Posted on 11/27/2006 1:37:37 AM PST by LibWhacker
ALMOST two-thirds of English voters want full independence for Scotland, a dramatic new poll revealed last night.
A clear majority on both sides of the Border are in favour of Scotland breaking away from the United Kingdom, according to the survey by ICM. It finds that 59% of English voters want Scotland to go it alone, while independence is backed by 52% of Scots.
There is also strong support in both nations for England breaking away completely from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - backed by 48% in England and 45% in Scotland.
Meanwhile, 68% of English voters and 58% of Scots back the lesser step of an English parliament, which would have similar powers to the Scottish parliament.
The poll, which supports the abolition of the Act of Union between England and Scotland as its 300th anniversary approaches, follows recent surveys in Scotland which have shown more than 50% in favour of independence.
It came as Chancellor Gordon Brown delivered an impassioned defence of the Union at Labour's Scottish conference in Oban. On Friday, Blair also warned of a "constitutional nightmare" if the SNP wins power in Edinburgh next May.
Yesterday, in a further attack on the SNP, against whom Labour will fight a bitter battle for control of the Holyrood parliament, the Chancellor claimed: "We should never let the Nationalists deceive people into believing that you can break up the United Kingdom."
But, seizing on the poll results, SNP leader Alex Salmond said: "There is a powerful pro-independence tide now flowing both north and south of the Border. Both countries now have majorities in favour of their own independence and independence for their neighbour.
"Scots are tired of remote control from London and the onset of devolution has made people realise that, since we have our own parliament, it is time we had one with real powers.
"In England people, quite rightly, resent Scottish MPs bossing them about on English domestic legislation. England has as much right to self-governance as Scotland does."
The ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph shows that 60% of English voters agree, complaining that higher levels of public spending per head of the population in Scotland were "unjustified", with only 28% claiming they were justified. Among Scots, 36% said the current system was unfair, with 51% supporting it.
Ironically, only 21% of English voters said there were "too many Scots" in the Cabinet, with 76% saying this did not matter. Perhaps unsurprisingly, only 4% of Scots agreed that the number of their fellow countrymen in top government posts - who include Brown, John Reid, Alistair Darling, Lord Falconer and Douglas Alexander - was too high.
But voters had serious concerns about the so-called "West Lothian Question" - the ability of Scottish MPs at Westminster to vote on solely English matters while many purely Scottish issues are decided in Edinburgh. Almost two in three English voters (62% ) want Scottish MPs stripped of this right, as did 46% of Scots.
Reacting to the poll last night, the Chancellor said: "There is a debate to be had about the future of the United Kingdom, but I think when you look at the arguments, when you look at the family ties, the economic connections, the shared values, the history of our relationship which has lasted 300 years, people will decide we are stronger together and weaker apart."
A Scottish Labour Party spokesman added: "Our conference in Oban has shown the strong case for building on Labour's achievements within the UK rather than throwing it all away with the damaging nationalist policy of breaking up Britain."
Tory leader David Cameron also issued a robust defence of the Union saying it is "good for us all and we are stronger together than we are apart."
My late husband, who was a Scottish dance band leader, maintained that the cultural border between England and Scotland was the river Tyne, not the river Tweed.
That would put Northumberland in Scotland.
Either would suit me.
There are no "conservative", as we understand the term, Scottish nationalist parties.
A real shame. I've been to Scotland and love the country. I suspected this was the case. Oh well. Hope springs eternal.
Thx, Ivan.
Way, way back, I recall the Pound and 1,000 Yen and $4 were fairly close...
Labour Party 50
Scottish National Party 25
Conservative Party 17
Liberal Democrats 17
Scottish Green Party 7
Scottish Socialist Party 4
Solidarity (Scotland) 2
Scottish Senior Citizens Unity Party 1
Independent 5
Presiding Officer 1
Not one of those parties with the exception of the Conservatives are anything we'd remotely like.
Regards, Ivan
Well England has owned Scotland for a lot longer than Americans have owned America so I suppose the Native Americans oil has also subsidised the United States
In my experience, interest in the issue is most fertile in the border counties - a very long way from either myself or Ivan, who concern ourselves with how to get away from the EU, not how to get closer to it as the Scots appear to wish.
That said, I agree that separation would diminish support for Labour - but on the other hand, so will the forthcoming elections anyway.
My concern is that certain breakaway movements in the north of England might see this as a way to strengthen their calls for regional assemblies which would, without doubt, be a disaster.
And then there's the Orkneys and Shetlands - a different culture again to the Scots.
Very true!
:)
Ping
Sounds like the kook fringe of the US Democratic Party.
The SNP are Sinn Fein without a terrorist wing!
Next it will be Cornwall :)
In the meantime why don't they kick out the alien Muslims?!?!?
I don't like it.
The oldest countries of Europe all began as kingdoms, and were united under their kings long before anyone ever heard of ethnic nationalism. If you ask a man in the Ile de France, London or Glasgow, in 900 AD, "what he was", he would have told you he was "a Christian". Pressed, he would have identified the King of France, or of England, or some other local ruler as his lord, but the home of the heart was not some tribe, it was Christ and his Church.
That all of these centuries later the Bretons should decide that they cannot abide Paris, or the Scots should decide they cannot abide London...this is madness. Where is the end to it? Why should old tribal affiliations be the end of the game? If the agricultural zones should decide that farmers cannot abide cityfolk and should not have to? Or the very wealthy should decide that they no longer wish to follow the laws of the land or pay taxes (but do not want to owe fealty to the Prince of Monaco) should they, too, be able to simply secede because they want to?
And if I no longer want to follow the law and pay taxes, may I erect a fence and declare myself King, and shoot at airplanes passing overhead?
Scotland and England are free. There was a time, under the rule of the Kings, when neither were, nor Ireland. And in those times of abuses there was ample reason for rebellion.
But today?
What cause is there tooday to break up ancient arrangements and ovreturn long-established governments? Simpy greed over eight pence on a pound?
On what basis do free Corsicans or free Ulstermen of either stripe presujme to blow people to kingdom come today?
The UK is the UK, and should remain the UK.
Balkanizing Western Europe is foolishness.
Point final a la ligne.
That's about the size of it.
If Scotland becomes independent, they'll be run into the ground.
Regards, Ivan
Interesting question: if England and Scotland part ways, who gets custody of the nukes?
Regards, Ivan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.