UK, Ireland /
Polish Families Moving to Scotland or back to Poland [23]
Unexplained? That's a new one on me, particularly as I tell anyone that wants to know that I left because I was fed up of having to fly everywhere to visit anywhere interesting. Now I can jump in a car and go to Prague, or Vilnius, or Berlin, or Warsaw, or Vienna for the weekend. Nothing unexplained about it - just a desire to see more of the world.
That sounds more like a cover story someone on the run would give.
Scotland will be poorer than it is now. England has been willing to pay Scotland to stay in the Union. Also, given the large number of Scots or those of Scottish descent who have and are MPs it comes as no surprise that England has been effectively been paying a ransom. The English support an independent Scotland too just to end the blackmail.
And as I already stated Scotland may think it is rich in resources but that doesn't mean it will have rights and access to them.
It's long been argued that the historically strong pound has been heaven for The City but hell for British business. Scotland will go through a very painful economic transition and it won't be short lived either. Westminster will have simply no reason to have any regard if Scotland's economy suffers in order to keep their own currency at par. Even if they continue to use the British pound they will still suffer especially in any remaining export and tourism sectors. Ireland as always been a country reliant on other nations for financial assistance. Even then it has always been a poorer region in Europe. They were very quick to switch to the euro though weren't then? And recent years has shown that far from being a "Celtic Tiger" their economy was in reality only a mangey cat.
Major trading partner with whom with a pegged currency and an economy in transition? Don't think every country will simply keep the current trading treaties going. It will be a golden opportunity for other countries to demand new treaties which are more in their own favor. And if the English didn't play games at the European level they would never have demanded and used their opt-out clause. The whole of the UK would be far more integrated already at every level and aspect of life. If you haven't noticed London doesn't genuflect to Brussels. London has diplomats there to protect its own interests from being taken over.
Furthermore, any place could read and apply EU law in their own country if they wanted to. Lots of nations copy laws from other countries and even get places like the EU and America to help them to do it. That doesn't make them eligible to be member states. Even the accession countries had to apply the laws to show they were capable of doing it long before they were allowed membership and for many it was done reluctantly because of other concerns such as lingering economic problems and fears of mass migration transfers.
What relevance does it have? The Crown would then become part of the Scottish Crown - and with it - mineral rights. But if you want to get technical - the Crown is more or less what is owned directly by the State. If the State splits (as has happened many times previously to the UK) - then the property splits too. It's really a non-issue - anyone with an understanding of the British constitution knows this. In fact, the Scottish Parliament was recently handed some rights relating to the Crown as part of the Scotland Act 2012.
You're assuming those agitating for independence would be satisfied with not being a republic. Unlikely. If Scotland splits the property may split but it would be foolish to assume it would be done evenly or amicably. You even had to admit that "the Scottish Parliament was recently handed
some rights..." You can be certain it was nothing that England couldn't do without.
England has already made it clear that Scotland is free to pursue her own path. There has been absolutely no mention of mineral rights, simply because they wouldn't have a leg to stand on in terms of international law.
There was no mention of mineral rights because they don't want to have to start any negotiations over it. As far as international law goes no current ally of the UK is going to back the Balkanization of Britain. The EU knowns that if Scotland declares independence it will be an incentive for other regions such as Catalonia and Silesia to do the same. This is too costly not just financially but flies in the face of the notion of deeper EU integration with the existing member states.
Of course, it could go the other way, as an independent Scotland goes towards a Nordic model. All major parties in Scotland support Nordic-style social contracts, and it's pretty much certain that the country would go down that path.
The Nordic countries have had centuries to build up their wealth and establish trade and treaties in order to get where they are today. No one in Europe will want to see Scotland become a South Sudan or Somalia on their doorstep but they won't become another Norway or Sweden either. After many generations an independent Scotland will most likely be as relevant as Greenland or the Faroe Islands and at best be another Iceland.
As I already mentioned Poles will do better elsewhere.
