In defence of UK unity

Will Northern Ireland remain a part of the UK or will it in the near future join a united Ireland. As with everything else I have a Pro UK perspective. I want Northern Ireland to stay a part of the UK for the same reason that I want Scotland to stay a part or for Cornwall to stay a part. I believe in maintaining the territorial integrity of the UK just as people in the United States believe in maintaining the territorial integrity of the United States.

It doesn’t matter that New Mexico, California, Texas etc used to belong to Mexico. Nor does it matter that the Mexican-American War (1846-1848) would be condemned today as unjust, amounting as it did to a United States landgrab. The result of this war which was the partition of Mexico, the northern half going to the United States is still legal. If Mexico attempted to reunite by means of terrorism or war, the United States would be justified in opposing them.

The fact that the partition of Mexico does not justify the unification of Mexico applies also to islands. Hispaniola was partitioned into Haiti and the Dominican Republic. So too Borneo was partitioned into Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei. The very large island or continent of Eurasia has been partitioned into numerous countries. Partition whether just or unjust does not in itself justify unification.

Likewise, the fact that one country lost part of its territory to another country sometime in the past does not justify claiming it back. Much of Poland used to belong to Germany. Much of Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania used to belong to Poland. Some of these territorial changes occurred because the Soviet Union made a pact with Germany in 1939 and invaded Poland. No one seriously thinks that Poland has a legitimate claim to the territory it lost so unjustly because of Soviet collaboration with Nazis.

The fact that a population who identify with one country live in another does not justify any territorial changes. Russia has no legitimate claim on Latvia, because there are large numbers of Russian speakers living there. Hungary cannot annex Transylvania because it used to be part of Hungary and Hungarians still live there. Austria cannot reunite South Tyrol with North Tyrol even though more than 60% of the population speak German rather than Italian. It doesn’t matter that South Tyrol was annexed by Italy against its will in 1919. No one seriously thinks that Austria has the right to reunify its previous territory nor that German speakers have the right to leave Italy because they don’t feel Italian.

There is only one place in Europe where these rules don’t apply. There is only one international border in Europe that is questioned. Only one European country is allowed to long for Großirland rather than remain Kleinirland. Normal rules don’t apply in Ireland and most especially not in Northern Ireland.

But there is one thing and one thing only that makes Northern Ireland different from other places. Britain.

There is something very strange about Britain. Whereas every other nation state fights to maintain its territorial integrity we are largely indifferent. The British Army could have maintained control in Ireland with ease both during and after the First World War. Compare and contrast the various wars that occurred after 1918 with how Britain responded to rebellion in Ireland. Turkey resisted the Treaty of Sèvres (1920) and fought against Greek incursions into Anatolia and Eastern Thrace. The result still stands. Poles resurrected their state and defended it fiercely. But Britain was too tired.

We were willing to lose more than one and half million men to defend Belgium neutrality and a few hundred yards of French mud, but we were unwilling even to properly deploy the British Army to defend British territory in Ireland and we were defeated by a raggle taggle band of proto terrorists numbering a few thousand with home made weapons or those they could smuggle from abroad.

An experienced British Army Corps of Somme veterans, perhaps even a division could have defeated the IRA in 1919. Instead we chose to wait forty years to fight the battle by which time the enemy was stronger and more costly to defeat. The loss of the Irish Treaty Ports in 1938 alone would have been reason enough to commit that Corps in 1919. More British sailors were lost between 1939 and 1945 because our Atlantic patrol aircraft could not take off or land in the Irish Republic, than would have been needed to defeat Irish rebellion in the first place. If you think that would have been unjust you must apply that logic to every other historical rebellion that was defeated, e.g., the American Civil War or the Paris Commune.

The most peculiar thing about the Troubles is that Britain chose to fight at all. Why deploy the British Army for more than thirty years. Why go through decades of bombing and murder of our citizens in Northern Ireland if we choose in the end to essentially accept long term defeat. The IRA may not have succeeded militarily but their thirty-year war was a long-term strategic defeat for the UK. We promised not to give in to terrorism, but in the end we did. Terrorism won.

The Belfast Agreement (1998) is just another example of the damage Tony Blair’s Labour Government did to the UK. Not merely did he fuel nationalism in Scotland and Wales by means of an uneven devolution settlement, he did the same in Northern Ireland by means of a devolved power sharing arrangement that entrenched sectarianism in Northern Ireland, rewarded the more extreme voices of both communities and gave the IRA the means to achieve their aims by simply waiting. It would have been better and less costly in terms of lives and money if the UK had simply granted the IRA its wishes way back in 1968. Why fight for thirty years if you are going to give up in the end anyway?

We have seen the consequences that followed from the Belfast Agreement in the past three years. Ireland with help from the EU has leveraged the agreement so as to work towards its long-term goal of a united Ireland. The UK has no more obligation to keep open the international border between Ireland and Northern Ireland than does any other state. But the Belfast Agreement (which says nothing about borders) plus EU hostility to the UK, plus Theresa May’s foolish acceptance of the Irish backstop meant that the UK could only leave the EU by allowing Northern Ireland to be treated differently to the other parts of the UK. We could have given up on Brexit but would that really have helped Northern Ireland in the long run? We could have gone for “No Deal” but we didn’t have the numbers in a Parliament and anyway that might have given rise to a Border Poll in Northern Ireland.  But no matter what we did there might at some point in the years ahead be a Border Poll.

Ireland had no more legitimate claim to UK territory than any other country in the world until we gave them it. The Belfast Agreement may have brought a sort of peace to Northern Ireland, but at the cost of treating Northern Ireland differently from the other parts of the UK. We would resist any other foreign power’s claim to British territory, but we gave Ireland the means of annexing our territory simply by winning two referendums. This is the equivalent of the United States giving Mexico the right to gain back what it lost by winning a referendum in Mexico and New Mexico. The problem is that while most Americans would care about the loss of former Mexican territories, not least because they live there, most Brits and most British politicians don’t care about Northern Ireland. It is so to speak a near away place of which we know nothing.

