• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Scotland post-Brexit - what happens next?

Status
Not open for further replies.

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Either way, Scotland at least gets to stop spending money it doesn't have on a share of a vanity navy.
To be fair, the Royal Navy is the one branch of the armed forces were I'd say we punch above our weight.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,038
To be fair, the Royal Navy is the one branch of the armed forces were I'd say we punch above our weight.
I was thinking vanity navy in the context of nuclear subs and aircraft carriers. Scotland has rather a lot of that business at the minute, but it is at least expenditure we would no longer need to contribute to, since we wouldn't still be pretending to be a significant world power
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,188
Location
Wittersham Kent
To be honest I'm not sure how valuable any debates about economy sizes or the viability of individual nations is until we've seen the impact of Covid-madness and Brexit. The English economy may look a lot less healthy with a much-reduced financial sector.

It's also worth noting that the services sector is absolutely huge exporter both north and south of the border - just looking at heavy industry and suggesting that's all Scotland has is about 30 years out of date as a credible economic analysis.

On the defence contracts specifically, it's not clear that the rUK governments would move them all out of Scotland. It's also unclear that there's a long term future for the shipyards even in a united country. Either way, Scotland at least gets to stop spending money it doesn't have on a share of a vanity navy.
Its relatively certain that the GDP percentage between the nations won't change greatly as a result of either Brexit or Covid. Both will invariably have an impact on all 4 nations.

Unfortunately the strength of Scotlands Financial sector is primarily based on its relationship with the city of London and indeed the majority of services "exported" go to r uk. It doesn't seem logical to me that this would continue with Independence and a move to a different currency, this is especially true for the retail financial services which make up a lot of the Scots market.

Its absolutely clear to me that in the event of Independence the Ruk government won't be placing any contracts with the Scottish Yards. The effect that will have particularly on the Clyde Corridor is massive.

Where we are now it seems to me that Independence for Scotland would economically at least, be a blunder of extreme proportions.
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,038
Its relatively certain that the GDP percentage between the nations won't change greatly as a result of either Brexit or Covid. Both will invariably have an impact on all 4 nations.

Unfortunately the strength of Scotlands Financial sector is primarily based on its relationship with the city of London and indeed the majority of services "exported" go to r uk. It doesn't seem logical to me that this would continue with Independence and a move to a different currency, this is especially true for the retail financial services which make up a lot of the Scots market.

Its absolutely clear to me that in the event of Independence the Ruk government won't be placing any contracts with the Scottish Yards. The effect that will have particularly on the Clyde Corridor is massive.

Where we are now it seems to me that Independence for Scotland would economically at least, be a blunder of extreme proportions.
The Scottish financial sector is comparatively much smaller than the English one and as you say much more domestically focused. The fallout of Brexit will hit London and therefore England much more severely than it will Scotland. Under independence we most likely have a relationship with rUK which allows the Scottish financial sector to remain essentially unchanged. Failing that, Scotland rejoins the EU and rUK firms are no longer allowed to provide services in Scotland, which will essentially result in all the Scottish domestic business moving north, as well as a bunch of the people who want to transact across Europe in English.

Basically, England's incredibly valuable financial sector is in a lot of Brexit trouble irrespective of Scottish independence, while Scotland's less important financial sector will be less affected by Brexit, and may actually benefit from independence.

As to the shipyards, I think it's highly unlikely that the UK military will continue to throw piles of money into shipbuilding on the Clyde even if independence doesn't happen, so it's just not an important factor. If they do want something like that built post-independence though, they can either do it on the Clyde or somewhere even more abroad, so it's not at all a given that they would avoid the Clyde
 

LSWR Cavalier

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2020
Messages
1,565
Location
Leafy Suburbia
The Guardian reports that Ms Sturgeon plans yet another referendum is she wins the election this year
Could be good to achieve a result, one way or another
 

etr221

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2018
Messages
1,037
The Guardian reports that Ms Sturgeon plans yet another referendum is she wins the election this year
Could be good to achieve a result, one way or another
Methinks that, in the present climate, while a 'yes' vote (to independence) will settle the decision, leaving only the arguments about how it is achieved (that will occupy most of the next decade), a 'no' vote (for continued Union), will merely be precursor to the next referendum after another ten or so years of discussion...
 

