I FEEL that Andrew Vine is primarily looking to the past and therefore missing the point (The Yorkshire Post May 8).
The more important question is: what is the future for the UK? It seems to me there are two important precedents to consider.
It is essential to observe what happened to the British Empire. The amazing thing is that it was relatively peacefully restructured as the Commonwealth – a new name and constitution, and developed in a commendable way.
Scandinavia is a fascinating example of four nations living together independently whilst meeting as a Nordic Council to resolve the obvious joint issues of the nations.
The four nations of the UK have four separate situations, all relating to the fact that they each have issues of devolution that will continue to develop until a new concept is promoted. Historically they have never been truly ‘United’.
I feel the big question is what might the UK become? To date so far I feel the UI might be the answer United Isles (England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales). Meeting initially on a rotating quarterly basis and eventually having a similar structure to the Nordic Council.
From: Gareth Robson, Kent House Road, Beckenham.
I AGREE with the final sentence in Andrew Vine’s Saturday essay: “Those seduced by the fantasies spun about independence won’t realise just how much they have lost until it is too late.”
Unfortunately, it applies to the tragedy of the UK’s departure from the EU; not to the ambitions of Wales, Scotland and England to go it alone.
Within the cleverly-constructed framework of the EU, we could have co-operated comfortably as separate nations (Ireland – either re-united or partitioned – Wales, Scotland, England) but outside that framework any nation leaving the UK will now face far more awkward obstacles, meaning more trauma for all parts of the union if there is to be a break-up.
The referenda of 2014 and 2016 both produced the wrong result and have delivered the current situation in which we are trapped in a moribund and unhappy marriage. A velvet divorce is no longer available.
From: Dr O Sykes, Brampton Drive, Liverpool.
THE Brexiteers are fond of saying that the 2019 election gave an ‘unprecedented’ mandate to “Get Brexit Done”.
They base this claim on the fact that, under the ‘first past the post system’, the Tory vote share of 43.6 per cent converted into a large Parliamentary majority.
In last week’s elections to the Scottish Parliament, the SNP won an overall vote share of 47.7 per cent. It is therefore complete hypocrisy for Brexiteers and Tories to claim that the SNP has no right to pursue a new independence referendum when this is higher than the Tory vote share in 2019 – which they were quite happy to use as a justification for ploughing ahead with Brexit.
It is also hypocritical for them to conveniently become temporary converts to ‘proportional representation’ and emphasise that the SNP on its own did not win an outright majority of seats.
This ignores the fact there is a pro-independence majority overall, and that if the same system was used in Scotland as for Westminster elections, the SNP would be sitting on a huge majority with 109 seats out of 129.
Given such appalling double standards, no wonder so many Scots want out of the UK state.
From: Jarvis Browning, Fadmoor, York.
I SINCERELY hope the Scottish voters will not agree with an independent Scotland if they have a referendum, we’ve had a United Union since 1707! The EU is not interested in an independent Scotland without England and Wales. An independent Scotland will not survive economically, and then we’ll have an influx of Scots moving south as they have done in the past.
Support The Yorkshire Post and become a subscriber today. Your subscription will help us to continue to bring quality news to the people of Yorkshire. In return, you’ll see fewer ads on site, get free access to our app and receive exclusive members-only offers. Click here to subscribe.