The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

If they want to be, I don't see why not.
*shrugs*
Reply 2
I don't think it's in their interests, they'd have a much better quality of life under Englands wing.
Reply 3
No.
We'd probably self-destruct if we were left on our own.
Reply 4
kiddranc
Would Wales be viable as a sovereign state?


Well, that's a completely different question from the one in the thread title. The answer to this question is yes; the answer to the one in the title is categorically no.

Does it have enough industry?


Well, sure it does. It's not the wealthiest part of the Kingdom by a long shot, but I remind you that it's probably got more wealth floating around it than the majority of sovereign states. If Ethiopia can do it, so can Wales in theory.
Reply 5
I think that it would be better for Britain and better for Wales if it didn't, however while those in Westminster under the current democratic system have the power to refuse independence even after a landslide referendum, I don't think that they would.
Reply 6
ukebert
I think that it would be better for Britain and better for Wales if it didn't, however while those in Westminster under the current democratic system have the power to refuse independence even after a landslide referendum, I don't think that they would.


I doubt it indeed. I imagine they'd be more likely not to offer a referendum instead, which raises the tricky constitutional question of whether the devolved bodies can hold a purely consultative (at least on the face of it) referendum to negotiate for independence. This would be, in the popular imagination, not substantively different; yet could perhaps be pulled off legally.
Considering the referendum on it even having its own assembly was 'won' by the tiniest of margins, I don't think Wales would ever vote for independece.

Even if it were to demerge from the United Kingdom, I wouldn't call it independent. Presumably it'd opt to stay in the EU? And the EU calls pretty much all the shots now. Sovereignty has lost its meaning extremely quickly.

As for whether I think it should become independent, the answer is no. I am very proud of the United Kingdom (the combination of the Kingdom of England & Wales, the Kingdom of Scotland, and the Kingdom of (Northern) Ireland). Losing Wales would be an enormous blow.
Wales has no interest in becoming independent as far as I know.
Reply 9
Wales has no native industry left, it is totally reliant on London for money. The Welsh Assembly is given £80 billion a year to spend on things, which is why the roads are so good around here! If Wales left the Union then the rest of Britain would still be the 5th richest country but Wales would be like 26th behind even Barbados.
Elipsis
I don't think it's in their interests, they'd have a much better quality of life under Englands wing.


It's politically wrong to say that we are under "England's wing". The parliament is the BRITISH parliament, which means, England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland all CONTRIBUTE TOGETHER the funding of all the countries. I don't think any of the 4 countries could be independent, well, they could - But there wouldn't be enough money for services such as the NHS, taxes would increase, and we would all be worse off. Wales have nothing really to offer, as much as England do, or perhaps even the same to offer as we have gold mines (correct me if I'm wrong in thinking England don't have any), and Scotland don't have a terrible lot to offer either. Britain doesn't have a terrible much to offer. If any of us became independent, we wouldn't survive, we all need eachother to rely on. In my opinion. Please, no one tell me that I am wrong, because it is simply my opinion, and I will gladly consider and respect the opinion of others :-)
...And to answer your question, No. lol.
AnythingButChardonnay
Rule, Britannia!


Wooo! Whatever she/he said! lol
Reply 13
Nah, whats the point.
But i do think, partly as a solution to the west lothian question that there should be 4 national parliaments, keeping westminster as the federal parliament. Like the United states of britain.
Reply 14
No Wales should not become independent, just NO!
Reply 15
mfm89
Nah, whats the point.
But i do think, partly as a solution to the west lothian question that there should be 4 national parliaments, keeping westminster as the federal parliament. Like the United states of britain.


It'd be rather odd. Imagine the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom having no power over day-to-day policing, health, education...

I'm not sure how a First Minister of England and the Prime Minister would develop an effective working relationship - especially, as is quite possible, one would be Tory and the other, Labour.
Reply 16
No, I think all of us should remain united otherwise in many years to come we could end up going back to the days where we were at war with each other.
Reply 17
L i b
It'd be rather odd. Imagine the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom having no power over day-to-day policing, health, education...

I'm not sure how a First Minister of England and the Prime Minister would develop an effective working relationship - especially, as is quite possible, one would be Tory and the other, Labour.


The obvious answer would be to devolve more powers to Local Governments, and have the assemblies subject to Parliament and without an overall leader. Perhaps even partyless.

And I realise that that probably wouldn't work, but it would be nice if it did :smile:
Three reasons why Wales should not become Independent:

1. We don't have the Economy. We lack the industry, because all the factories are suddenly closing down, and we can't rely on Coal and Slate to get us by, can we?

2. What don't have a decent defence system. Making ourselves independent of Britain means we're basically shunning the British Army, who already have bases on our soil. We have nothing. What do we do; take back the Welsh Guards? So, we're basically sitting ducks if we go independent. Any big 'power' who wants us can just march straight in. (Unlikely, but still plausible.)

3. What we know about legislation couldn't fill a shoebox. We may have the W.A.G. but it's basically the epitome of the phrase 'talking shop' - we have LIMITED power of legislation as it is now, and I don't exactly see us grasping it very quickly. That'll mean, shall we say 50 years of recession and misery (on top of the mediocre state we're in anyway) before we start going in the right direction.


To be quite honest, when you're getting Objective 1 Subsidies from the E.U., meaning you're one of the poorest areas in Europe, you're not exactly going to run away from a source of funding and protection that quickly?
As much as we all say, here at least, how great it'd be to have an independent Wales and stick it to the Saes, we're not going to get it, and even if we did it'd be like putting a goldfish in a lake and telling it to survive - it'll seem alright for the first few moments, then either a bigger fish will swallow it up, or it'll die because it can't fend for itself.
Reply 19
L i b
It'd be rather odd. Imagine the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom having no power over day-to-day policing, health, education...

I'm not sure how a First Minister of England and the Prime Minister would develop an effective working relationship - especially, as is quite possible, one would be Tory and the other, Labour.


Does Kevin Rudd in Australia have a problem with New South Wales running some of its own affairs? Does Stephen Harper in Canada have a dilemma with Ontario running its own affairs? Does Manmohan Singh in India have a problem with Uttar Pradesh running some its own affairs?

Other Westminster Systems work fine as federal countries, so there is no reason why the UK cannot.

Latest

Trending

Trending