eoff

Member
Joined
15 Aug 2020
Messages
441
Location
East Lothian
Methinks that, in the present climate, while a 'yes' vote (to independence) will settle the decision, leaving only the arguments about how it is achieved (that will occupy most of the next decade), a 'no' vote (for continued Union), will merely be precursor to the next referendum after another ten or so years of discussion...
Concerning the latter point, very much so, and this is why many in Scotland were so happy at the pronouncement of a once in a generation vote to avoid this.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Concerning the latter point, very much so, and this is why many in Scotland were so happy at the pronouncement of a once in a generation vote to avoid this.
Though, that came with the implicit (and at times explicit) promise that the Indyref settled not just our constitutional status but also our geopolitical status for that generation.

Not, as it turned out, for a little more than two years.
 

mcmad

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2015
Messages
977
Possibly, but the SNP never accepted the result and started the campaign for Indyref 2 from the next morning.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Possibly, but the SNP never accepted the result and started the campaign for Indyref 2 from the next morning.
Surprisingly, the party that exists to promote independence promoting independence.
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,545
Location
Elginshire
Possibly, but the SNP never accepted the result and started the campaign for Indyref 2 from the next morning.
Just as David Cameron proposed English votes for English Laws the very next morning. If there was ever a red rag to a bull...

C'mon then, let's hear your solutions. You previously asked where the money was coming from. The thread is about Scotland post-Brexit, and that need not be independence. The status quo is obviously untenable; show us your own magic bullet instead of constantly parroting the "naw, ye cannae" line.

I am sick to the back teeth of people going on about ship-building, oil and Faslane as if these were the sole industries keeping Scotland afloat (pun not intended) and how they'll be gone if we leave the union. Ship-building was ****ed a long time ago - what we have left is a bonus. Oil, while still fairly lucrative, is in decline and the proceeds of the boom years were squandered rather than being invested for future generations as Norway does. As for Faslane, I'd like to think that the government of a future independent Scotland would have a transition plan to move people into jobs that don't rely on having weapons of mass destruction on our doorstep.

We used to be a great mining nation. We were steelmakers. What happened to the transition plans there, eh? Just as swathes of England were devastated by de-industrialisation, many parts of Scotland were thrown to the wolves.

If you think that's okay it's fine - wallow in your own misery - but don't drag those who can see a better future down with you.
 

mcmad

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2015
Messages
977
Just as David Cameron proposed English votes for English Laws the very next morning. If there was ever a red rag to a bull...

C'mon then, let's hear your solutions. You previously asked where the money was coming from. The thread is about Scotland post-Brexit, and that need not be independence. The status quo is obviously untenable; show us your own magic bullet instead of constantly parroting the "naw, ye cannae" line.

I am sick to the back teeth of people going on about ship-building, oil and Faslane as if these were the sole industries keeping Scotland afloat (pun not intended) and how they'll be gone if we leave the union. Ship-building was ****ed a long time ago - what we have left is a bonus. Oil, while still fairly lucrative, is in decline and the proceeds of the boom years were squandered rather than being invested for future generations as Norway does. As for Faslane, I'd like to think that the government of a future independent Scotland would have a transition plan to move people into jobs that don't rely on having weapons of mass destruction on our doorstep.

We used to be a great mining nation. We were steelmakers. What happened to the transition plans there, eh? Just as swathes of England were devastated by de-industrialisation, many parts of Scotland were thrown to the wolves.

If you think that's okay it's fine - wallow in your own misery - but don't drag those who can see a better future down with you.
What great future? Where is the money coming from to pay for this better future? As you say we have been de-industrialised already, the oil money is gone. Stop living in the past and show a realistic plan for this better future as that is what will convince the people who voted No last time.
 

XAM2175

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2016
Messages
3,469
Location
Glasgow
EXCL: Boris Johnson is expected to visit Scotland this week as he ramps up his bid to save the UK from Nicola Sturgeon's indyref2 threat

In other news: firefighters attempt to save burning building by spraying it with petrol.