What if anything can be done? Pro UK politicians in Northern Ireland must appeal to both communities and make their parties non-sectarian. Being British has absolutely nothing to do with being Protestant or Catholic. It would help Northern Ireland enormously if it voted for Conservatives, Labour and the Lib Dems. If you want to be British, vote for British parties.

We should build the Boris bridge from Scotland to Northern Ireland on condition that the money expended would be paid back if the constitutional status of either Scotland or Northern Ireland was changed. There is no point paying to unify what might be divided. 

The British Government, having seen how Ireland is using the Belfast Agreement should seek to amend or repudiate it. Lots of treaties have been signed in history only to be revoked. If that proves to be impossible, we should make clear to Ireland that we would treat the loss of Northern Ireland as an essentially hostile act on their part. They could have it, but in that case they would have to immediately pay the £10.8 Billion per year that the UK presently provides Northern Ireland. They would also have to deal with any troubles by themselves. British citizens would have the right to move to the UK and we would help them do so by providing them with housing and jobs. But under those circumstances it might be better if the UK decided to revoke whatever rights Irish citizens have at present in the UK and to decide that the Common Travel Area is no longer necessary given that the sea would be the border between Ireland and Britain. We could then develop relations with Ireland along similar lines to those we have with Japan, Vanuatu or Chad.

None of these things will happen of course. The UK will meekly assist and even defend those who hate us and want only our destruction. While we have been willing to fight for Belgium, France and  Poland we are unwilling to fight for ourselves.

Each of us is a British ambassador

Every now and again on Twitter a Scottish nationalist contacts me with pictures of a demonstration that took place in Glasgow sometime soon after the Scottish independence referendum in 2014. The pictures involve some Glaswegians behaving badly. They carry Union Flags and are clearly involved in some sort of disorder. Some of them are making far right gestures. I always point out that such pictures suggest West of Scotland sectarianism rather than anything to do with the rest of Scotland. Where I live in Aberdeenshire, no-one knows or cares whether someone else is a Catholic or Protestant. The idea of voting because of religion strikes the vast majority of Scots as something out of the Middle Ages. Nevertheless it is important to realise that years after this misbehaviour in Glasgow, Scottish nationalists feel they can use it to help their cause. Those foolish people misbehaving in Glasgow might have been waving Union flags, but they were harming the UK and helping those who want to destroy it by means of Scottish independence.

The Pro UK side of the argument has an advantage. We don’t have the equivalent of Cybernats, neither online nor on the streets. I can’t remember a huge Pro UK mob picketing an SNP conference or the BBC. Nicola Sturgeon has never been chased by a mob in Edinburgh, nor was Alex Salmond. It was Jim Murphy who was confronted by a foul mouthed mob while he tried to put forward reasoned argument. When someone from the SNP speaks in public they are allowed to do so in peace. No large Pro UK crowd will even turn up let alone attempt to shout them down.

Online the situation is if anything worse. Pro UK people regularly are attacked by foul mouthed nationalists for simply expressing an opinion that they disagree with. What is frightening is that on occasions these mobs can be overwhelming. Suddenly you find your timeline filled with hundreds, sometimes thousands of Scottish nationalists saying the most insulting things imaginable. These people have succeeded in driving some Pro UK people from Twitter.

At some points it gets so bad that I take the rather drastic step of blocking Scottish nationalists en masse. I simply go down my timeline and block everyone whose picture suggests they support the SNP. It's a pity, but it works and enables me to use Twitter in peace.

There is no equivalent to this on the Pro UK side. There are some Pro UK people who say stupid things, but they are isolated individuals.

The important point to realise is that the Scottish nationalist extremists who become mobs on the street or mobs online damage the SNP. The sort of people who vandalised Pro UK signs in the street in 2014 didn’t help the cause of Scottish independence they harmed it. An angry mob whether online or on the street is not a vote winner. It’s a vote loser.

For the most part Pro UK people I come across behave well. We all sometimes say or write stupid things. We all sometimes lose our tempers. But try to always remember that by expressing support for the UK you represent our country. By behaving well you make it more likely that moderate Scottish voters will continue to support the UK and reject Scottish independence.

I have a general policy of not debating to any great extent with obviously committed Scottish nationalists. I will make one or two comments and then leave it. There is no point having long debates with people who won’t change their minds. I will try to be polite, but if I get any sort of insult, I will politely but immediately block them. I consider words like “yoon” and “British nationalist” to be insults. There is no point replying with an insult. Instead simply block and the problem is solved.

I use polemic in my writing and I try to point out what I think is the hidden truth involving Scottish nationalism. My style of writing is always to try look at issues in an unusual way. Sometimes in the hundreds of thousands of words I have written I may misjudge something. That is the nature of writing articles that try to be original. But I don’t make lurid and obviously false claims about our opponents. If I did it would help their cause and damage mine.

Sometimes I see Pro UK people who use sectarian language or who describe the SNP as Nazis. These people are helping the SNP and making Scottish independence more likely. It’s ludicrously false to describe Nicola Sturgeon as a Nazi. I try to follow back everyone on Twitter. It's only polite.  But I tend to simply ignore people who make our side look bad. Having a profile picture of Sturgeon mocked up to look like Hitler is the equivalent of Scottish nationalists burning the Union Flag. Likewise ranting and swearing about the SNP might give you a moment’s pleasure, but it hurts the Pro UK cause. The same goes for any sort of sectarianism.

