Cassie: Cassie, with respect, you do need lessons about the constitution, because you don't appear to know anything about it. Are you in the business of dealing with actual political problems or merely theoretical ones? Can you give me an example of how England is disadvantaged by the existing contitutional arrangement? What do you want to achieve, which cannot be achieved in a HoC where English constituencies provide 528 of the 645 representatives? That majority provided the means, wisely or unwisely, to privatise public assets and other utilities in Scotland, Wales and NI. Can you provide a comparable example of where the Scots, or indeeed Wales and NI, combined, and armed with their 117 votes, have ever possessed that ability to impose their political will over England? This is central to the issues being discussed.
You stated, Cassis, as an implied threat, if you can't get your own way, you would prefer an independent England. What happens if the Scots inform you that Noway, with a smaller population than Scotland, (4.7 milllion to 5.3million) are independent, have their own seat on the UN, embassies world-wide, the third highest GDP per capita in the world and also a good Welfare State. In addition, they have control over their own oil and armed forces, while being members of NATO.
Scotland is a valued member of the UK. For reasons which you cannot justify or explain, you and other EDs', want a constitutional showdown within the UK. If you want to partake in the dismantling of the nation state; well carry on. The EU must be delighted with you political ambitions: and when you have destroyed everything which is good around you, presumably you will then deem your life's work done. Complex things constitutions; creating one which actually works for generations, is something which few nations have achieved. Give thanks for how fortunate you are.
|