A divided land
The YesScotland campaign website conducted an interesting thought experiment last week, turning the independence referendum question on its head by asking “If Scotland was still an independent nation, would you vote to join the Union?” It was an interesting and imaginative piece, penned by campaign head Blair Jenkins, and it got us pondering over which other aspects of the referendum might take on a different perspective if viewed a different way.
Recently, some Lib Dems have been reviving the bizarre and misinformed notion that Orkney and Shetland might remain in the UK if the rest of Scotland voted for independence but they didn’t. (It’s misinformed because those putting forward the idea attempt to claim that it would have serious consequences for Scotland’s oil resources, when in fact international law would attribute almost all of it to the newly-independent state even if the Northern Isles weren’t a part of it.)
In today’s Scotsman, the paper’s increasingly-unhinged comedy relief Michael Kelly takes the idea a step further, proposing that Glasgow might similarly declare itself an enclave of the UK in the event that it rejected independence but Scotland as a whole voted Yes. Normally one would assume he was joking, or at least half-joking, but in the context of the barely-coherent madness of the rest of the article such an assumption would be reckless, given that its main focus is to praise the contribution made to the debate by Lord Wallace Of Tankerness.
But what happens if you turn this curious argument on its head? What if we go along with Mr Kelly’s demand that the results of the referendum be regionalised, and divide the nation accordingly? (For as an Irish nationalist, we can surely take it as read that Mr Kelly is a big supporter of the concept of partition.)
If we can’t have the whole of Scotland independent at first, can we just start with (at a minimum, generously basing the territorial division on Westminster election results) Aberdeenshire, Angus, Perthshire and the Western Isles? Being the coastal regions, they’d of course still take most of the oil revenue. The Central Belt and the Borders could stay with London for a bit and see how they got on when Scotland was no longer a major revenue source to the Treasury.
We’d have all the oil, much of the coastline – and therefore the wind and wave resources – and nearly all the scenery (particularly if the impending electoral implosion of the Lib Dems delivered the Highlands and Argyll too). They’d have Shotts, Paisley, Dumbarton, Coatbridge, Niddrie and Cowdenbeath. It wouldn’t be the ideal scenario, of course, but to be honest, this blog could probably live with it.
“It’s misinformed because those putting forward the idea attempt to claim that it would have serious consequences for Scotland’s oil resources, when in fact international law would attribute almost all of it to the newly-independent state even in the Northern Isles weren’t a part of it.”
Source?
I have blogged on this tangentially. It’s a classic divide and conquer approach, which unfortunately pays no heed to the prevailing international law doctrine of uti possidetis juris. With the Balkans the Badinter commission was clear that “whatever the circumstances, the right to self-determination must not involve changes to existing frontiers at the time of independence (uti possidetis juris) except where the states concerned agree otherwise.” One self-determinative step at a time, please. wp.me/p2E6mD-q
@TheMaganator
See Map 2 on Page 105
http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/12/1/505.pdf
By the way, can we have Berwick-upon-Tweed back if we’re going down the divide and conquer route?
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/01/scotlandengland-maritime-boundaries/sea-grab/
Themaganator
You could do worse than make a start here, quite an authoritative source
Just read the article in question. Honestly it beggars belief that any politician could put pen to paper and produce such an article. It also stuns me that the editor saw it as being fit to print. I am going to have to open the windows now to get rid if the smell of stupidity that is still wafting about.
You could spend all day picking that drivel from Kelly apart. “So that’s another avenue of escape cut off” was an interesting turn of phrase though. Freudian slip perhaps?
As for having a general election right away, well that’s democracy for you. And no Westminster to turn to was pretty much the idea behind the Yes campaign in the first place! Surely they can do better than this muppet?
MajorBloodnok – thanks for the link to the map.
Have often thought most of the bottom two sections of Wings’ map will vote ‘No’.
So, if they want to stay, and the rest want to leave I am sure all would be happy with moving the border north.
