My understanding of why English students are charged by Scotish and Welsh universities but say French or German students are not, was a EU ruling. Countries that are physically connected can charge, but those that are not cannot charge for foreign students. This was to stop people just crossing a border to gain an advantage. That is what I have read in the past on the topic. What the real diiference is is the national governments policy of funding a university education, in England the government has not generally inclined to fund this, whilst the Scottish and Welsh would refund one of their students who studied in England.
I think it is simpler than that. The EU regard the UK as one country so cannot interfere in an internal charging policy. England and Scotland do not "exist" in the EU. You cannot charge students from another member state on a different basis - which of course from an EU perspective is not happening.
That is correct, it is nothing to do with English law. If you live in Northern Ireland you have both UK and Irish nationality, so obtain an Irish passport and it is free. Apply with your UK passport and it is not. Once you have you place in the uni. you then use your UK passport to apply for a loan from the student loan board in England. If Scotland were to become a seperate country they would then have to treat all students the same.
If Scotland were to vote Yes on September 18th then they would remain part of both the UK and the EU until March 2016 (the duration of the interim period). European sources suggest that they would be able to negotiate renewed membership (independently of David Cameron) from within in the meantime. If successfull they would never have been out of the EU. But...a yes vote would trigger off an unprecedented constitutional crisis in the UK. The general election is due for May 7th 2015. There are various possible scenarios. The frst being that emergency laws could be passed to ban the 59 Scottish constituencies from taking part with polls held only in England, Wales and N. Ireland. A step which is difficult legally as Scotland would still be a part of the UK at the time of the election. The second scenario is that the election proceeds as normal with Scottish MPs being ejected from the Commons when Scotland becomes fully independent - which could be in March 2016 (only 10 months after the election). A move which could decisively shift the balance of power and bring down a new government (in other words destroy a Labour majority). In the third scenario could you possibly elect MP's for the full 5 years when they wouldn't be from the same country. The fourth scenario sees the Election postponed until after full independence - a step which would be difficult for a coalition to push through. Bearing all of this in mind, I cannot understand why so many people in England appear unconcerned about Scottish independence, or think that it has no consequences for England. I do not want a constitutional crisis. I do not want a Tory majority - and I do not want the resultant EU referendum which this would involve. Why, because although I like democracy I do not trust the typical English voter on this issue (EU membership that is). This is why I am praying for a no vote on September 18th - but at the same time recognize that Scotland deserves it and would survive as a free nation - but, some other time please !
Perhaps they think that two levels of government is enough? Rather than Independence being a case of swapping Westminster for Brussels, it would simply mean dropping Westminster and retaining Brussels.
If Scotland votes Yes then independence would indeed be at a future date - probably but not certainly after the 18month period. If both so desired it could be brought forward to coincide with the May 2015 elections in the UK. European sources cannot possibly predict how quickly Scottish membership of the EU could be negotiated - how long is a piece of string. There are 28 member states - each with a veto and each with it's own agenda. There would be no constitutional crisis as this is a constitutional change. On your scenarios. The first is unlikely and unnecessary. The second is the most likely. The election would take place as planned. The formation of a government would proceed as normal. Upon Independence Scottish MPs would cease to be MPs and so the remaining MPs would need to see who could form the Government. Governments have fallen before now during a Parliament and it is not a constitutional crisis but a normal event. Were Labour in power they would be able to call a General election then if they wanted to. The third scenario is the same as the second - but upon independence those MPs elected in Scotland would not be part of the UK. The fourth is almost certainly out as it would require an Act of Parliament to extend the life of Parliament and the precedent that would create would be too dangerous. I think most people in rUK already realize that if Scotland gains independence in the short term Labour will suffer most in rUK as it has most Scottish MPs. Tough luck on Labour but there you go - there are probably lots of us who would be glad to see the Scottish Labour tail wagging the UK dog. I am not cynical of course but Cameron's decision not to give a vote on Scottish Independence to England, Wales and N Ireland helps his party tremendously if Scotland votes Yes. As for your EU scenario I suspect it would not arise as I cannot see the Tories gaining a majority in 2015 outright.
Lenny - I can actually see a Tory majority in 2015. After today's events there will be a panic setting in at Tory HQ and they will look to dilute the potential UKIP vote - best way to do that is to make a EU in/out vote a manifesto pledge. All those Tory MP's in marginal constitutencies will be banging on the door demanding it. If they do that they will marginalise UKIP by taking there USP away.
I think that Cameron has already committed his party ot a referendum within 2 years of the net election if he wins so I agree with you - it will be a manifesto pledge. It will also ensure that whoever I vote for it would not be Tory. For us to come out of the EU is for me identical to Scotland leaving the UK -a recipe for economic disaster.
