If The Rest Of The Country Had A Vote On Scottish Independence ….

[naomi24]

…. do you think the ‘Ayes’ would have it?

[THECORBYLOON]

ELIPSIS and NEW JUDGE, I think the opinion of the Law Society of Scotland may carry a wee bit more weight than yours and British Citizens outwith Scotland may also qualify automatically for Scots Nationality through birth or can apply through descent or because of a least ten years' residence in Scotland.

[Ellipsis]

TCL, I don't dispute what the Law Society of Scotland says, but I do dispute your understanding of it!

Indeed, the Law Society of Scotland has suggested that it might be contrary to EU law if Westminster attempted to deprive anyone of British citizenship merely because they had acquired citizenship of another member state ie Scotland.

So the process would be this:

Scotland votes for independence
A given Scot is then a Scot and not an rBrit
Said Scot then applies to rUK to be an rBrit
If said Scot qualifies to be an rBrit they are granted rBrit nationality.
rUK may not deny citizenship on the basis of said Scot being Scottish, but may OF COURSE deny citizenship on other grounds, e.g. said Scot was not born in rUK, did not have rUK parentage and did not live in the rUK.

Really, what do you expect? Independence AND ongoing nationality of the rUK. You have got to be joking!

The "transitional arrangements" would be to sort out en masse situations like you would find in Corby, where loads of people would qualify for dual nationality. That's fair enough.

[THECORBYLOON]

I didn't say Scots WILL have dual Nationality, I said Scots CAN have dual Nationality and if you agree with the Law Society of Scotland, they say Scots ARE entitled to ongoing, i.e. continuing British Nationality.

[New Judge]

"Really, what do you expect? Independence AND ongoing nationality of the rUK. You have got to be joking! "

No, they are not joking. The Scots who seek independence want the best of all worlds. At present they have their own Parliament but still have MPs in Westminster who vote on matters only effecting the English. After independence they want a Scottish passport and their old UK one. They want to break away from the UK but demand to share the pound. They want to leave the UK but imagine they will be admitted to the EU in their own right (ahead of nations who have been candidates for years). They want a share of all the assets built up by the UK but will claim virtually all of North Sea oil by dint of geographical fate. They even want more devolution should the vote go against them.

I don't think I'll contribute to any further questions on this subject. It is clear to me that "cake and eat it" is very appropriate for the Independence movement. The stupid UK government will allow this if there is a "Yes" vote and will allow further devolution to the disadvantage of England if, as I expect, the vote is "No". Quite why just 8% of the population should be granted such special treatment is a mystery.

Roll on the eighteenth. Roll on a "No" vote (two to one is my estimate) and then perhaps we will hear no more of this nonsense.

[EDDIE51]

To get back to the original question . I think it would be a 'NO' landslide.

[Ellipsis]

Why am I not surprised that the question of citizenship is up in the air and will be resolved post independence - but this learned article appears to put all the scenarios quite objectively:

http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2014/08/04/nick-barber-after-the-vote-the-citizenship-question/

The citizens of the UK would want to have their say on this, and on the currency, even if they don't get a vote on "independence" itself.

[THECORBYLOON]

As the piece concludes, ' If, as is, I think, more likely, the UK were to require people to choose between UK and Scottish citizenship, the decision may run into problems with European Law.' He agrees with the Law Society of Scotland.

[Ellipsis]

Two things about his conclusions

1) despite what he says about the EU, he says he thinks it "likely" that the UK would require people to choose anyway
2) he goes on to say this "may" cause problems with the EU

So, why may it NOT cause problems with the EU? One possible reason is that there is no way the EU wants to set in motion a chain of events that would make the UK leaving the EU almost inevitable. The EU telling the UK that requiring people to choose was "illegal", and that they must allow Scots to remain citizens so they could retain EU citizenship (even though their home state was not an EU member because of a vote exercised by those citizens!) could well set in motion such a chain of events, starting with the outcomes stated by New Judge. If you consider we have an election next year that could lead to a referendum on EU membership in 2017, you can see how we could easily all end up leaving the EU in these circumstances.

I do not see that coming to pass as I trust that good sense would prevail. Independence of A from B must mean independence of B from A, otherwise a parasitic relationship is formed which would infringe the rights of the host.