Britain and the World Conference: round table discussion on Scottish independence

The Britain and the World Conference attracted historians from across the globe to debate Britain's role in world development since the seventeenth century.

This major international conference, which attracted nearly 200 delegates and speakers from over 40 countries, was held for the first time outside the USA between 21 to 23 June 2012 at the University of Edinburgh. It was jointly hosted by the British Scholar Society and the Scottish Centre for Diaspora Studies.

The round table on Scottish independence discussed the question "The end of more than three centuries of the Anglo-Scottish union in 2014?"

Chair: Alan Taylor, Editor of the Scottish Review of Books.

Panellists: John Curtice, Professor of Politics at the University of Strathclyde; Owen Dudley Edwards, Honorary Fellow of History at the University of Edinburgh; Catriona MacDonald, Reader in History at the University of Glasgow; Joyce McMillan, Columnist for The Scotsman.

Recorded on Thursday 21 June 2012 at David Hume Tower Lecture Theatre, the University of Edinburgh.

[macgonnigal]

The UK gets whatever government England decides and as England is completely foreign to most Scots in terms of politics and attitude this is greatly resented. Our very concept of sovereignty is at odds with England's. In Scotland sovereignty rests with the people while in England it rests with parliament. Yes, folks in a foreign country with foreign ways make the rules and decide Scotland's future with little or no regard for our aspirations or traditions. But not for much longer.

[macgonnigal]

Would you want folks in a foreign country deciding your future?

[hashburystumble]

15 months on and the Unionists are still sticking their fingers in their ears and putting on blindfold. Shame no socks in the Project Fear mouths. If anyone reads this, might I suggest you try watching the debate from Abertay University.

[steaphris]

This Curtice guy changes his tune according to who is elected....before their first election win, didn't he use to go on about why the SNP wouldn't win a majority because of their policies?...well, maybe not quite as simplistically as that.

[johnnycarrotheid]

They are in power, and are giving us that choice.
The people of Scotland gave us more SNP MSP's than the rest of the parties combined.
The Sovereign will of Scots was expressed by giving us a majority party that believes in Independence.
This is why Holyrood can and will set the terms of the Indy Referendum.
If Westminster barge in to take over, then the SNP are within their rights to ignore them, even remove them/the Queen as heads Westminster, for defying the Sovereign will of Scots.
Legally

[johnnycarrotheid]

Sovereignty is a totally seperate issue
The difference between Scotland/ rUK are chalk and cheese.
Sovereignty within the rUK lies with the Queen, in Scotland it lies with the people.
In Scotland we have the ability to choose what/who we want/if we want anything.
In rUK you get told what you have and that is the Queen. No choice.
Its a total different state of mind.
A lot of Scots ideals from Decl Arbroath were taken on board for the US Decl Independence.
Our thinkings closer to American scarily

[johnnycarrotheid]

Largely boils down to having a population that continued to vote for treacherous Labour.
Labour and the Tories were as bad as each other when it came to Scotland.
Hopefully this is Labour on the decline in Scotland much like the Tories did.
We have the ability, its just the "Parcel o Rogues" elected to "save" us from the Tories have never been any better, if not actively working against our interests in order to keep position and influence at the big table down London way.

[johnnycarrotheid]

I'm saying we are totally different constitutionally.
Your opinion doesnt have to be taken into account in England, if the Queen holds a different view to the people she can with-hold assent.
The Queen, and most tellingly the UK Supreme Court, wont touch Scots Law or Scots Parliamentary Acts with a bargepole, as it leaves the Queen open to be deposed, for acting against our will. They admitted so.
England/rUK has no such statute.
The USA took our basic ideas, and god knows what they did to them.