Sectarianism is deeply unpopular in most of Scotland. The vast majority of us have no time whatsoever for either side of this divide. If you are motivated by sectarianism you would be far better keeping silent. Most Scots whether we support independence or oppose it want nothing to do with sectarianism. It horrified me when the Orange Order decided to march prior to the vote in 2014. It cost the Pro UK side votes.

Our task is always to reach out to moderate people and the undecided. The best way to do this is to make clear, rational arguments and to do so in as polite a way as possible. Treat our opponents with respect. We are all Scots. Disagree forcefully with them by all means, but don’t attack them personally. It is to our good fortune that a large number of pro-independence people behave badly. Let them do so, but don’t join in. If we can show that the Pro UK side of the argument is the more reasonable because we behave better, we will have a far better chance to defeat the SNP in any future election. 

"F off Scotland"

There was a football match between England and Scotland sometime in 2014. The England fans sang “F off Scotland”. Did they think they were helping the cause of UK unity or hindering it? Did they think at all? It’s an attitude that I come across more regularly now. I’m quite sure it’s a minority view. But it is becoming commonplace to meet English people who have become hostile to Scotland remaining a part of the UK or at best indifferent. The SNP have been very careful over the years to annoy the English. They have succeeded. But it strikes me as just a little unthinking for English people to fall for this trick.

It is perfectly natural to be hurt by how the SNP have been trying to break up our country. When a husband tells his wife he no longer loves her and wants a divorce it is natural for the wife to be angry and to tell him to “F off then”. But we are not in that situation. Scotland did not reject the UK in 2014. We reaffirmed our marriage vows. The SNP represent a minority of Scots. They have a lot of seats and they have a leader who is on television a lot. But they still lost the only vote that mattered in 2014 by a large margin.

There is justified resentment in England about devolution. It is obviously unjust that Scotland has devolution while England does not. English people can justly complain that their taxes subsidise Scotland and they only get insults in return. It’s worth remembering however, that unless you live in London or the South East your region is subsidised by the UK Government too. This is how successful countries are run. Germans didn’t complain about the cost of subsidising East Germany when they reunited. This is because they were all Germans, fellow countrymen who had a shared history and identity. So do we. Don’t help Scottish nationalists separate what is essentially the same.

Few English people are really English nationalists. There is no successful party that represents these views. But English people do lash out with momentary lapses into nationalism. It’s understandable that football fans should do so. But it is just as stupid and harmful when it comes from an MP. You might get a moment of satisfaction by metaphorically saying “F off Scotland”, but you damage our shared country by making it more likely that Scotland eventually will achieve independence. How do you suppose the average Scottish voter is likely to respond to being told by an English person that he is indifferent to the continuation of the UK or that he would really prefer it if Scotland just left? Would such a voter be more or less likely to support the UK?

The support of ordinary British citizens across the UK is absolutely crucial to maintaining the unity of our country. This was ably demonstrated in Canada a few years ago. On two occasions Quebec had a vote for independence. On the second occasion the separatists almost won. But Canadians from across Canada had come together to show support for Canadian unity. There were huge demonstrations of support for Quebec remaining an integral part of Canada. There is no doubt that this positive support influenced some people in Quebec. Given the closeness of the result, it may well have been decisive.

Canadians realised that their country would be diminished if it lost the huge chunk of territory that makes up Quebec and the people who live there. It is vital that everyone in the UK realises that we all would be diminished by Scottish independence. English nationalists may think we’d be all right. But would you?

What flag would you fly over the Houses of Parliament? It could hardly be the Union Flag. The Scottish Saltire is a part of that flag and would have to be removed. Would it be the Cross of St George then? What about Wales and Northern Ireland then?

Do English nationalists really want to go down the route of separating their country from Northern Ireland and Wales? Would you like to do this at the same time as separating from Scotland? This strikes me as all rather complex. You end up with a rather oddly shaped part of an island in the North Sea. Who would take such a place seriously?

If on the other hand England Wales and Northern Ireland stuck together what would this place be called? What would be its common identity? It couldn't be British, because North Britain would be gone. It couldn’t be called Great Britain as this includes Scotland. It couldn’t be called the United Kingdom. What would you call the place where you live “Little Britain” or the “Disunited Kingdom”? “F off Scotland” begins to look rather foolish doesn’t it?

The greatness of Britain has only been achieved since we have been united. Prior to that we fought amongst ourselves and this hindered our development. Our common identity as British people and the things that our country is most famous for have all been achieved as one United Kingdom. Would you really throw all this away for the momentary satisfaction of telling Nicola Sturgeon to “F off”?

People rightly across the UK support Gibraltar remaining British. It’s something we are all concerned about, because the people there want to remain British.  We fought for Northern Ireland’s right to stay British so long as that was what the majority wanted. Yet perversely some English people say they would look on with a complete lack of concern as our island was partitioned. This would not be the loss of a tiny rock at the bottom of the Iberian Peninsula.  Losing Scotland would mean losing one third of the UK’s territory and one tenth of its people. It would bring to an end three hundred years of history and do to us what no war has been able to do before now. Other countries fight to keep uninhabited islands, while some English people are happy to see our country break in two. It’s so much fun telling the Scots where to get off. But I’m sorry folks, it is childish, it is unpatriotic and it is downright not how British people behave. If this is the way you think, you should be ashamed of yourself. You are doing the SNP’s job for them. 

The folly is that we have potentially a great new future to look forward to. Brexit provides Britain with a new role. But it requires our unity. If we start fighting amongst ourselves, how will we have the energy to grasp that future? When the UK became united we ceased looking inward and instead looked outward. It is this and this alone that enabled a rather small island to become a great power. Brexit gives us the chance again, but only if we remain together. We can become a beacon of free trade that welcomes the world. But if we were to break up, that same world would shake its head at our folly. You couldn’t even keep your small island together. Who would take such a place seriously?

