Dissolution of the UK

[SiHart]

Yesterday saw the 300th anniversary of the union between Scotland and England, but it seems to me that the UK is less of a union than ever. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have their own assemblies now and are able to make their own policies on certain matters leaving significant differences in certain key areas like health and education around the UK.

So, following this, should England also go it alone? Should we disband the Union altogether?

What do you think?

Si xx

[Dirk Gently]

No.

[Nathan]

I agree with Mr Gently.

[Larry]

Yesterday saw the 300th anniversary of the union between Scotland and England, but it seems to me that the UK is less of a union than ever. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have their own assemblies now and are able to make their own policies on certain matters leaving significant differences in certain key areas like health and education around the UK.

So, following this, should England also go it alone? Should we disband the Union altogether?

What do you think?

Si xx

in truth it's even longer than that as in reality England & Scotland have been unified since 1603 when James VI became king of England as well as Scotland. Although I have half Scots and very proud of my Scottish heritage I personally don't see the point splitting up the UK but I do agree that Scotland should have their own parliment making their own laws.

[Captain Tancredi]

In theory, there's no need for it.

The reality, however, is that the devolution formula is grossly unfair to England, and the North of England in particular, as we are now firmly entrenched at the back of the queue when it comes to investment. We can probably expect nothing else given the Scottish domination of this Labour cabinet, which looks set to continue ad infinitum. The spirit of the Border Reivers seems to be very much alive and well.

If there's to be any appetite for the Union, then the kinks in the system have to be ironed out- weaning Scotland and Wales off subsidy from Westminster and solving the West Lothian Question so that we don't have Scottish MPs forcing through legislation which only affects England. It's tempting to let the Scots and Welsh have independence, give them a decade to see just how politically and economically unviable they are and wait for them to beg at the gates to be allowed back in.

However, I suspect that before that happens, the EU will dominate decision-making to such an extent that the UK becomes an irrelevance.

[Andrew Curnow]

No.

Si missed the chance to say "I like concise answers" there.

[Milky Tears]

It could be starting. Well, if Salmond cobbles together a coalition (unlikely as the Lib Dems don't want to play with him) or a minority administration:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6626207.stm

Last Updated: Friday, 4 May 2007, 16:35 GMT 17:35 UK
SNP edges ahead in Holyrood vote

The Scottish National Party have the biggest single number of MSPs in the new Holyrood parliament.

At 1730 BST on Friday the final results were known.

The SNP won 47, Labour came in second with 46; the Conservatives have 17; the Liberal Democrats secured 16; and others came in with three.

Earlier on Friday, SNP leader Alex Salmond said that the Labour Party had lost the "moral authority to govern Scotland.

SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT RESULTS
SNP - 47
LAB - 46
CON -17
LD - 16
GRN - 2
IND - 1 (Margo MacDonald)
After 129 of 129 seats declared

[Jon Masters]

I'm not sure the Scots are safe to have independence - they can't even run an election properly

[WhiteCrow]

Although I have half Scots and very proud of my Scottish heritage I personally don't see the point splitting up the UK but I do agree that Scotland should have their own parliment making their own laws.

Whereas at the moment in England we have the House of Commons making laws on English issues which the government gets through using it's Scottish and Welsh MPs (dunno if there are any New Labour MPs from N Ireland).

Something's rotten in the state of Denmark ...

[Captain Tancredi]

The politics of Northern Ireland are still far too sectarian for the conventional parties to make much headway.

It's a strange situation in Scotland, though- with the SNP the biggest party, conventional political wisdom would have it that Salmond should be the new First Minister, whether it's in a coalition or minority administration. The million dollar question for the Liberals is whether they're prepared to compromise their principles for a share in power.

[Raston]

The politics of Northern Ireland are still far too sectarian for the conventional parties to make much headway.

It's a strange situation in Scotland, though- with the SNP the biggest party, conventional political wisdom would have it that Salmond should be the new First Minister, whether it's in a coalition or minority administration. The million dollar question for the Liberals is whether they're prepared to compromise their principles for a share in power.

Perhaps, but then again, 47 + 16 is only 63, and you need 65 for a majority-which means they need the two green MSP's as well. Which makes it all a bit of a farce. Plus they have only 4 weeks to agree a first minister and have him win a vote on it in the parliament other wise it gets disolved and there is a new election. Oh and they need to agree on a presiding officer for the parliament, and if the tories and labour are clever and don't let any of their MSP's do it, then it will have to come from the lib dems of the SNP or the greens at which point they lose their majority of 1...