I expect regardless that, quite like last time, he'll fly into some remote RAF base, drive directly to a photoshoot with the one member of a Brexit-supporting industry that hasn't yet had their industry destroyed by Brexit, followed perhaps by a few moments of jovial japery with "local voters" who - completely co-incidentally - are all Tory unionists, then back home for supper.
 

mcmad

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2015
Messages
977


In other news: firefighters attempt to save burning building by spraying it with petrol.

I expect regardless that, quite like last time, he'll fly into some remote RAF base, drive directly to a photoshoot with the one member of a Brexit-supporting industry that hasn't yet had their industry destroyed by Brexit, followed perhaps by a few moments of jovial japery with "local voters" who - completely co-incidentally - are all Tory unionists, then back home for supper.
Surprisingly, the party that exists to promote independence the Union promoting independence. the Union. :rolleyes:
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,545
Location
Elginshire
What great future? Where is the money coming from to pay for this better future? As you say we have been de-industrialised already, the oil money is gone. Stop living in the past and show a realistic plan for this better future as that is what will convince the people who voted No last time.
How does any other nation in the world get money to pay for things? How does the UK as it stands get money to pay for things, eh?

I still haven't heard your solutions for how Scotland moves forward post-Brexit. Come on, put your cards on the table and come up with a positive vision.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Surprisingly, the party that exists to promote independence the Union promoting independence. the Union. :rolleyes:
It's not quite the same thing though, is it. The SNP constitution makes it clear that their raison-d'etre is Scottish independence. From the very first paragraphs of their constitution:
To be in the driving seat of our own destiny and to shape our own future is a natural desire. It is what we all hope for ourselves and it is what the SNP believes is right for Scotland.

We will achieve independence only when a majority of our fellow citizens are persuaded that it offers the best future for our country. Our success will depend on the strength of our arguments and the clarity of our vision. We have begun new work to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that independence is the best future for our country.

Whereas the Conservative party makes no such claim to being dedicated to preserving the Union, but rather to preserving their own interests:
PART I
NAME, PURPOSE, OBJECTS AND VALUES
1. This is the Constitution of a political party which shall be known as “The Conservative and Unionist Party” (referred to in this Constitution as “the Party”).
2. Its purpose is to sustain and promote within the Nation the objects and values of the Conservative Party
 

adrock1976

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
4,450
Location
What's it called? It's called Cumbernauld
Just as David Cameron proposed English votes for English Laws the very next morning. If there was ever a red rag to a bull...

C'mon then, let's hear your solutions. You previously asked where the money was coming from. The thread is about Scotland post-Brexit, and that need not be independence. The status quo is obviously untenable; show us your own magic bullet instead of constantly parroting the "naw, ye cannae" line.

I am sick to the back teeth of people going on about ship-building, oil and Faslane as if these were the sole industries keeping Scotland afloat (pun not intended) and how they'll be gone if we leave the union. Ship-building was ****ed a long time ago - what we have left is a bonus. Oil, while still fairly lucrative, is in decline and the proceeds of the boom years were squandered rather than being invested for future generations as Norway does. As for Faslane, I'd like to think that the government of a future independent Scotland would have a transition plan to move people into jobs that don't rely on having weapons of mass destruction on our doorstep.

We used to be a great mining nation. We were steelmakers. What happened to the transition plans there, eh? Just as swathes of England were devastated by de-industrialisation, many parts of Scotland were thrown to the wolves.

If you think that's okay it's fine - wallow in your own misery - but don't drag those who can see a better future down with you.

A quick comment here - last Friday 22 January at midday (GMT), the Treaty on the Prohibition on Nuclear Weapons that had been submitted to the United Nations came into force after 122 member states signed it with 50 so far having ratified it. Needless to say, the nine nuclear weapon states (China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russian Federation, UK, and USA) did not sign it. See https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/tpnw/

I do recall seeing somewhere that a report that was done by the Scottish Trades Union Congress more than 10 years ago had concluded with that should in the event that Trident is scrapped and not replaced, that there would only be 600 workers out of a five figure at Faslane that would not be transferred into a new manufacturing or engineering role in the renewables sector, or for the decommissioning and cleanup of the base. Most of those 600 would be people reaching retirement age or leaving for pastures new with those who have left or retired not being replaced.