Above all else English people must not imitate Scottish nationalism. They must help us defeat it. We need you. In the coming years, the help of Pro UK Brits from all over the UK will be decisive in keeping the UK united. I can understand the temptation to say “F off” to the SNP. But this is what they want you to say. The unthinking may not understand this, but far too many intelligent English people don’t understand it either. 

Setting sail in an SNP sieve

The UK is now going to leave the EU by the end of January, and it is likely that the transition period will last until no longer than the end of 2020. This will mean that the UK is unlikely to have a complete trade deal with the EU. It would take longer than a few months to negotiate one. Whatever ties remain between the UK and the EU will therefore be relatively loose. The UK will be able to make trade deals with other countries and will begin to diverge from EU rules and regulations. We will be able to compete with the EU and potentially offer an alternative way of doing business to the EU model. What does this mean for the Leave Remain argument in the UK?

The first thing it means is that Remainers can no longer be Remainers. They will have to either give up on the EU or become Rejoiners. What would campaigning to rejoin the EU entail?

It would mean telling the electorate they were wrong, not merely when they voted to Leave the EU in 2016, but more importantly when they elected the Conservatives twice running on a Leave manifesto. Are Labour really going to insist that the Brexit supporting voters who switched from Labour to Conservative were stupid? Are the Lib Dems having been reduced to 11 seats on a Revoke Article 50 platform going to go into an election on a Revoke Brexit platform?

We don’t know how leaving the EU is going to go. We haven’t left yet, and we are not going to leave the transition period for another year. But early signs are that the markets were absolutely delighted that the Conservatives won and perfectly content that we are leaving the EU. The uncertainty is now over and there is the prospect of lots of investment in the years to come. The Conservative Government intends to spend a great deal on improving life in those parts of the UK that are less well off. We will trade reasonably freely with the EU while having the chance to make our own deals with the USA, Australia, Japan etc. We may be able to undercut the EU and be able to do business with less regulation and more profit. After three years of dither and not doing much we have the chance to make progress.

Rejoiners have to hope that Brexit goes badly for the UK. If Britain does well from leaving the EU, the Rejoiner argument will be hopeless. For this reason, the Rejoiners must hope that the UK has a deep recession, with millions of job losses so that we have to go back to the EU like the prodigal son. EU forgive me for I have sinned, what is my penance?

Hoping that your country does badly is not a particularly good look, but let’s imagine that somehow a few years from now there is a Rejoiner Government. What would be the conditions for rejoining the EU? These conditions are worth investigating because they would also apply to an independent Scotland which would not be rejoining the EU, because it never joined in the first place, but would rather be joining from scratch.

1. Political union.

The UK or Scotland would have to promise to accept the aims of the EU. The EU aims to achieve monetary, fiscal and political union. It might have been possible in 1973 to pretend that the Common Market was only a trading group, but we all know better now. The question for the SNP would thus be why are you leaving one political union (the UK) in order to join another (the EU). If you can’t bear to be in a political union with people who speak English, how do you suppose you will be able to bear being in such a union with people who don’t. If you dislike being ruled by Westminster, why will you be happier being ruled by Brussels?

2. Rebate

For the UK to rejoin the EU we would have to accept that we would have to pay more for our membership. The UK would not receive, the rebate negotiated by Margaret Thatcher, but neither for that matter would Scotland. Brexit will mean that the proportion of the membership fee that Scotland would have to pay would also increase.

3. Schengen

All new EU member states have to promise to join the Schengen zone. Ireland and the UK received opt outs, but these are no longer available. The result for the UK would be that there would be no border checks between Calais and Dover. Migrants in France and anywhere else in the EU could simply get on a train and arrive in England without any checks whatsoever. When millions of refugees marched into Germany, they could equally as easily have marched into Britain. The problem for Scotland is that if Scotland were in Schengen while the former UK was not, there would be nothing to stop anyone who got into Scotland from simply walking across the border. For this reason, Scotland’s membership of Schengen would most likely entail border controls between England and Scotland. For this reason an independent Scotland could not be a member of the Common Travel zone that currently exists between the UK and Ireland.

4. Euro.

Each new EU member state must promise to join the Euro. It’s all very well saying that we would break this promise, but if you don’t agree with the aims of the EU why ask to join? In order to join the Euro it is likely that Scotland would have to have its own currency and central bank. Otherwise it could not cope with the Euro convergence criteria and could not enter the Exchange Rate Mechanism (which the UK so famously was kicked out of in 1992.)

5. Currency.

Each and every one of the present EU members had its own currency prior to joining the EU. Using Sterling unilaterally after leaving the UK would make it difficult for Scotland to fulfil the economic criteria which the EU requires from candidate countries. For instance, Scotland would have no control over interest rates or monetary policy, which would make it difficult for Scotland to reduce its deficit to the level the EU require without introducing radical cuts to public spending.  It’s unclear anyway that it would be possible for an EU country to use the currency of a non-EU country, because it’s never been tried.

6. Law.

Each new EU member has to follow the rule of law. No new EU member has seceded from a member state while that country was a member state, but we know that the EU sided with Spain after Catalonia tried to secede illegally.  If Scotland were to attempt to become independent by means of an illegal referendum, it would bar itself from EU membership, because it had broken article two of the Treaties of the European Union. It would not have followed the rule of law.

7. Trade

As the UK makes trade deals with other countries such as the USA and as we benefit from importing goods no longer subject to the EU’s Common External Tariff, it will be recognised that rejoining the EU or in Scotland’s case joining from scratch would involve giving up these trade deals. If UK or Scottish businesses benefit from our new trading relationship with the rest of the world, they will have to recognise that rejoining/joining the EU will mean these deals ceasing.  Those who hope for future EU membership are reduced to hoping UK trade goes badly.

