Scottish Referendum

Taub argues that independence would expose the country to big, unnecessary risks attributed to things it could lose during the process of cessation from the United Kingdom and those linked with being independent upon the completion of the process. Therefore, these risks are severe enough to an extent that Taub does not see how the benefits or advantages of independence outweigh them. This is followed by a statement on things that could go wrong if the Scottish independence referendum succeeds. These include the relatively few purely Scottish institutions, reliance of the country’s banks on London for a bailout in case of a bailout, and reliance of Scottish research labs on funding from the United Kingdom (Taub par, 4).

On September 14th, 2014, the people of Scotland had the chance ‘of a lifetime’ to vote on whether they wanted Scotland to be an independent country or to stay part of the United Kingdom. As the ballot papers were being counted, thousands stayed up late waiting nervously to see the outcome. The Scots voted against being separated from the union and soon after it caused riots in Glasgow’s city center. To this day, Scotland hasn’t been the same, and the once friendly nation is now split into unionists and nationalists. Even though the majority vote was no to independence, still the people of Scotland and its party leaders are hoping for another shot at independence. So the question is, did the people make the right choice, or would Scotland be a more prosperous nation by standing alone? Scotland should be given the chance to function on its own without the influence of other countries. With an independent Scotland’s wealth and if it is controlled by the right political party. It has great potential that could benefit the Scottish people massively.

In the past, referendums have been used to make some of the biggest constitutional changes in modern times. By definition, a referendum ‘is a general vote by the electorate on a single political question which has been referred to them for a direct decision’. The very name and use of 'referendums' is thought to have originated in the Swiss canton of Graubünden as early as the 16th century where, to this day, still use a form direct democracy to settle many issues. Traditionally, Referendums were rarely used in the UK but, in recent times, they have been gaining popularity by the public and have also been used more often to decide constitutional changes such as the 2016 EU Referendum and the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum. Since the end

Within the United Kingdom, a recurring issue has been raised regarding the political position of Scotland and how the Scottish Parliament could better govern the country. To establish whether the quality of life could be improved for the Scottish people, key events, devolution, and the Scottish Parliament must be evaluated and analysed. The argument for greater power in decision making and the ability to implement change for the citizens of Scotland, has been central to Scottish politics for some time.

Before the individual referendums for Scottish independence and EU independence political interest and election turnout amongst young people was statistically low and steadily decreasing. This changed for the referendums but it is doubtful however there will be a high turnout of young people in forthcoming local and national elections. Young people tend to vote on single topics, for single issue parties and in referendums more than elections. If 16 year olds could vote more needs to be done to gain young people’s interest in politics.

Scotland, who long had dreamed of their independence, suddenly saw a golden opportunity. The oil, could give them the money it would take to “survive on their own” without being controlled by England. Scotland got inspired by the Scandinavian countries, which only consists of five million habitants, but still are one of the world’s most successful countries, especially Norway with made a fortune on their north-sea industry. Scotland’s dream wasn’t realistic, though. The union ended up splitting the money, and Scotland started to dislike being in union with England even more when they have an open chance to succeed if they were on their own. The fact that Margaret Thatcher wasted a lot of the North Sea oil revenues on paying for tax cuts and unemployment benefits when it could have been used to rebuild industry or national infrastructure, didn’t help on the Scott’s anger.

Throughout history, there has been a constant cycle of colonization by large and powerful governments and the ensuing struggle for independence. From the early empires of the Greeks and Roman colonizing the Mediterranean region during the classical period, to the colonization of the Americas, Africa and Asia by England, France, Spain and Portugal, to the Soviet Union, colonization has been a theme throughout history. In some cases, those being colonized have benefitted from the protection and resources of their powerful colonizer but in many cases it has led to suffering and despair. As John Locke once said, “Revolt is the right of the people.” Revolt can come in many forms and for Scotland, attempted revolt has come in the

independence, to determine whether the Scottish independence from Britain. The independence referendum entered the 100-day countdown stage, Nicola Sturgeon (Deputy First Minister) and Alistair Darling (Former chancellor of the exchequer) both had a very convincing speech on this topic. Nicola argues,Scotland’s huge wealth and extraordinary resources mean there is no question Scottish can be independent (Sturgeon,2014).Darling called on people to say “no thanks” to independence (Darling,2014).I thought that Nicola had a stronger speech. They both had prominent points and were persuasive,but I thought Nicola’s speech is easy to understand.

The recent Scottish referendum played a pivotal role in the Scottish economy, while many people believed the 300-year old union is no longer fit for purpose and is holding Scotland back others believed that Scotland cannot thrive without the UK and the economic and social problems caused by Independence would be disastrous. In this essay I will explore Scotland’s position in Europe and how whether obtaining independence would have been an advantage or disadvantage to Scotland.

Scottish Independence Scottland has been a part of the UK since 1707 after James VII was deposed in 1688 England feared that Scottland would go its own way which led to a formal union of the two kingdoms. And now in September 2014 there was a public poll if there should have been a Scottish Independence. The poll failed with 55% No voters voting against a Scottish Independence. I am going to be looking at some pros and cons of an Scottish Independence.

A referendum for Scottish independence was held on September 18th, 2014, which ended up against independence, with a surprisingly low percentage of just 55.3% of voters answering “no”, that explains why Scotland had a vote for independence. The first minister of Scotland at the time of the referendum was

“Since 2007 to mid 2009, global financial markets and systems have been in the grip of the worst financial crisis since the depression era of the late 1920s. Major Banks in the U.S., the U.K. and Europe have collapsed and been bailed out by state aid”. (Valdez and Molyneux, 2010) Identify the main macroeconomic and microeconomic causes that resulted in the above-mentioned crisis and make an assessment of the success or otherwise of the actions taken by the U.K government to resolve the problem.

Scotland is at a turning point. On 18th September 2014 a referendum will be held asking voters a simple yes/no question: “Should Scotland be an independent country?” It has become more apparent that Scotland does not benefit from being part of the union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland and as a consequence of this many people agree that Scotland would be better off as an independent country. Some say the union is no longer fit for purpose and it is holding Scotland back. But many people oppose these views saying Scotland needs the rest of the UK and the economic and social factors of independence would be too great to deal with. Independence for Scotland means that we will have the right to

most scottish people like, for much more healthy environments, and a better lifestyle, and were many skilled and hard working people could earn better and more money, and because there was not enough money paying with their jobs at the time,most families would struggle to feed and clothe their

The “Great Recession” is commonly used to explain the massive economic contraction that occurred in the United States during the fourth quarter of 2007. However, the actions of the United States spanned to other nations, leaving massive effect on the global economy. One nation that took on serious financial burden during this recession was the United Kingdom. This nation first faced the effects of the Great Recession beginning in the first quarter of 2008. Overall, the initial mass effects on the nation can be attributed to the nation’s reliance on the financial sector. In fact, after partially stabilizing in 2009, the country struggled with a double-dip recession between 2010-12, and continues to struggle with some of these effects.