‘CRITICAL issues” around Scotland’s borders after independence are raised in a new report published on Thursday.
The 30-page paper says “political sensitivity” would be needed in the Scottish Borders,where voting trends suggest residents would be “least likely to back independence in a referendum”.
Authored by Professor Katy Hayward of Queen’s University Belfast and Professor Nicola McEwen of Edinburgh University, it argues that Brexit has “profoundly changed the context in which independence is contested and could be realised”.
And it questions how a new “EU border across Britain” would work as a result of the accession of a sovereign Scottish state to the bloc, which is the future the SNP and the Greens are looking to.
READ MORE: Alyn Smith: Scots can choose this Tory Brexit Britain or indy in Europe
It states: “Brexit has reenergised the campaign for Scottish independence, but it has made the practicalities of independence more complex. This is exemplified in the question of how Scotland would manage its borders as an independent nation-state and, potentially, as an EU member-state too.”
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has repeatedly said that Brexit is a “material change in circumstances” and justifies a fresh constitutional ballot. Political opponents have argued that the disruption of Brexit proves the status quo must stand.
Professor Katy Hayward of Queen’s University Belfast is co-author of the new report
Writing for the UK In A Changing Europe think-tank, Hayward and McEwen say Scotland’s new relationship with England and Wales would be governed by the terms of the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), which could be “very different” from that in place today and would determined the shape of a new border arrangement. TCA rules on customs declarations and checks would mean logistical and security challenges and there would be “no automatic retention of free movement of services, capital or (increasingly) digital data between Scotland and the rest of Britain, because these policy arenas are becoming ever more subject to the competence of the EU”.
However, they say a fully-operational Northern Ireland Protocol would mean border controls would not be necessary between Scotland and Northern Ireland and that the overall “scale and nature of the border challenges for Scotland would be quite different” to those resulting from the Northern Ireland Protocol because, from outwith the UK, the country would not have to manage membership of two diverging regulatory markets and customs regimes.
On trade with the rest of the UK, which in 2019 made up £52 billion worth of its £87.1bn total exports, the authors cite the experience of Ireland.
More than half of all Irish exports (55%) went to the UK when those states joined the European Community in 1973. However, that had decreased to just 9% by 2020. And they suggest sealing lorry loads of goods at the Scotland-England border and preventing further pick-ups on the journey through England to France could simplify deliveries.
READ MORE: Retired top Irish diplomat to EU sends message of support to Scotland
It’s further argued that though there would be costs and other challenges in setting up a new border regime, “assuming responsibility for managing an EU border across Britain need not preclude cross-border cooperation, including in areas like policing, criminal justice and security, where EU competence is more limited”. “Indeed, effective management of the border would be supported considerably by cooperation between authorities on either side of it.”
On the implications for residents of the Scottish Borders, the authors said a change in rules on crossing to England could impact on a sense of identity or work and leisure opportunities.
They said: “A ‘harder’ or less open border can have social and psychological consequences as well as economic, legal and political ones. Trends in voter preferences suggest that the Scottish Borders may be the area of Scotland that is least likely to back independence in a referendum. This underlines the need for political sensitivity and care in the process of delineating and introducing any new border management measures.”
And they wrote: “Any detailed prospectus or white paper intended to instil confidence in a transition to independence should confront the challenges Brexit has presented for managing Scotland’s borders.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel