[travoot]

(Original post by Rakas21)
Ideally i support localised devolution of taxation and infrastructure.

With that said..

NI - Just holding until they reunite
Wales - Is an English region as far as i am concerned, to give them their own assembly was a great sign of weakness
Scotland - Great country, my birthplace
England - Draw a line from the north of Merseyside to the north of Tyne and Wear and call it the new Scottish border and we will have a smaller, more productive England.

In answer to the OP, we get back what we put in with Scotland but Wales and NI do cost us.

Not content with your free education and the such, you now want English land in this divorce settlement. LOL It's also quite insulting to the Welsh to insist that they're somehow not fitting of their own nationality and yet somehow the Scots are a special circumstance? There are four nations in the UK:

England
Scotland
Whales
Northern Island

It's insulting to suggest that somehow only the English and the Scottish are allowed to consider themselves a nation.

[Rakas21]

(Original post by travoot)
Not content with your free education and the such, you now want English land in this divorce settlement. LOL It's also quite insulting to the Welsh to insist that they're somehow not fitting of their own nationality and yet somehow the Scots are a special circumstance? There are four nations in the UK:

England
Scotland
Whales
Northern Island

It's insulting to suggest that somehow only the English and the Scottish are allowed to consider themselves a nation.

I have no problem with the Welsh in that to me they are as unique as a Londoner but Scotland joined the UK willingly, Wales was conquered and its territory is now rightfully English, they are no more entitled to a parliament than Yorkshire in my opinion.

Technically Ireland as well once reunited.

[navarre]

Yes, England does benefit from the Union. But it's the only country in the Union that could hold its own without the Union. Scotland and Wales would fade into obscurity, whereas England would continue to exert strong economic and military might on the global stage.

In the USSR, towards the end, Russia was the largest and most powerful Republic, yet it was the only one without its own Republican government. I think the UK has placed England in a similar situation.

[travoot]

(Original post by Rakas21)
I have no problem with the Welsh in that to me they are as unique as a Londoner but Scotland joined the UK willingly, Wales was conquered and its territory is now rightfully English, they are no more entitled to a parliament than Yorkshire in my opinion.

Technically Ireland as well once reunited.

I'll concede on the point of Northern Island, although I still don't agree with your point of view, as Northern Island has in many ways been shaped by it's Scottish roots and thus is culturally somewhat different to the republic. Also I need to make clear in case that I've caused unnecessary offence, I wasn't at all suggesting you have any kind of problem with the Welsh. I'm merely pointing out that I believe you to be denigrate Welsh nationalism, regardless of the fact that it was annexed. By that logic we could consider any one of many former British colonies as the same as England in cultural terms. Although yes, Whales has more in common with England that Scotland does with England, it does indeed posses it's own culture and this is made clear by the very fact that Welsh nationalism still exists.

Anyway, just to reiterate the point of my reply. Although I do indeed think that your downplaying of Whales as a 'nation' is insulting, I didn't mean to infer that you were consciously trying to be rude to the Welsh (because in actuality you're just putting forward an opinion). I was merely pointing out my interpretation of what you'd said.

[sorafdfs]

Scotland only become some independent nation that's angry at England because that Margaret Maid of Norway kid died on her way to become queen.

[Cyanohydrin]

(Original post by Cmca1)
Well, if Scotland leaves the Union, which I believe it will, you can minus 41 Scottish Labour MPs from the scenario straightaway. The Tories only have 1 Scottish MP, which is indicative of the varied attituted between Scotland and England.

I don't believe Scotland will leave the union at all. There are some huge issues that will come out in the debate before the referendum such as our currency, what "Scotland in Europe" actually means and people will realise the pointlessness of unpicking national infrastructure that has been built up over three centuries. I do believe Scotland will get more powers and we will see a shift to a federal model in the United Kingdom.

[Kaiser MacCleg]

(Original post by Rakas21)
I have no problem with the Welsh in that to me they are as unique as a Londoner but Scotland joined the UK willingly, Wales was conquered and its territory is now rightfully English, they are no more entitled to a parliament than Yorkshire in my opinion.