8. Powers

Both the UK and Scotland will gain new powers as a result of Brexit. Areas such as agriculture, fisheries, trade, and environment will controlled largely by the devolved parliaments of the UK with some input from the UK Parliament to make sure that there is harmony in the UK’s internal market. For the UK to rejoin or for Scotland to join the EU we would need to give up control of our territorial waters. We would need to cease controlling our own farms and environment. The Scottish Parliament will as a result of Brexit gain new powers. The SNP will have to explain to the Scottish people why it wants to make the Scottish Parliament less powerful and why it wants to give up power in order to become “independent”.

9. Border

The UK will be outside the EU’s Single Market and Custom’s Union. If Scotland were to join the EU, the EU’s external border would be between England and Scotland. The only way to prevent this giving rise to border checks would be if the former UK agreed to rejoin the EU’s Single Market and Custom’s Union. This obviously would not happen. It is inevitable therefore that border checks would have to take place between Scotland and England. Not least because former UK goods would be subject to the EU’s Common External Tariff and Scottish goods would be subject to whatever tariffs the former UK chose to impose. These checks might involve border checks or they might be done remotely. But we have learned from the “backstop” debate that the EU will insist that checks are made somewhere.

10. Divergence.

Brexit is going to cause the UK to gradually diverge from the EU. The more this happens the harder it will be for either the UK to rejoin or for Scotland to join the EU, because we would be required to converge again with EU rules and regulations. The further the UK diverges from the EU, the greater the distance would be between an independent Scotland and the former UK if Scotland were to join the EU. Scotland trades far more with the other parts of the UK than with anyone else. Independence would inevitably mean Scotland ceasing to be part of the UK’s Internal market, but an independent Scotland in the EU would be in a different trading bloc to its greatest trade partner and that trade partner would be diverging from Scotland just as Scotland was converging with the EU. It is preposterous to suppose that Scotland could benefit economically from this arrangement.

The obstacles to the UK rejoining the EU are such that it may as well be discounted. But the obstacles to Scotland joining the EU are if anything even greater. Not only would Scotland have to go through the upheaval of leaving the UK, we would not be able to join the EU that we are in at present. We wouldn’t be able to do this not merely because the UK would no longer be there, but just as importantly because rules for new members have changed since the UK first became a member and require things that they did not require before.

The condition for the possibility that Scotland could become independent was always that the UK was a member of the EU. If that were the case, then Scottish independence could occur with minimal disruption to the Scottish economy. But Brexit changes the relationship between an independent Scotland and the former UK so radically and involves such uncertainty and so many unresolved questions that it would involve Scotland starting life both outside the UK and outside the EU. The SNP might as well propose that we set sail in a sieve without charts.

Could Scotland join the EU?

The UK is now definitely going to leave the EU. What does this mean for an independent Scotland joining the EU?

1. Political union.

Scotland would have to promise to accept the aims of the EU. The EU aims to achieve monetary, fiscal and political union. It might have been possible in 1973 to pretend that the Common Market was only a trading group, but we all know better now. The question for the SNP is why are you leaving one political union (the UK) in order to join another (the EU). If you can’t bear to be in a political union with people who speak English, how do you suppose you will be able to bear being in such a union with people who don’t. If you dislike being ruled by Westminster, why will you be happier being ruled by Brussels?

2. Rebate

If the UK intended to rejoin the EU, we would have to accept that we would have to pay more for our membership. The UK would not receive, the rebate negotiated by Margaret Thatcher, but neither for that matter would Scotland. Brexit will mean that proportionally the membership fee that Scotland would have to pay would also increase. 

3. Schengen

All new EU member states must promise to join the Schengen zone. Ireland and the UK received opt outs, but these are no longer available. The result for the UK would have been that there were be no border checks between Calais and Dover. Migrants in France and anywhere else in the EU could simply get on a train and arrive in England without any checks whatsoever. When millions of refugees marched into Germany, they could equally as easily have marched into Britain. The problem for Scotland is that if Scotland were in Schengen while the former UK was not, there would be nothing to stop anyone who got into Scotland from simply walking across the border. For this reason, Scotland’s membership of Schengen would most likely entail border controls between England and Scotland.  An independent Scotland could not be a member of the Common Travel zone that currently exists between the UK and Ireland.

4. Euro.

Each new EU member state must promise to join the Euro. It’s all very well saying that we would break this promise, but if you don’t agree with the aims of the EU why ask to join? In order to join the Euro, it is likely that Scotland would have to have its own currency and central bank. Otherwise it could not cope with the Euro convergence criteria and could not enter the Exchange Rate Mechanism (which the UK so famously was kicked out of in 1992.). This means that ordinary Scots would first have to convert their money from Sterling to Scottish Poonds and then to Euros. In each case there would most likely be devaluation.

5. Keeping the Pound

Each and every one of the present EU members had its own currency prior to joining the EU. Using Sterling unilaterally after leaving the UK would make it difficult for Scotland to fulfil the economic criteria which the EU requires from candidate countries. For instance, Scotland would have no control over interest rates or monetary policy, which would make it difficult for Scotland to reduce its deficit to the level the EU require without introducing radical cuts to public spending.  It’s unclear anyway whether it would even be possible for an EU country to use the currency of a non-EU country, because it’s never been tried.

6. Law.

Each new EU member must follow the rule of law. No new EU member has seceded from a member state while that country was a member state, but we know that the EU sided with Spain after Catalonia tried to secede illegally.  If Scotland were to attempt to become independent by means of an illegal referendum, it would bar itself from EU membership, because it had broken article two of the Treaties of the European Union. It would not have followed the rule of law.

7. Trade

As the UK makes trade deals with other countries such as the USA and as we benefit from importing goods no longer subject to the EU’s Common External Tariff, it will be recognised that Scotland’s joining the EU would involve giving up these trade deals. If Scottish businesses benefit from our new trading relationship with the rest of the world, they will face the fact that joining the EU will mean these deals ceasing.  Those who hope for Scotland’s future EU membership are reduced to hoping that UK trade goes badly, which amounts to hoping that Scotland’s economy goes badly too.