Yes, and If you can tolerate that I’m sure you’ll be just as happy to allow independence to Cornwall.
“Yes, and If you can tolerate that I’m sure you’ll be just as happy to allow independence to Cornwall.”
If it is about self-determination and the will of the people – then why not?
“Have often thought most of the bottom two sections of Wings’ map will vote ‘No’. “
The bottom section, certainly. I wouldn’t be so sure about the next one up. Support for independence is strongest among the working class and the poor, and there are plenty of those in the central belt. The people most in favour of the Union tend to be those doing best out of things as they stand.
The article is just making fun of a ludicrous Unionist argument – I don’t think Yes and No votes will divide neatly down party lines by a long chalk, and Mr Kelly might be in for a nasty surprise re: his beloved Glasgow.
Yes – Massie wrote on the ‘Hampden Vs Murrayfield voters’ in the Spectator as I recall.
You are correct that voting wont go down party lines but dont think Edinburgh or Glasgow will vote Yes. We shall see.
Also, of course, the logical counterpoint of your “moving the border north” argument is that if we extend choice democratically, much of northern England would probably choose to join Scotland too, leading to an intriguing “Polish corridor” scenario…
Yes – democratically that’d be fine.
A Union with the English that wanted to leave the UK – it’d make for an interesting flag.
If they’re talking of partitioning Scotland how granular are they going to make this? Is it going to be on regional council level, Westminster constituency level, Holyrood constituency level or down to individual postcodes?
I wonder in a UK referendum on Europe if there would be talk of partiioning the UK to reflect the bits that wanted to stay in and the bits that wanted out. Of course there wouldn’t. This partitioning nonsense is just more FUD from the unionists.
@TheMaganator
I like this thinking outside the box!
I’m in the bottom section and there’s no way I want to be part of greater england, so screw the idea of moving the border.
Unionist nonsense about Scotland dividing is just space filling, its because they have nothing else to say, no policys no positive message for Scotland. just status quo drivell.
What about the Question,
“if you have a referendum and the people vote in favor and then subsequently vote in a Labour Government, do you think they will they overturn the referendum result ?…..”
I know it’s nonsense, no democratic party would ignore or overturn a referendum vote…..
It is astonishing that the old chestnut about the Northern Isles is still getting used to spread fear in Scotland. In the first instance, as is made clear in the European journal of international law article, most of the oil would remain outside the control of the isles, and stay with Scotland. Secondly, there is little real appetite for Orkney or Shetland to somehow choose not to be part of Scotland, and become dependent upon England or rUK for funding. Thirdly, it is blindingly obvious by its very nature, that not only is it disingenuous, but it is clearly based upon a premise that involves attempting to wilfully deprive Scotland of natural resources by rUK.
As for partition, well we all know how well that turned out in Ireland and India, but as Revstu points out, if such were the case, I kind of think many in the North East of England might opt to become part of an independent Scotland. Possibly even Darlington – the constituency seat of a certain William Hague.
I must say however, I find it really quite sad that a once great ‘news’ paper, the Scotsman, chooses to give column inches to the unfounded dribblings of Kelly. No matter what your political standpoint, it’s pretty clear it is childish piffle.
Interestingly, Quote of the week in political page of the Herald is from one Paul Gordon from Madrid….none other than honorary secretary of Conservatives Abroad Madrid……hardly a quote from the man on the street…
I firmly believe Michael Kelly is mentally ill.
It’s always interesting to turn things on their head to get a different perspective.
Unionists are always telling us how damaging constitutional uncertainty is to business yet refuse to reveal the fiscal powers, and the timescale involved, which is their jam tomorrow ‘promise’. How is any business meant to plan ahead when politicians make vague statements about changes in tax etc, yet will not let anyone in on their secret?
@R Louis
Possibly even Darlington – the constituency seat of a certain William Hague
I think you will find it is “Richmond, Yorkshire” and not Darlington. I lived in Darlo for many years (never got the MP I wanted).