Leaving aside the cultural argument, in which you obviously would not have a leg to stand on, in narrow legalistic terms you are still wrong. It was Henry VIII's Laws in Wales acts of 1535 and 1542 which legally annexed Wales to the Kingdom of England and abolished the Marcher Lordships and Principality that had existed there beforehand. As put in the 1535 act: "Albeit the Domynyon Principalitie and Countrey of Wales justly and rightuouslye is and ever hath ben incorporated annexed united and subjecte to & under the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme"

Unfortunately for you however, both acts have been repealed with no outstanding effects, as you can see here and here. So you see, as of 1993, Wales has not legally been a part of England (and outside this narrow legal framework it has, of course, never been). To appeal to some arcane concept of ruling a country by right of some ancient conquest is frankly bizzare and incompatible with modern democracy.

[Snagprophet]

(Original post by Cmca1)
NI is heavily subsidised by the UK and would probably unite with the Republic of Ireland. Scotland could stand on its own two feet no problem. Wales and England could have closer links.

Quite a few believe that the Republic of Ireland doesn't have the capability of subsidising Northern Ireland to the same degree than the United Kingdom does.

(Original post by Cmca1)
Also, regarding the armed forces point you make, would army bases in Scotland not fall under a new Scottish army? Those bases are as equally Scottish as they are English.

There could be a mini-NATO between English and Scottish defence forces, so bases will continue to be shared by England and Scotland and continue to be funded by English and Scottish taxpayers.

(Original post by Cmca1)
England is a great country, but a lack of its own Parliament and this overriding idea of being British have deteriorated the image of the English nationality.

There's the Scottish National Party ( http://www.snp.org/ ), Plaid Cymru ( http://www.english.plaidcymru.org/ ) and Sinn Fein/SDLP in NI, all of whom support independence for their own nations, yet what is the English equivalent? - http://www.voteenglish.org/ not very much support it would seem.

The main thing with the small nations' nationalist parties is they're dominated by England. People refer to the whole of the UK as England. As an Englishman I feel it's perverted the English image into something inconsistent and inaccurate, but I'm not really having a nationality 'imposed' upon us. It's easier for the SNP to use Braveheart and their lack of Tory voters as a reason to break off from England.

For an Englishman, the gripe would be wanting to change our image. Some say that English nationalism is a response to Scottish/Welsh nationalism, but the truth is that there's too many nationalities in the UK. The English flag is now synonymous with football, which annoys me. This has to change, but the idea is not as mainstream as independence for non-English UK nations. Plus there's also the fear that associating with any English nationalist parties and organisations makes you racist.

A lot of people also see anti-EU parties as morally wrong and the English Democrats are pro-leaving the EU. There's a lot of restructuring in their manifesto. I don't believe they'll get to reunite all traditional counties because smaller areas with a lot of people steal all the industry, hence why Swindon Borough and is not politically within Wiltshire but I don't see why it can't ceremonially be in Wiltshire.

Something which bothers me is why on earth are the vast majority of conservatives unionists and not nationalists. I don't see why the two are hand in hand. It's just as stupid to preserve something for the sake of being preserved as to change things for the sake of change.

[Cmca1]

(Original post by Snagprophet)
Quite a few believe that the Republic of Ireland doesn't have the capability of subsidising Northern Ireland to the same degree than the United Kingdom does.


Something which bothers me is why on earth are the vast majority of conservatives unionists and not nationalists. I don't see why the two are hand in hand. It's just as stupid to preserve something for the sake of being preserved as to change things for the sake of change.

I agree with a lot you say in your last post!

With regards to Ireland. The northern economy in Ireland including in counties of the Irish republic requires a lot of infrastructural investment and development to even out the concentration of employment and economic growth which is currently centred in Dublin. In direct relation to NI, the economy there has everything in place to facilitate growth in the private sector bar the low corporation to tax to bring it in line with the RoI and to allow it to attract foreign direct investment. The other issue in NI, is there is a much larger proportion of public sector workers than private sector workers and as a result, the British government overfunds the budget of the Assembly.