Should if Scotland becomes independent in this new post-Brexit period, I can see Trident being scrapped sooner than expected as out of the political parties in Scotland, only the SNP and the Scottish Green Party have a party position agreed at conference for the scrapping of Trident. However, where the SNP and the SGP differ is that back in 2012, the SNP conference narrowly agreed for an independent Scotland to also be a member of NATO, which in my view, would make it slightly harder for Trident to be scrapped. NATO is also a front for the proliferation of USA tactical nuclear weapons being as they are the dominant member, and it is only in recent years that Germany have managed to get them removed off their soil, and in the UK, the base at Lakenheath eventually had them removed.

Moving on, I would like to see what is going to happen with the State Pension and the retirement age. Even though I am still a way off from retirement, I would not like there to be any further mucking about (i.e. increasing the age further) with it. Rather, I would like it to take into account of average life expectancy, as parts of Scotland have low life expectancy rates. I posted in another thread a while ago that the report that the World Health Organisation did around 2009 had the Calton area of Glasgow has having the lowest life expectancy where it is not expected to live beyond 56 years of age. For someone who resides in the Calton who is in paid work and pays National Insurance Contributions, with the present retirement age being 67 (soon to increase further), this means that although they have paid towards their State Pension, they will not live long enough to actually receive a penny of it.
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,038
Moving on, I would like to see what is going to happen with the State Pension and the retirement age. Even though I am still a way off from retirement, I would not like there to be any further mucking about (i.e. increasing the age further) with it. Rather, I would like it to take into account of average life expectancy, as parts of Scotland have low life expectancy rates. I posted in another thread a while ago that the report that the World Health Organisation did around 2009 had the Calton area of Glasgow has having the lowest life expectancy where it is not expected to live beyond 56 years of age. For someone who resides in the Calton who is in paid work and pays National Insurance Contributions, with the present retirement age being 67 (soon to increase further), this means that although they have paid towards their State Pension, they will not live long enough to actually receive a penny of it.
There's some logic to the principle that Scotland could either have a lower retirement age, or reap the benefits of having a smaller economically-inactive population. It's worth pointing out though that the life expectancy at birth was 56. That still typically leaves more than half of people living to older than that age. If it is being driven by high deaths at younger ages then it can mean that the typical adult stands to live to significantly more than 56, and in fact that by the time people have paid in a significant amount of NI contributions they can expect to live to the same ripe old age as people elsewhere.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
I was thinking vanity navy in the context of nuclear subs and aircraft carriers. Scotland has rather a lot of that business at the minute, but it is at least expenditure we would no longer need to contribute to, since we wouldn't still be pretending to be a significant world power

The nuclear submarine force makes up by far the lions share of actual Royal Navy combat capability.

Indeed nuclear submarine forces are actually really quite cheap to operate per unit combat power due to not paying fuel costs and not having large crews.
A minimum self defence navy would probably get even more slanted towards submarines.

Either way, the experience of Ireland demonstrates that Treaty Ports are functionally useless without the cooperation of the hosting government, which means that Faslane and Coulport will have to be evacuated of all moveable equipment and most of the remainder demolished. (There is too much sensitive stuff at Faslane and Coulport to allow them to fall into the hands of an unfriendly power).

For myself, given that I have no interest to try and hold a group of people who don't want anything to do with me in a union, the evacuation and replacement of the strategic force bases are the only thing I actually care about.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
2,544
Location
North West
It is open to question whether Boris should have visited Scotland during lockdown while non-essential travel is advised against if even allowed.