Leo - the second scenario would not be unique, I admit that, in that it has happened before that governments fall in mid term - However it would be totally unique that we go into a general election with the knowledge in advance that the result will not last for more than 10 months.
If Scotland voted yes I see little to no chance of negotiations being completed within 18 months. They would be hugely complex, and from my reading of informed opinion it would be probably 3-5 years before enough had been agreed for independence to happen. If that were the case the UK could be into another election by then.
This is where I find the whole thing totally bias towards the Scots, should they vote Yes and then we have a General Election including Scotland and their MPs, it will be this Parliament that negotiate the terms of the Independence. How can one group negotiate with a second group when a large portion of group one is in group 2. But the citizens of rUk will have no say in the matter. As for the Tory referendum. Leo, do you really think they want out of the EU, I certainly don't.
I am not sure he has actually committed to a straight In/Out vote - I think his mealy words were bound up in a attempted renegotiation with the EU and if that did not work he would offer the vote. But my natural distrust of all politicians means I believe that he will squirm out of it with some pretend victory in those negotiations and a vote on that instead. But the rise of UKIP might put enough pressure on him. We will have to disagree on membership of the EU...hopefully we can that debate in a few years time though!
You are right w_y, the vote would only take place if he couldn't get some changes that he could recommend. He clearly remembers Maggie coming back from the EU with various agreements over our contributions to the budget, given back again by Blair. He has said that the best thing for Britain would be to get a new deal from the EU. He will come under pressure now to state what he wants, but do that and it will make talks with Brussels even harder. You don't disclose your position before you start to negotiate.
I would have to trawl through his words to find what he has actually said but my recollection is that after a Tory win in the general election he would seek a renegotiation - he then committed to a referendum for the country to decide if enough had been conceded to us. I am sure he has no wriggle room on the referendum - only on whether the Tories would recommend in or out - and that is bound to be "in" as he will pretend to have got what he was after whether or not he has. Perhaps it is just me being pessimistic but I fear that a Tory win will lead to our leaving the EU. People who dislike immigration will sway the vote.
My current guess would be that there will be a hung parliament again, but with a different mix of numbers. The chance of a vote will be lost, and the anti EU MPs will rise again to make the most of the situation. The FN here is exploiting the immigration numbers coming into the country, but it is slightly different. Many are coming in illegally from Africa, outside the EU, but the FN are seeking to suggest that there is no difference between them and legal workers from the EU as they want to be out. Some of the spin that goes on in any election really makes me wonder how extreme politicians can become before the ordinary person starts to question what they say. Yesterday I heard a lady in Scotland say that she wasn't sure about Independence, but would give it a try and see what happened. She seemed to think that if she didn't like it things could return to the current state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passport_to_Pimlico Now this is a good film on independence..... Seriously though..... the fact that so many people are unsure and the vote on each side is seemingly a minority one..... seems it would be in the public interest to leave things as they are.
Is this not similar with Cyprus and their independence. The government was lead by Archbishop Makarios and he was the head of the terrorists AOKA who were fighting the government. The Scots are not terrorists but is the same idea the government, including the Scottish politicians, negotiating with the same Scottish politicians for independence.
A new aspect I saw on Channel 4 last night was pure politics. They were interviewing people about reasons for yes and no. One chap said he was voting Yes to smash the Tories - he claimed that an independent Scotland would be free of them. He could be right of course but what a poor reason for overthrowing 300 years of successful union. He was not alone as there were a lot of banners and stickers saying "vote yes - get the Conservatives out" The funny thing is it could of course backfire as I have heard the SNP called the Tartan Tories sometimes - if they move to the right and the Conservatives in Scotland maintain their 18%+ vote of increase it you could have the funny situation of a number of Scots voting Yes to get their socialist state an achieving the opposite. Pure speculation on my part but from reading Spurf's comments I suspect his support of Independence could be for just such a socialist reasoning - he admits he is English and left wing although "comfortably off", so it is surprising he would have such a passionate view - unless it is more to do with party politics than genuine reasons for independence.
My support for Independence is largely to break up the 1000 years of elitism in the UK. I have spent a life in business running my own companies. I would not describe myself as a socialist largely because I don't think the human race can cope with. Capitalism is natural to humans which is why it has triumphed over other ideas. My hope is that with all the fresh ideas being discussed in Scotland a new form of using capitalism will emerge just as it did in the Scottish Enlightenment. The Common Weal is one such idea. Independence for Scotland would open the most exciting political scenario in modern Europe and such a move has the potential to be a world changing event. The lack of imagination on the No side prevents them seeing anything other than problems, which for me is one of the saddest aspects of this debate.