I also agree that in relation to England specifically in my opinion, nationalism is frowned upon by the mainstream. However, i support self-determination where people want it, and would like to see all nations of the British Isles (England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales) work together as independent nations.

[dannyoh]

England in its current form certainly doesn't benefit from being in the Union. The Barnett Formula is appallingly unfair and disproportionate and a disgrace to the English taxpayer.

However lets flip it over and the reality is that Scotland, and to an extent NI and Wales do benefit from being in the union and having a devolved parliament. It's balanced the funding issue and allows the people of those areas to make their own decision for themselves.

Whilst I am moderately-tory myself, where I live it's staunch Labour, and the people here aren't in agreement with the views of a Conservative government - yet it still has to put up with a Conservative government when it is elected, similar being the staunch Tory south of England having to put up with a Labour government. Surely local government and devolution is a much better concept.

What we need is a devolved english parliament and to create a federal political system in this country if we really want fairness. Personally I am in favour of regional parliaments, as the funding balance between NW England where I am and SE England is totally unfair and disproportionate and needs readjusting and fairness - something a regional parliament should bring.

[jkneen95]

Scotland won't really vote yes. the most likely outcome is they'll vote for Devomax. It's just a way of blackmailing Cameron into allowing them to push for further sovereignty. Everybody nkows that Scotland would suffer terribly if it became independent and no longer was aided by the UK

[L i b]

(Original post by travoot)
Not content with your free education and the such, you now want English land in this divorce settlement. LOL It's also quite insulting to the Welsh to insist that they're somehow not fitting of their own nationality and yet somehow the Scots are a special circumstance? There are four nations in the UK:

England
Scotland
Whales
Northern Island

It's insulting to suggest that somehow only the English and the Scottish are allowed to consider themselves a nation.

Why? You're denying this largely made-up status of 'nation' to, say, Cornwall or Shetland. In reality, you're doing exactly the same thing as him by thinking that you have any standing to arbitrarily define someone's tribal identities.

(Original post by jkneen95)
Scotland won't really vote yes. the most likely outcome is they'll vote for Devomax. It's just a way of blackmailing Cameron into allowing them to push for further sovereignty. Everybody nkows that Scotland would suffer terribly if it became independent and no longer was aided by the UK

And yet it seems increasingly unlikely that a choice for devomax or any similar scheme would be on a referendum ballot

[jkneen95]

(Original post by L i b)


And yet it seems increasingly unlikely that a choice for devomax or any similar scheme would be on a referendum ballot

In which case, Scotland will remain part of the UK

[Rakas21]

(Original post by Kaiser MacCleg)
Leaving aside the cultural argument, in which you obviously would not have a leg to stand on, in narrow legalistic terms you are still wrong. It was Henry VIII's Laws in Wales acts of 1535 and 1542 which legally annexed Wales to the Kingdom of England and abolished the Marcher Lordships and Principality that had existed there beforehand. As put in the 1535 act: "Albeit the Domynyon Principalitie and Countrey of Wales justly and rightuouslye is and ever hath ben incorporated annexed united and subjecte to & under the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme"

Unfortunately for you however, both acts have been repealed with no outstanding effects, as you can see here and here. So you see, as of 1993, Wales has not legally been a part of England (and outside this narrow legal framework it has, of course, never been). To appeal to some arcane concept of ruling a country by right of some ancient conquest is frankly bizzare and incompatible with modern democracy.

Your last sentence puzzles me. England, Scotland and Wales were all formed via the annexing of land at different times before they eventually algemated into one sovereign state each so given that there were no rules at the time to prevent the annexing of land i do believe that ruling a country by right of an ancient conquest is justified.

Thankyou for clearing up the relevant laws, i personally believe that they should not have been repealed.