Anyway, for all the talk of Boris being unpopular in Scotland, let's look at the result of the General Election he held as Prime Minister in 2019. Despite the pledge to get Brexit done, which Scotland voted against in 2016, the Conservatives held 6 seats, which is more than in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2010 and 2015 put together. Admittedly they did lose seats compared to 2017.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Anyway, for all the talk of Boris being unpopular in Scotland, let's look at the result of the General Election he held as Prime Minister in 2019. Despite the pledge to get Brexit done, which Scotland voted against in 2016, the Conservatives held 6 seats, which is more than in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2010 and 2015 put together. Admittedly they did lose seats compared to 2017.
I suspect that is much more down to the quality of the candidates than any love of Boris.

I know it's dangerous to extrapolate from a single data point, but one of my friends is very much against everything that the Tories stand for (he's a Bernie Sanders fan to give you an idea of his politics), yet he voted for Douglas Ross. Not because Ross is a Tory, rather in spite of it because (in the words of my friend) he appears to genuinely work to better his constituency, ahead of party ideology.
 

adrock1976

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
4,450
Location
What's it called? It's called Cumbernauld
I suspect that is much more down to the quality of the candidates than any love of Boris.

I know it's dangerous to extrapolate from a single data point, but one of my friends is very much against everything that the Tories stand for (he's a Bernie Sanders fan to give you an idea of his politics), yet he voted for Douglas Ross. Not because Ross is a Tory, rather in spite of it because (in the words of my friend) he appears to genuinely work to better his constituency, ahead of party ideology.

Was Ross the one where he got pulled up for spending more time being a football referee than time spent on Holyrood duties?
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Was Ross the one where he got pulled up for spending more time being a football referee than time spent on Holyrood duties?
Yes, he's the one who is/was a football referee though I suspect the "more time on football" thing was political mud-slinging rather than actual fact. :)
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,574
Location
Glasgow
It is open to question whether Boris should have visited Scotland during lockdown while non-essential travel is advised against if even allowed.

I would have the same view no matter if it was Boris, Nicola, Mark or Arlene. I work with an organisation that provides back end support to the NHS and we are doing absolutely everything to perform actions remotely even when it’s more costly, time consuming and difficult. I don’t like it, no one does. Whether you think the current restrictions are proportionate or not I do think our leaders have a duty to be very strict with themselves on adhering to the message they (are told to) give out.

As to whether Boris is that unpopular, purely anecdotally I just walked past some anti-Boris graffiti dubbed across a billboard while on my way back from the shop! I have not seen anything like that in years.
 

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
1,800
Location
Way on down South London town
Just as David Cameron proposed English votes for English Laws the very next morning. If there was ever a red rag to a bull...

C'mon then, let's hear your solutions. You previously asked where the money was coming from. The thread is about Scotland post-Brexit, and that need not be independence. The status quo is obviously untenable; show us your own magic bullet instead of constantly parroting the "naw, ye cannae" line.

I am sick to the back teeth of people going on about ship-building, oil and Faslane as if these were the sole industries keeping Scotland afloat (pun not intended) and how they'll be gone if we leave the union. Ship-building was ****ed a long time ago - what we have left is a bonus. Oil, while still fairly lucrative, is in decline and the proceeds of the boom years were squandered rather than being invested for future generations as Norway does. As for Faslane, I'd like to think that the government of a future independent Scotland would have a transition plan to move people into jobs that don't rely on having weapons of mass destruction on our doorstep.

We used to be a great mining nation. We were steelmakers. What happened to the transition plans there, eh? Just as swathes of England were devastated by de-industrialisation, many parts of Scotland were thrown to the wolves.

If you think that's okay it's fine - wallow in your own misery - but don't drag those who can see a better future down with you.

100% agree-deindustrialisation did and continued to be sociologically traumatic to the whole UK.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
100% agree-deindustrialisation did and continued to be sociologically traumatic to the whole UK.
I think it's important to expand on that:
The way that successive UK governments mismanaged deindustrialisation was and continues to be traumatic to the whole UK.
Other countries handled the economic changes of the latter half of the 20th century onwards much better than we did.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
I think it's important to expand on that: Other countries handled the economic changes of the latter half of the 20th century onwards much better than we did.

Well if you go to Eastern Europe I can find many places that did a great deal worse.
Also the US.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top