The English nationalist make a whole series of demands, but one suspects that these demands are simply not thought through; they are more in the nature of a petulant “they have, we want” argument, see here. I copy it below also:-
We demand action on the following matters
England to be recognised and treated as a unified country. Scotland and Wales have been recognised as countries and their people given the opportunity to vote in referenda for devolved government. Scotland now has a parliament, and Wales an assembly. In contrast, the people of England have been denied the opportunity to choose an English Parliament. Instead, England is being dismembered into nine regions. We find this discrimination unacceptable. England should be a political entity with its own parliament and executive.
The immediate abandonment of the Barnett formula. The formula institutionalises discrimination against the people of England by ensuring that public spending in Scotland and Wales is far higher per head of population than in England. The Barnett formula diverts about £8 billion of extra public expenditure to Scotland each year. This means that the entire population of Scotland enjoys a subsidy averaging £30 per person per week. This has meant, for example, smaller class sizes in Scotland, higher pay for teachers, shorter hospital waiting lists, and the availability of prescription drugs and surgical procedures which are unavailable in England on grounds of cost. This unjustified discrimination must end. A new fairer system is needed which enables England’s share of the £8 billion to be used to improve public services in England.
I will not deal with the first bit of their argument here I will return to that at a later date as it is the second part that I find quite laughable in that it is complete nonsense. No one doubts that the whole “fiscal autonomy” question needs addressing, BondWoman over at BondBloke puts it much better that I can:
The UK needs urgently to look at fiscal autonomy to go with the devolution of powers. This is not because this will give the English things the Scottish have, such as lower university tuition fees, which they think they are being denied because of budgetary constraints. The differences lie in political choices, not budgetary possibilities. England, for better or for worse, is making different political choices to Scotland. That is very clear in the health services and schools arenas. Even leaving aside the West Lothian question, those political choices would be more legitimate and probably better thought through if they were tied to a system of fiscal autonomy, combined with an appropriate system of fiscal transfers which all federal systems must have in order to maintain solidarity within the union. Fiscal autonomy will not necessarily lead to the break up of the UK. I hope it does not. Refusing to contemplate such autonomy may on the contrary, though, foster the types of political movements which will ultimately do much greater damage to the union.
Their main bone of contention seems to be that “the entire population of Scotland enjoys a subsidy averaging £30 per person per week“; when will they get it into their heads that this is not a subsidy! (I would agrue that Scotland actually subsidizes England with the oil revenues) In fact, even if public spending per head of population in Scotland is higher than that in England, the gap is actually narrowing. But, leaving that aside, these people are complaing that Scotland (a part of the UK which incidentally is poorer on average) is bleeding England (a part of the UK which incidentally is richer on average) dry! This is just so much bollocks! What these people cannot understand is that the benefits that Scotland has, and which they are crying foul about, i.e. “smaller class sizes in Scotland, higher pay for teachers, shorter hospital waiting lists, and the availability of prescription drugs and surgical procedures which are unavailable in England on grounds of cost“, are nothing to do with such things as the Barnett formula they are purely and simply differences of political choices between England and Scotland. So, maybe it is time they stopped whingeing, thought their arguments through carefully, stopped scaremongering with facts that in truth are completely false, and started to do something constructive to aid the changes that they seek; because as sure as a snowball in hell will remain intact their demands, as they are at present, will simply be ignored!
March 4, 2007 at 3:59 pm
The fact is England does not subsidize Scotland by by £8 billion a year. Scottish oil revenues bring in £12 billion a year alone, all of which is taken to the British treasury in London. Other multi-billion pound Scottish industries are conveniently ignored by Englishment who claim to subsidize the Scottish economy. Scotch Whiskies are a multi-billion pound international industry, and again the revenues are taken to, and spent in England. Electronics revenues are also taken by England for England.
England has not been playing fair in the Union, and still believes London should be the hub of the UK economy. This is unnacceptable to the Scottish people, which is why there is more and more demand for the revenues from north sea oil and gas to be returned to us and spent in the country where it is produced.
Scotland has no choice but to vote for independence now, and Englands economy will suffer greatly if this does happen. Not only will England lose the UK’s largest area of natural resources, but you will also lose a portion of the army, navy and airforce. England will not be able to recover from this in our life time, and i cant say i have any sympathy for England anymore. England is a small and very over crowded country, which is quickly running out of its own natural resources. Scotland has the great advantage of a small population, large tourist industry and the most abundent natural resources on the British isles.
Should Scotland vote for independence England will be damaged more than they can presently imagine. Scotland will remain outside of the EU and international business investment will grow. It is also possible that foreigh businesses would transfer their UK headquarters from England to Scotland, thus increasing Englands unemployment rate even more as Scotland will provide multi-national companies with better deals.
United Nations economists have projected an independent Scotland to become the worlds 6th, possibly 5th richest country, while England would fall to around the 20th richest.
The fact is England does not respect Scotland, and has continuously ripped us off. Scotland has every right to be angry with England, and our patience is running out faster and faster.
Scotland must be independent, and England must learn to live with the consequences of taking advantage of us for so long.
April 25, 2007 at 6:11 pm
At last, someone else who gets offended at the use of the word ’subsidise’!