: Brexit.

Yes but the Brexiter narratives actually convinced people the opposite was true.

They were able to convince people that Brexit would save money and make life simpler, by being out of the EU.

They made it seem like the UK would gain in prestige and power by being out of the EU.

I don't think they were right but they did build a coherent narrative based on these two ideas, that a lot of people believed.

I think it would be harder to do that with the breakup of the UK. Not impossible though, which is why I said at the beginning that an effective propaganda campaign would probably lead to majority support for breakup.