8. Powers

Both the UK and Scotland will gain new powers as a result of Brexit. Areas such as agriculture, fisheries, trade, and environment will controlled largely by the devolved parliaments of the UK with some input from the UK Parliament to make sure that there is harmony in the UK’s internal market. For Scotland to join the EU we would need to give up control of our territorial waters. We would need to cease controlling our own farms and environment. The Scottish Parliament will as a result of Brexit gain new powers. The SNP will have to explain to the Scottish people why it wants to make the Scottish Parliament less powerful and why it wants to give up power in order to become “independent”.

9. Border

The UK will be outside the EU’s Single Market and Custom’s Union. If Scotland were to join the EU, the EU’s external border would be between England and Scotland. The only way to prevent this giving rise to border checks would be if the former UK agreed to rejoin the EU’s Single Market and Custom’s Union. This obviously would not happen. It is inevitable therefore that border checks would have to take place between Scotland and England. Not least because former UK goods would be subject to the EU’s Common External Tariff and Scottish goods would be subject to whatever tariffs the former UK chose to impose. These checks might involve physical checks at the border, or they might be done remotely. But we have learned from the “backstop” debate that the EU will insist that checks are made somewhere.

10. Divergence.

Brexit is going to cause the UK to gradually diverge from the EU. The more this happens the harder it will be for Scotland to join the EU, because we would be required to converge that much more with EU rules and regulations. The further the UK diverges from the EU, the greater the distance would be between an independent Scotland and the former UK if Scotland were to join the EU. Scotland trades far more with the other parts of the UK than with anyone else. Independence would inevitably mean Scotland ceasing to be part of the UK’s Internal market, but an independent Scotland in the EU would be in a different trading bloc to its greatest trade partner and that trade partner would be diverging from Scotland just as Scotland was diverging from the UK and instead converging with the EU. It is preposterous to suppose that Scotland could benefit economically from this arrangement, because the amount Scotland trades with the EU is much less than we trade with the UK. It is the equivalent of California supposing it would be better off if it left the USA.

The obstacles to the UK rejoining the EU are such that it may as well be discounted. But the obstacles to Scotland joining the EU are if anything even greater. Not only would Scotland have to go through the upheaval of leaving the UK, we would not be able to join the EU that we are in at present. We wouldn’t be able to do this not merely because the UK would no longer be there, but just as importantly because the rules for new members have changed since the UK first became a member and require things that they did not require before.

The condition for the possibility that Scotland could become independent was always that the UK was a member of the EU. If that were the case, then Scottish independence could occur with minimal disruption to the Scottish economy. But Brexit changes the relationship between an independent Scotland and the former UK so radically and involves such uncertainty and so many unresolved questions that it would involve Scotland starting life both outside the UK and outside the EU. The SNP might as well propose that we set sail in a sieve without charts.

The SNP are unaware of the scale of their defeat

Politics is the continuation of war by other means is to rather mangle Clausewitz but expresses a truth that the SNP and most other Scots missed yesterday.  The SNP may have won a tactical victory, but they suffered a strategic defeat.

The SNP goal of creating an independent Scotland, depends on their being granted an independence referendum. But this depended on them holding the balance of power in a hung Parliament and propping up Labour.

The Conservatives put in their manifesto that they would not allow a second independence referendum and therefore have a perfect right not to allow one. This was a UK Election and a Government has a right indeed a duty to implement its manifesto. There is nothing undemocratic about this. Quite the reverse.

 The SNP offensive is the equivalent of the Battle of the Bulge (1944-5). Their tanks pierced the front line and broke through gaining an initial tactical victory. But they were just creating a giant salient and a position that was impossible to defend. Eventually the SNP ran out of petrol could not supply their beleaguered front line and what had seemed to be success eventually turned into strategic failure that hastened their final defeat.

The problem the Pro UK side faces is that most Scots are unwilling to exploit the SNP’s strategic defeat. The problem is that most Pro UK Scots agree with the SNP about nearly everything except independence.

The first problem is that we are conditioned to view UK elections through the lens of Scotland. We treat Scotland separately and accept the SNP narrative that it ought to be treated in this way. If you treat Scotland separately, you are a separatist.

Large numbers of Pro UK Scottish Remainers complained that Scotland did not vote Leave in the 2016 referendum. If you think that Scotland ought to have a veto in UK wide elections, you really ought to join the SNP.

But again, far too many Pro UK Scots think that the UK is akin to the EU. They think that the UK is a group of countries that happen to form a union just as long as it is convenient for us to do so. This is historical nonsense. The United Kingdom is one sovereign nation state in the same way that the United States is one sovereign nation state. It matters not at all that the parts of the United States are called “states” while the parts of the UK are called “countries.” Until and unless Pro UK Scots understand this, they will always be helping the SNP by confirming the SNP narrative and helping them win the argument.

It no more matters therefore that Scotland voted to Remain or that the majority of seats went to the SNP than that California voted for Hilary Clinton, but Donald Trump won the presidency. Secession is not justified by losing an election. If it were then no democracy would long endure. If you don’t understand this, you cannot even begin to understand the foundational texts of Western democracy.

The SNP should never have been given a first independence referendum. When the Scottish Parliament was established it was made clear that it would have no say on constitutional matters. These would be reserved. How then can the fact that the SNP won a majority in such a Parliament give them the right to decide matters that are outside their remit. It’s the equivalent of California deciding to declare war on Vermont. The same logic obviously applies now. It doesn’t matter if the SNP win a Holyrood majority in 2021. They still cannot decide matters that are reserved for the UK Government.

