IT was good to read the report in The National that a motion has been submitted for the upcoming SNP conference on “seamless trade” within the UK. This recognises the legitimate concerns about the future relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK, which is shared by people who vote for other parties. The issue could become as much of a barrier to independence support as the currency question was in the last referendum.
Labour and the LibDems might join the Tories in saying that the need to maintain open borders is one reason for having devo-max on indyref ballot papers, with further devolution then excluding powers over international trade, foreign affairs, defence and other undefined exclusions. This could leave Westminster making UK trade agreements and in charge of trading regulations, UK immigration rules, Scotland’s £18 billion contribution nuclear weapons development, and a grossly inflated defence budget.
READ MORE: Scotland's electricity grid charges 'jeopardise UK's net-zero efforts', MP warns
Whilst the continuation of Westminster power in these areas would be unacceptable, the independence movement needs to recognise that of £85 billion in Scottish exports, £50bn is from exports to the rest of the UK. We would also want to keep open borders with rUK and the mutual benefits from UK free movement of labour. Therefore, whilst a federal system leaving Westminster with any power over the Scottish Parliament and Government would be inappropriate, a new kind of British Isles Federation will be desirable.
Scandinavia offers a model for a new kind of British federalism. The Nordic Council is the official body providing the means of governmental cooperation, with 87 members elected by its constituent parliaments to represent the various political parties of the member states (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden) and the associate members (the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and the Åland Islands). The council elects a president and is supported by a secretary general and secretariat. The countries also have an intergovernmental Council of Ministers, with ministers for Nordic cooperation, agriculture, the environment, health and education.
READ MORE: Industry bosses urge Tories to U-turn on carbon capture snub ahead of COP26
The UK and Scottish Governments are already members of the British–Irish Council, which also has representatives from the administrations in the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man. So, there is already a body in which Scotland could participate as an independent state, alongside any other European or global partnerships that an independent Scotland may wish to join.
So, the Yes Campaign should reach out to previous No voters in all political parties not only with the slogan Independence in Europe, but also calling for Independence in Britain and Ireland and we should set out how best both of these aims can be achieved. A devo-max referendum option would be unacceptable – the maximum amount of devolution is independence. But this does not have to mean border barriers and can still allow seamless trade.
Andrew Reid
Comrie, Perthshire
“SEAMLESS border between iScotland and rUK” ... are you kidding me? Have we lost the plot here? Has no one heard the expression “cake and eat it”? NI 2.0.
I absolutely despair reading this. Who exactly, as an independent country, would we be making our demands to? rUK? The EU? Please tell me this is Unionist propaganda to undermine the SNP and the independence cause (it is working, by the way), because
I have absolutely no under-standing, as we watch the Brexit “cake and eat it” strategy unravel before our eyes, why such a nonsensical idea would be worth debating.
Independent Scotland will face some hard choices, but I predict this preposterous fantasy will not be one of them – not if we want the benefits of EU membership, that is.
I Easton
Glasgow
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