Frankly the concept of Welsh nationalism surprises me, bar becoming a tax haven it is unlikely that Wales will ever be important on a global scale and as such would logically be better off retaining as closer ties to England as possible.

(Original post by travoot)
I'll concede on the point of Northern Island, although I still don't agree with your point of view, as Northern Island has in many ways been shaped by it's Scottish roots and thus is culturally somewhat different to the republic. Also I need to make clear in case that I've caused unnecessary offence, I wasn't at all suggesting you have any kind of problem with the Welsh. I'm merely pointing out that I believe you to be denigrate Welsh nationalism, regardless of the fact that it was annexed. By that logic we could consider any one of many former British colonies as the same as England in cultural terms. Although yes, Whales has more in common with England that Scotland does with England, it does indeed posses it's own culture and this is made clear by the very fact that Welsh nationalism still exists.

Anyway, just to reiterate the point of my reply. Although I do indeed think that your downplaying of Whales as a 'nation' is insulting, I didn't mean to infer that you were consciously trying to be rude to the Welsh (because in actuality you're just putting forward an opinion). I was merely pointing out my interpretation of what you'd said.

I fail to see why is is insulting, as the poster in the above quote shows Wales was legally English territory for 400 years. To assume that just because the legislation was repealed everybody would agree that Wales being its own nation is the right thing is false.

For me the union is not strictly about culture (though Welsh culture is close enough to England's anyway). The difference between overseas territory's and Wales are numerous, namely that out overseas territories were expensive to maintain and had a lot less rights than England and that Wales is geographically joined and as an English region was entitled to all English rights, much more than the majority of the Empire.

There may be a slight tinge of imperialism from me but i do not believe that Wales should be entitled to any different rights than somebody in Essex on the basis of a bit of cultural nationalism.

[Kaiser MacCleg]

(Original post by Rakas21)
Your last sentence puzzles me. England, Scotland and Wales were all formed via the annexing of land at different times before they eventually algemated into one sovereign state each so given that there were no rules at the time to prevent the annexing of land i do believe that ruling a country by right of an ancient conquest is justified.

A King of Gwynedd conquered Northumbria once. Perhaps all of northern England should be included in a new Welsh state should one ever come into existence?

I simply cannot understand why you believe that due to the conquest of Wales 730 years ago by a bunch of Normans, the English (another conquered people) have a right to erase the name "Wales" from the map and print "West Anglia" in its place. The UK does not base its claim to the Falkland Islands on the history of the archipelago; rather, as a modern democracy, it refers to the will of the Falkland Islanders to remain British.

Incidentally, Wales wasn't formed through territorial expansion. Rather, it was isolation from the other Brythonic-speaking people of Britain as the Anglo-saxons advanced that encouraged the people of this part of the world to start identifying themselves as a nation. Instead of being Brythoniaid, the people of Wales started calling themselves Y Cymry ("The compatriots"). Wales' existence is not due to aggressive expansionism or territorial annexation - at least, not on the part of the Welsh.

(Original post by Rakas21)
Frankly the concept of Welsh nationalism surprises me, bar becoming a tax haven it is unlikely that Wales will ever be important on a global scale and as such would logically be better off retaining as closer ties to England as possible.

I don't see why it should. There are myriad reasons to become a nationalist, if you live in Wales. Many (particularly in the west) are drawn to nationalism because they fear for the future of their language, and they see a stronger Welsh state and civic society as crucial to safeguard it. Many more are disgruntled with Westminster politics, the foreign wars of the British state and the overbearing influence of neo-liberalism. Many are simply fed up of Wales being economically shafted and want change. I don't doubt there's a fair few romantics in our ranks too.

Not sure quite what you mean by being "important", but if you mean influence on the World stage then this is the choice for Wales, as I see it: either a little influence (through membership of the EU, UN etc.) or none at all (as a part of the UK). An independent Wales would not look to project its power across the world - why on earth would it? It's the UK that likes to launch itself into deeply unpopular foreign interventions, hitching a ride alongside the superpower so those in charge can play Empire. Wales would not have the capability to carry out nor the interest in such interventions.

