Why do England stay attached to the UK?

Question

As scotland and wales have their own parliment/assemblies, they obviously dont want to be a part of great britain anymore, and make their own decisions.
So why dont we cut them off?
Scotland cost us £11 billion a year!!
Wales must be close due to them having FREE prescriptions funded by us!
There must be some reason England has not set up on its own must'nt there?

Answer 1

why does scotland always go on about the oil that is owned by bp not by scotland. england taxes it yes and that money goes all over the uk not to england. scotland is so much better off ur nhs is better u dont pay for percriptions in scotland or wales. you get free university we get nothing like that in england so why are we better off. i feel england should become independent. t

Answer 2

Though the SNP has become the largest party in Scotland after these recent elections, remember that a majority of Scots in fact voted for unionist parties. Same in Wales.

So I'm not sure it's right that people in these places don't want to be part of Great Britain any more, or that England should feel rejected.

Naturally people want as many decisions as are appropriate taken as close to them as possible. That's especially likely in areas with a strong cultural identity, where a perception of being ruled from afar by people without that identity at heart can be stronger.

Hence enthusiasm for the assembly and parliament in Wales and Scotland.

But when the idea of a regional assembly was put to a referendum in the North East of England a couple of years ago, it was rejected by a massive 78%.

It was perceived to be politicians trying to add yet another layer of bureaucracy and expense, and about providing more 'jobs for the boys'.

I suspect that an English Parliament is seen as unnecessary for similar reasons.

Altogether, I expect this is why the English remain committed to the UK - they don't feel too rejected by the Scots and Welsh wanting more local autonomy, and don't like the idea of yet more politicians, bureaucracy and, consequently, higher taxes.

If you want to save some money in the field of international relations, I'd start by looking at the billions Britain hands over to the European Union every year. That's an organisation whose auditors haven't been able to approve their accounts for twelve years running, and has a terrible reputation for waste and fraud. That's the real waste.

Answer 3

The topic of "Who owns the North Sea oil" is a contentious one.

BP does not own the oil at all. It merely has the right to access it. Although there are no internationally recognised "Scottish waters", as a result of Scots law being different to English, there is a region roughly defined for the purposes of executing the law accordingly. However, the precise borders of this region are open to interpretation and as such, the amount of North Sea oil that would fall under Scottish jurisdiction ranges between 70-95% of the total currently administered by the UK.

Figures from around 2000 suggest that Scotland's budgetary shortfall is about 11%, compared to 4% in England. Again, this is dependent on exactly how much of the oil is apportioned to Scotland's coffers.

Scotland's fishing industry cannot be described as anything remotely approaching thriving. EU regulations have crippled the Scottish fishing fleet and left it struggling for survival.

Scotland's only chance of surviving as an independent country would be if it were weaned of the Barnett formula over a period of years prior to severance and also vastly improved its national health in order that it can save money on public health services.

It is interesting to note that whilst the SNP is obviously in favour of full Scottish independence, it also strongly supports moving into Europe. Why gain sovreignty only to give it away further?

Given England currently funds all other nations in the Union and can be dictated to by the Members for said nations without reciprocal powers, it is a curiousity that England does not harbour its own pretensions to independence by severing ties with the rest of the Union.

Answer 4

Without Scotland the UK would be a lot worse off. Do you not know how much money Scotland generates through North Sea natural gas and oil? Not to mention major tourism, a thriving fishing industry and a huge financial centre in Edinburgh. Wales would collapse if the UK split but Scotland would thrive. There was a vote just last week and the SNP won by a mile....the Scottish people have spoken, they want independence. England need Scotland more than we need you. Our economy may have been crippled for 20 years but that was only because of a Conservative English government. Thank you very much Lady Thatcher

By the way Scotland does not get free prescriptions or free education. And the reason we have a better NHS is because there's less people in the country.

Answer 5

The reason why England has not been given a devolved government is that the Scottish and Welsh junta in this government is using England to keep their seats in these foreign countries. England will not get independence until an English lead Parliament is installed in London. also the Euro-prats in Brussels are trying to break up England into little pieces and remove England from the map as various European govermnents have been tryuing for centuarys.

Answer 6

Chimplad?

The UK is greater than the sum of its parts, it is a big mistake to think that Wales and Scotland 'cost' money. Westminster wastes more on Brussels than it spends on its own people.

We could have free prescriptions if we left the EU!

Our 'cousins' in Wales and Scotland have made and continue to make contributions to our country. The SNP are a pain, its true, the home of the self centred backward thinking anti- English but they are not typical of the Scotts who are warm and generous and the minority of Welsh who hate the English are no greater than the minority of English who return the 'favour'

The UK also has dependencies such as the Falklands and Gibraltar, and we should stay to together at least until we have secured a safe and self determining future for the people on those islands.

Answer 7

This is a very weird question. England to the UK is like the army to the armed forces, or like Russia to the former Soviet Union. I think England is the one that has to make sure that this union is strong; and not the opposite.

If England made it on her own, she'll have to import most of her oil and coal; not to mention cigarettes and alcoholic beverages! Granted that the per capita income will rise and so will the crime rate decrease, but a considerable amount of land and people shall be lost too. Do you think England could single-handedly be a member of the G8? Would her armed forces still be the second most powerful in the world?

I think England needs to preserve this union; otherwise she may have to make very dear sacrifices.

Answer 8

Scotland and Wales are not really big enough to sustain themselves and I believe that majority of Scottish and Welsh people do not want full independence. It is only fair that they make their own decisions. There should be less control by central government. You cannot simply cut them off from England.

Answer 9

Firstly we do pay for our prescription in Scotland and we would love to be separated from England and if we were separated England would loose out in many things from Scotland-north sea oil, whisky and Scottish visitors to England and maybe we would have more say in the amount of English students we have at our universities that are paid for by our taxes and mainly the amount of refugees that are taking our jobs and earning lower wages.

Answer 10

King Edward I "Longshanks" of England (1272-1307) defeated Prince Lllewellyn of Wales in battle in 1282 and the title of Prince of Wales was given to Longshanks' son the future Edward II (1307-1327). Longshanks also subdued Scotland, though Scotland won their independence against his son. Nearly three centuries later, all three children of Henry VIII (1509-1547) - Edward VI (1547-1553), Mary I (1553-1558) and Elizabeth I (1558-1603) - died childless and so the throne of England went to King James VI of Scotland (1567-1625?), who became also James I of England (1603-1625?), who was the great-grandson of Princess Margaret Tudor, who was the sister of Henry VIII. The Act of Union of 1707 created the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1800 and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1922.