Scottish Independence: the implications

ScotSepFriday 23rd May, 7:30 pm, Unity House, Fennel Street, Loughborough

What are the implications of Scottish Independence?

Do we want a new border?

Will the majority of ordinary people be better off?



This entry was posted in Meetings. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Scottish Independence: the implications

  1. A National Border can be closed, that is, it is possible to stop people crossing. An Administrative Boundary is fundamentally different in this respect, However independent of each other the administrations either side are, neither can prevent people crossing that boundary.
    Currently the Scottish is an administrative boundary. Independence would require the setting up of a proper National Boundary.
    In the short term it seems unlikely that the boarder would be closed, but history is unpredictable; Suppose Scotland remains a member of the eu, but England gets a UKIP government, leaves the eu and wants to stop immigration? They would have to create an effective barrier.

    There is a very long term process of decreasing divisions between peoples. From tribal isolation to tolerance and freedom to move. This has been a very uneven process with periods of gradual opening and violent closing.
    I think Socialists generally want this process to continue.It seems perverse to support Scottish independence, on the slender chance that it just might lead to better governance in the short term, by making a definitely retrogressive step in the quest for freedom of movement that is for long term.

  2. alg4 says:

    There almost certainly will never be a UKIP government as such, although, the way things are going, UKIP could have a few MPs after May 2015. The biggest problem re the EU is not UKIP but the Tories’ promise of an in-out referendum in 2017. Geoff Gay

  3. stevecoltman says:

    Why is an in-out referendum a ‘problem’? There is strong pressure from within the EU hierarchy to form a proper Federal Union, Mr Juncker the EPPs candidate for the Commission presidency (and as of this moment the most likely to get the presidency) is a known Federalist. Do you seriously suppose we should go down this route without a mandate from the people?
    (This is, however, straying off-topic, something we are prone to doing)

Comment on this article

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s