(Original post by Rakas21)
I fail to see why is is insulting, as the poster in the above quote shows Wales was legally English territory for 400 years. To assume that just because the legislation was repealed everybody would agree that Wales being its own nation is the right thing is false.

Whether it's "right" or not is an irrelevance; Wales is a nation. There is a significant group of people who identify themselves as Welsh as opposed to English, and this, fundamentally, is all that nationhood requires. All the rest; symbols, institutions, culture and traditions, are merely trappings, though Wales is as well-endowed with those trappings as any other nation. When I am unfortunate enough to come across this denial of the Welsh nation's existence, I find it quite bemusing. We're here, and quite easy to find. Why not come and have a look?

For the record, I don't don't doubt there are a lot of people out there who would get offended if you told them their nation didn't exist. I don't tend to any more - perhaps because I've become jaded by conversations like this. I no longer expect any better.

(Original post by Rakas21)
There may be a slight tinge of imperialism from me but i do not believe that Wales should be entitled to any different rights than somebody in Essex on the basis of a bit of cultural nationalism.

Nationalism is an expression of nationhood. Where there's nationalism, there's a nation. Although devolution was originally designed as a sop to the nationalists (one which evidently didn't work) nationalism itself should not entitle anywhere to self-government. Nationhood, though, is a very strong basis for self government, which is what makes Wales fundamentally different to Essex.

[Gales]

(Original post by Rakas21)
Frankly the concept of Welsh nationalism surprises me, bar becoming a tax haven it is unlikely that Wales will ever be important on a global scale and as such would logically be better off retaining as closer ties to England as possible.

You're mixing up Welsh nationalism and independence; nationalism and independence, whilst closely linked aren't the same thing.

Anyway, I'm not really sure what you mean when you say Welsh culture is very similar to English culture. Modern English, Welsh and Scottish culture are all very similar as they're all essentially strands of the same mainstream culture (British culture). If you think that somehow Scotland's culture is very much different to English culture, whilst Welsh and English cultures are practically the same, you're being ludicrous. If anything, Welsh culture (which is one Welsh-speakers usually adhere to, rather than Anglophones) is very distinct and quite dissimilar from English culture, in fact.

Anyway, if you think that because Wales was a part of England for several hundred years, therefore it's more similar to England than Scotland is, that's absurd. Scotland was English-speaking way before Wales predominantly was. Scotland was essentially English-speaking at the end of the 1600s. English only became the majority language in Wales during the 1800s. Put it this way, the USA has been an English-speaking nation longer than Wales.

[Psyk]

(Original post by Kaiser MacCleg)
Not sure quite what you mean by being "important", but if you mean influence on the World stage then this is the choice for Wales, as I see it: either a little influence (through membership of the EU, UN etc.) or none at all (as a part of the UK).

It's not true that Wales has no influence as part of the UK. Wales is just as much a part of the UK as the rest of it, complete with voting rights and everything. So Wales does have some influence on the world stage through the UK, just like every other region of the UK does. And it's not necessarily less influence than they would have if they were independent (it's not necessarily more either).

[Snagprophet]

Wales has less influence than any region of England. This is because we believe that each individual is equal.

[Kaiser MacCleg]

(Original post by Psyk)
It's not true that Wales has no influence as part of the UK. Wales is just as much a part of the UK as the rest of it, complete with voting rights and everything. So Wales does have some influence on the world stage through the UK, just like every other region of the UK does. And it's not necessarily less influence than they would have if they were independent (it's not necessarily more either).

The right to vote in elections does not translate into influence on the world stage when Wales is about as far from the thoughts of those elected into a position of power as it is possible to be.

[Cyanohydrin]

(Original post by Kaiser MacCleg)
The right to vote in elections does not translate into influence on the world stage when Wales is about as far from the thoughts of those elected into a position of power as it is possible to be.

Do you think say Merseyside, Devon, Nottinghamshire or County Durham gets any more attention from those elected than Wales? At least you have an assembly and FM.