Obviously, the SNP don’t accept this. They are separatists. The problem we have is supposedly “Pro UK” Scottish commentators and the majority of left-wing Remainer Scots don’t accept it either. I have lost count of the number times I have read someone who I thought was Pro UK write things that support the SNP narrative and undermine the argument for the UK.

The SNP are bonnie fechters. They endure. They ignore defeat. They give it their all and they do everything they can to win. Far too many supposedly Pro UK Scots prefer to collaborate, aid and abet, and concede defeat at the first set back. There may be one hundred opinion polls showing a Pro UK majority in Scotland but let there be just one showing the tiniest nationalist majority and our distinguished newspaper columnists say we are doomed.

Scotland has a rather unintelligent intelligentsia, which can’t even make up its mind what to think nowadays. At least the SNP believe in something.

The Pro UK argument has never been better, but its left to people like me to make it. Years and years after I began arguing that Brexit will make Scottish independence impossible, I read someone mention it as if he has just discovered the wheel.

But the Lefty Remainer mindset prevents far too many Pro UK Scots from thinking strategically. This is why we still divide our forces into three so that the SNP can defeat us in detail. This is why we still repeat the same old tactical voting strategy even when it keeps being defeated in exactly the same way as before. One more push and we’ll beat them isn’t a strategy. It leaves you hanging on the old barbed wire.

So, for those who haven’t been following closely. Here is the strategy.

Get us out of the EU.

Don’t agree with the SNP about anything. Don’t give any legitimacy to their narrative and don’t think or talk about Scotland as being in any way separate.

Don’t think that another independence referendum and another nationalist defeat would make the SNP give up their dream of independence. It wouldn’t. It would fuel it. Didn’t you watch last time?

Give us time. Delay.

Leaving the EU will make the whole of the UK gradually diverge from our European neighbors. As they continue to unite, we will continue to be different. In time this will make the idea of rejoining seem quaint, then it will be impossible. Let us take back control of those massive chunks of ordinary life that the EU presently controls and then let the SNP explain that they are going to give them up in order to join a federal EU. Let them explain how keeping the pound is consistent with promising to give it up. Let them explain how an independent Scotland would start life both outside the UK and outside the EU having to negotiate trade deals with both.

That’s it.

Keep fighting folks. We are winning.

None of us need to flee

It’s a UK General Election. What matters is who wins a UK majority. It doesn’t matter who wins in Devizes, nor does it matter who wins in East Antrim.  Clwyd West doesn’t get to choose which party leads us and who is our Prime Minister and nor does Na h-Eileanan an Iar. We all choose together. In every democracy the parts vote differently from the whole. This is not a fault. Far from it. If the parts did not vote differently from the whole, we would be living in a one-party state. This is what the British people just rejected.

Labour have been taken over by communists. We have rejected them. Labour have not so much gone back to 1983 and Michael Foot’s longest suicide note in history, they have gone back to 1917. I went to bed not knowing if I would wake up to a Marxist Prime Minister. I wake up to find that we are safe.

 Labour must be sent into the wilderness once more.  The reforms that were introduced by Neil Kinnock and then Tony Blair did not do enough to cut out the far-left cancer. Labour must cut deeper or else perish entirely. Never again must the British people be faced with such extremism getting a chance to win power. But we desperately need a credible force on the Left. Democracy is about choice. But Western democracies can only be a choice between capitalism and social democracy. To vote for the far left is to vote to cease to be a Western democracy. It is to vote for an end to elections. Never vote for a Marxist, you might never get the chance to vote him out.

I want to go back to a time when elections were mildly interesting but could safely be ignored. I want to go back to a time when it didn’t much matter who wins.

Extremism has entered British politics. For centuries we alone in Europe rejected revolution. Our unwritten constitution evolved. It did not need to be written because we could trust that our country was in safe hands no matter who won. I might have disagreed with Atlee, or Lloyd George, of Wilson, but they were decent people with whom I could agree to disagree. Now we have a Labour Party who makes Jewish people fear for their lives and contemplate emigration. We have a Labour Party whose leadership sided with the Soviet Union in the Cold War and who would like to emulate the economics of Lenin. We would have faced capital controls within a week if Labour had been elected.

But while extremism has been rejected by the British people it is still going strong in parts of the UK. There are supporters of former terrorists trying to break up the UK in Northern Ireland and in Scotland we have the SNP.

For nearly ten years ordinary Scots have faced a near continual threat to the existence of the United Kingdom. The people of Northern Ireland have faced a similar threat for rather longer. French people do not go into elections fearing that France might cease to exist. People in Germany don’t fear this either. There is no more extreme policy than attempting to destroy a nation state. Let’s be clear that this is what the SNP and Sinn Féin want to do. This is what every country in the world has the right to defend itself against. No country can continue indefinitely to have to deal with separatists attacking it from within. This too is a cancer that must be cut out. We must cut deep.

The UK Government must make it absolutely clear that it will always defend the territorial integrity of the UK. If necessary, this must be enshrined in a written constitution. Foreign powers must have no right to claim parts of UK territory, nor can UK citizens continually attempt to turn our territory into a foreign power.

Just as Jewish people feared a Labour victory, so too hundreds of thousands of ordinary Scots dread the SNP one day being able to destroy the United Kingdom. We dread this in just the same way that a French person would dread his country once more being invaded and partitioned. Many of us would flee to whatever safe haven remained just as Jewish people contemplated fleeing from Corbyn.

But for the moment we are safe.

Two things matter.

1. A Conservative Government must promise that there will be no second independence referendum for the foreseeable future.

2. We will leave the EU.

The SNP will be very angry. But there is not a thing they can do to stop the UK leaving the EU. In time the anger will subside and when it does it will be clear that Scottish independence is no longer possible. The post EU future can unite the UK just as we were united before we joined. We need time. Boris will give us that time.

