The Breaking Up of the UK.

Apparently, the heads of various regional assemblies have expressed a shared desire for future independence from Westminster at some point. Is this truly a serious proposal or even a desirable one? And what would real independence actually look like?

Parents
  • In a dangerous world, no matter how much independence there is, it's vital to retain some kind of unity. I don't think anyone wants to return to medievalism or tribal systems. This is such a multicultural country it would be better to ensure each section has a voice, rather than arbitary geographical boundaries or even cultural boundaries which have less and less meaning as history moves on. [Hope this makes sense. My brain is definitely slowing down!]

Reply
  • In a dangerous world, no matter how much independence there is, it's vital to retain some kind of unity. I don't think anyone wants to return to medievalism or tribal systems. This is such a multicultural country it would be better to ensure each section has a voice, rather than arbitary geographical boundaries or even cultural boundaries which have less and less meaning as history moves on. [Hope this makes sense. My brain is definitely slowing down!]

Children
  • You also wonder what these people mean by “independence.” Do they mean true independence, where the country is left entirely on its own to survive in a highly competitive world? Or do they really mean (which I suspect is actually the case) that they simply still want to be subsidised by Westminster, yet have the freedom to make autonomous decisions about, for example, whether to rejoin the EU or not participate in foreign wars, etc.? And what about the NHS? Would they be expected to provide their own independent health service? I rather doubt it.

    Would free movement between regions still be allowed, like it is now, with many people heading south in search of jobs?