A summary of reasons for Scottish Independence.
There are broadly two types of argument for independence, James Mitchell professor of public policy at the University of Edinburgh explains. “One is the classic nationalist argument that a nation ought to govern itself regardless of other considerations,” he says.“There are people who feel that being governed by a party elected for the whole of the UK means that Scottish views and interests are all too often ignored.” Prof Mitchell says this view tends to emerge strongly when the party in power in Westminster has little support in Scotland, like when the Conservatives have won UK elections.
Michael Keating, professor of politics at Aberdeen University: “There’s an argument in principle that Scotland should make its own policy decisions, and the more practical argument that it has been subjected to policies it hasn’t voted for because constantly it's getting Conservative governments,” he says. “It all starts from the idea that Scotland as a nation can decide on its own fate, make decisions for itself and run its own affairs.”
Meanwhile, the other pro-independence argument focuses on Scotland needing “distinct policies, preferences and priorities” that could only be realised if it were to break away from the UK. There’s the economic argument that the country could do better on its own as a small European country, Prof Keating says. Supporters of independence would like to see Scotland have control over its own spending, as well as its natural resources, like oil. And some want it to have the power to make its own decisions about social policy - like migration - which it is currently unable to do as it is reserved to Westminster.
The pro-independence side needs to focus on public services and how Scotland would pay for them as an independent country, Prof Keating argues. He also points to what currency an independent Scotland would use, an issue that became prominent and heavily debated during the 2014 referendum.
But critics retaliate by saying that the EU may not be willing to accept Scotland continuing to use the pound. Yet Dr Hughes thinks the currency problem is exaggerated within the EU context and is “not as big a stumbling block as some of the anti-independence arguments make out... My thought is, as long as there’s a clear path to the introduction of a new currency, then there may well be a willingness on the EU’s side.”
There are also questions about the “hard border” that would be created with England if Scotland were to join the EU.
Opponents of independence claim such a border would be problematic as there would have to be customs checks and regulations brought in, making trade difficult between Scotland and England. Dr Hughes argues: “The benefits of independence aren't just about looking at the cost of putting up a border with England and taking it down to the EU - it’s about the whole lot. We should be having this debate but we’re not, as Nicola Sturgeon said in the election campaign she would bring that case forward later. But if you’re not going to make the argument it’s going to look like you’ve got more trade with the rest of the UK and there are going to be costs. It’s all there to be argued for, and I think alternative arguments can be plausibly made.”
the case for independence is “much stronger than it used to be”, Prof Mitchell says, “in terms of allowing the country more autonomy to pursue its own priorities, policies and preferences”. But he draws attention to the fact that many people already have settled views that are unlikely to change - so, ultimately, it will come down to those who are neither strongly in favour or against independence. “It seems likely at this stage that the result would be close. Public opinion is currently pretty equally divided, with some slight advantages for one side over the other shifting, and so the outcome is difficult to predict. A referendum today or soon would be a massive gamble for each side.”