@Cuphook
Interesting you should say that. I’ve been involved in some massive offshore reneweables projects likely to be developed through the port facilities on the Humber and at least two senior (English) individuals told me that they wished they had Alex Salmond fighting their corner because they’re feeling let down by the Westminster government’s current equivocation and uncertainty about renewables.
As an Edinburgh boy I would be quite happy for Glasgow to stay part of the union 🙂
As a Glaswegian I would be quite happy for Edinburgh to stay part of the Union. 🙂
Independence for Shotts!
My toilet is going to stay with the UK. I shall pass my political judgement at my leisure.
@MajorBloodnok
I’ve had several English colleagues express the same opinion. One of them was up during the last election and was blown away by the professionalism of Alex Salmond and the SNP. He even talked about moving his family here.
Yes, I’ve had English colleagues, who for some reason see red at any aspiration of independence for Scotland, raving on about declaring their house/street/town independent. It’s all out of Passport to Pimlico.
they can declare all they like presumably it will be a treasonable offence against the sovereign will of the Scottish people. ???
God knows why Kelly is still in employment at the Scotsman. When I consider how many educated and politically literate friends of mine of all political persuasions would be willing to write far better copy than this laughable nonsense it really makes you wonder whether the Scotsman does indeed have a suicide wish. Kelly was entirely discredited when he nearly bankrupted Celtic. He absolutely disgraced himself then, particularly by completely ripping off loyal fans by buying up their shares for a fraction of their true worth. Its truly bizarre that now, as an OAP, he’s a regular columnist with what is supposed to be a national broadsheet.
Watch him get ripped to shreds for almost half an hour by a bog-standard sports columnist here:
and here:
I often think that many politicians are mentally ill. I mean, just look at the average labour lot during the average FMQs.
”
Kenny Campbell says:
August 23, 2012 at 12:18 pm
What about the Question,
“if you have a referendum and the people vote in favor and then subsequently vote in a Labour Government, do you think they will they overturn the referendum result ?…..”
I know it’s nonsense, no democratic party would ignore or overturn a referendum vote…..”
Honestly, I wouldn’t put it past them. The rUK has proven time and time again that it doesn’t give two shits about the opinion of the populace on many issues. It’s why I feel so strongly for independence. Basic self-determination can’t be overlooked, but it is, so as much as I like Britain culturally (which I’m sure my English friends wouldn’t believe for a second), it’s sinking fast, and we want off this ship before we drown.
The labour party have just overturned a referendun that was held in Aberdeen.
kelly….your a fool if you think it was just Celtic fans he ripped off!
Aplinal,
Yes, Hague – not Darlington. Doh! Perhaps a job awaits me at the Scotsman?? Type in haste, repent at leisure, you might say. However, the point remains the same. Although I’m starting to think it might not end at the North East of England
With the recent frankly hysterical mutterings of Boris the clown, in relation to London’s wealth, I wouldn’t be too surprised if we ended up at independence with a kind of English ‘no man’s land’ stretching from the Scottish border at Berwick upon Tweed to Watford gap services, at which point ‘proper’ England, run by the Bullingdon boys and their ‘nouveau riche’ Chelsea chums, would begin.
Passport to Pimlico indeed.
Aye RL
Doncaster have dug up relics and have documents that prove that Scotland owns Doncaster in S Yorkshire:
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/politics/scottish_independence_english_town_of_doncaster_stakes_its_claim_to_scottish_heritage_1_2125780
I have it from good authority that other towns and cities across N England are busy digging up large amounts of land to prove likewise.
I have it from good authority that other towns and cities across N England are busy digging up large amounts of land to prove likewise.
Do you think this is this a Scottish thing Roll on? :LOL:
I wonder as they try and dig up the historical links of their towns if the inhabitants will also be digging up their “Scottish” ancestry. 😀