Our country is very divided indeed. The gap between Conservatives and Labour is enormous. Education is dominated by Left-wing thinking as is the broadcast media. Only this can explain why so many are seduced by socialist ideas that history has decisively discredited.

We are divided between Leave and Remain. It is high time that everyone in Britain accepted the result of elections. But it is equally clear now that referendums decide nothing. Once more the Conservative Government should make clear that there will be no more referendums for the foreseeable future. Let us instead decide everything in Parliament.

MPs in the last few years have behaved disgracefully. The speaker has become a partisan figure instead of a neutral umpire. MPs have been making the rules up as they go along. This cannot continue. If MPs cannot be trusted to follow the unwritten rules, then we must write them instead.

Our country is divided between secessionists, those who care about our country’s unity and those who don’t care. Never has there been the need for some team spirit to be injected into those British people who care more for their part rather than the whole.

I always go to bed early on election night. I wake up early too. Too often during the past decade I have gone to bed with fear. I ask one thing of Boris Johnson. Do what is necessary for us all to sleep soundly during elections. Let there be no more threats to our country. Defend us against the extremists.

But let us rejoice for the moment. We are safe. For the next five years at least, none of us need to flee.

Your Conservative needs you

There is one thing that matters in politics above everything else. It matters more than Brexit. It matters more than economics. The only thing that really matters is keeping our country intact.

The United Kingdom is our country. This is the way the word “country” is primarily used by everyone in the world. It means a sovereign nation state. A member of the United Nations. The place that is named on your passport. Our country. It is this that is threatened.

There are two possible outcomes next week. Either we get a Conservative majority, which will defend the UK and deliver Brexit, or we will get a Labour, Liberal Democrat and SNP coalition.

This Remain coalition would give us a second referendum on the EU, but there would not be a genuine Leave option. It would be a sham. I can’t think of a single prominent Brexit supporter who would campaign for Labour’s “Brexit” and the vast majority of Brexiteers would boycott such a fake referendum. We would end up back in the EU, but half the country would be there reluctantly.

The Remainers would have won. Their long rearguard would have succeeded. They would have reversed the result of the 2016 referendum, but there would be a price.

The cost that Labour and the Lib Dems are willing to pay to stop Brexit is that the SNP gain a second chance to destroy the United Kingdom. Unless the SNP get a firm guarantee that they will get a second independence referendum, they won’t support the Corbyn led Remain coalition.

I would like to see the SNP win as few seats as possible, but it won’t essentially matter, if the SNP win 30 seats, 40, seats or 50 seats, so long as the Labour or Lib Dem MPs who might beat them, end up working with the SNP to both deliver EU referendum two and Indyref2.

Every Labour, or Lib Dem MP might be the one that takes them over the line so that they can form a Government that will depend on SNP votes. The only MPs that can stop this are Conservative MPs.

If we get a Conservative Government, we’ll be out of the EU in a few weeks. The deal may not be ideal, but it is the only way we are going to be able to leave at all. No deal is not going to happen. It certainly won’t happen when we have a deal that is acceptable to the vast majority of Brexit supporters.

The Conservatives have been slightly ahead in the polls. But we know that opinion polls have been wrong before. There are no guarantees. Many seats are very close.

We need everybody to vote. Try to persuade friends and members of your family to vote Conservative. Explain what’s at stake.

If we can once get completely out of the EU, the SNP’s dream of independence will effectively be over. Independence would already mean years of austerity, because an independent Scotland would start life with an unsustainable deficit. But if an independent Scotland were in the EU while England, Wales and Northern Ireland were outside the EU, Scotland would be in a different trading bloc to its greatest trade partner, the former UK. This turns independence into a nightmare.

Boris Johnson can legitimately explain to the SNP that he will not allow a second referendum because the SNP promised in the Edinburgh Agreement that it would respect the result of the 2014 referendum and accept that it was decisive. They didn’t.

It doesn’t matter what the Scottish Parliament decides on this issue, because constitutional matters are reserved, and therefore Scottish independence is outwith the jurisdiction of the Scottish Parliament. There is no legal right to secession.

A Conservative victory therefore not only kicks a second independence referendum into the long grass, it also by delivering Brexit makes it progressively harder for the SNP to win it. As the UK diverges from the EU and as the EU becomes a still closer union, the SNP will be faced with a horrible dilemma. Do we leap into the EU and put a chasm between ourselves and our former fellow countrymen only to end up being ruled by Brussels and no more independent than Texas, or do we end up outside both the former UK and the EU having to negotiate trade deals with both of them?

A Conservative victory stuffs the SNP. But if the Conservatives fail to win a majority by even the slightest of margins, we could end up with the UK remaining in the EU, which would make it all the easier for Sturgeon to break it up.

The SNP are going to want independence whether we Leave the EU or Remain.  But the EU guarantees that trade wouldn’t be a problem between an independent Scotland and the former UK, it also guarantees that the border will be open and that everyone has the same rights as before because everyone will remain an EU citizen.  This is why the SNP are Remainers.

So, you have a choice. Either you vote Conservative and you help us defend the UK from those who hate it more than anything else, or you have Corbyn propped up by Sturgeon.

Just as the UK is beginning to recover from the last time Labour wrecked our economy, Corbyn would go on the biggest spending spree in modern history maxing out our credit cards until the markets raised interest rates on debts that we could then not hope to repay. He would then give Sturgeon the chance to apply the coup de grâce.

Let’s be clear. If the SNP won a second independence referendum the United Kingdom would cease to exist. I have no idea what the former UK would be called, but it certainly couldn’t be called United. Every war we have ever fought to defend our country would have been for nothing, we would have lost in the end, our country would be no more. It would be the exit of Britain. We would no longer be British because Britain would be partitioned. Think carefully about how you vote. Your vote for the Conservatives has never been more needed and has never been more important.