Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Scottish independence
Section I. United Kingdom issues

In 1997, Scotland voted ’yes’ in a referendum for devolution of powers from Westminster. This led to the setting up of the Scottish Parliament which has limited tax-raising powers and control over policies such as health, education and transport. In 2011, the Scottish National Party won a majority in the parliamentary elections, and their leader Alex Salmond used this mandate to call for a referendum on Scottish Independence to take place in 2014.

Pros

[1] The principle of self-determination should be followed and the Scottish people should govern themselves. The Scottish people have their own distinct culture and history; they have their own legal system and education system; their political discourse is further to the left than England’s. They should be able to make all of their own decisions rather than have laws dictated to them from Westminster.

[2] Scotland has the potential to have a viable, and indeed flourishing, economy in its own right. It has strong tourism, manufacturing and services sectors and it has natural resources including oil. It would wish to participate fully in the EU and this would give it support to do so.

[3] Devolution has been successful; independence is the natural next step. Scotland has proved it is capable of self-rule in almost all policy areas and it has the infrastructure set up. Gaining control over foreign, defence and economic policy would be a smooth transition.

[4] Scottish independence would be in the best interest of the rest of the United Kingdom. At present, Scotland is heavily subsidised by Westminster and the money saved could be invested in poorer regions. It would also be more democratic, as the current system has led to the so-called ’West Lothian question’: the situation where Scottish MPs vote in Westminster on issues which will not affect their constituencies.

Cons

[1] Scotland is able to keep alive its distinct culture and aspects, such as its separate legal system, within the union. Devolution allows it a large degree of selfdetermination while also recognising the strong shared history and culture which exists in the United Kingdom. The Scots are not being dictated to from outside; they have a strong voice in Westminster and are often over-represented at Cabinet level.

[2] Scotland is economically subsidised by England and would be financially worse off on its own. As a smaller economy, it would also have less resilience to external factors.

[3] Devolution has been successful; independence is unnecessary. Scotland has a large degree of control while still protecting the union of the United Kingdom; this allows Scotland to have a greater global influence through UK foreign and defence policy.

[4] Scottish independence is not in the interest of any of the regions of the United Kingdom, all of which would be weakened by a split. If it wishes to remain a strong world player, then the United Kingdom should stay together and keep as large an economy, population and military capability as possible.

Possible motions

This House supports Scottish independence.

This House believes that Scotland would be better off outside the United Kingdom.

Related topics

English Parliament

Democracy