Caius Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Why Independence for Wales and Other Countries Makes Economic Sense Adam Price The great French moralist André Gide's last reported words were, "I love small nations. I love small numbers. The world will be saved by the few" (Kohr 1970). During the long boom of the 1990s and 2000s, that last-gasp proclamation took on an almost prophetic air. Small and nimble open economies like Ireland, Iceland, and the Baltic States became the poster boys of globalisation. Countries the size of Norway topped every feel-good league table in existence from gross domestic product (GDP) per capita to indexes of innovation, happiness, and peace. Small is successful (think Sweden), sexy (think Costa Rica), smart (think Singapore), even cool (think Iceland). Yet recently, something strange tends to happen every time there's talk of carving a new independent country out of an old colonial one. Take Québec in Canada, for instance, or my own beloved Wales in the United Kingdom. Faced with the prospect of a people choosing its own destiny and charting its own course, the champions of the status quo gravely intone that such a move would not be economically viable. Without the colonial country as benefactor, we're told, the small could never survive. So, why the new pessimism? Well, now that economic conditions have turned, so has the tide of ideas. The travails of small countries have made big headlines worldwide in a series of Lehman Brothers-like moments. The sovereign debt crisis in Greece, the banking collapse in Iceland, and Ireland's fall from "Celtic Tiger" grace have all led to a shift in the intellectual terms of trade. "Big is best" has replaced "small is beautiful" as the new global mantra. This was perhaps best summed up by an epithet attributed to Paul Volcker, former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman (with a sideways nod to Roy Scheider's character in the movie Jaws): "In turbulent times, it's better to be on the bigger boat." Can the small survive and thrive through the present storm? How does country size affect economic performance? And what would independence do for a place like Wales? These are more than just academic questions for me. After almost a decade at the coalface of politics in the House of Commons as a Welsh Nationalist Member of Parliament, I came to the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University (HKS) to find solid foundations for my lifelong dream. But size matters to all of us. My own continent of Europe is a patchwork mosaic of meso-economies and microeconomies. Where China and the United States are building supertankers, Europe is in flotilla formation--built to ride, not rule, the waves. Is it destined to flounder? Continued....... http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/adam-price/why-independence-for-wale_b_911083.html It's time to break up the Union. It's not fit for purpose. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmarks Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Britain! Britain! Britain! Opened by the Queen in 1972. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim123 Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Continued....... http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/adam-price/why-independence-for-wale_b_911083.html It's time to break up the Union. It's not fit for purpose. What do you think? Where would Wales' income come from if it were an independent country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caius Posted August 8, 2011 Author Share Posted August 8, 2011 Where would Wales' income come from if it were an independent country? I think you've just agreed (without realising it) with me that the Union isn't fit for purpose! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 It's time to break up the Union. It's not fit for purpose. What do you think? When The Liar played with the UK constitution like a twelve-year-old with his toys, he left us in a position where tensions between the nations can only rise. Quite apart from economic questions, the Westlothian question is a constitutional time-bomb. From where we are now, far better an amicable divorce that leaves us good friends than an ever-deteriorating marriage. But the clear case that should lead the way is England/Scotland. It's not so clear that smaller nations like Wales or Cornwall would be viable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caius Posted August 8, 2011 Author Share Posted August 8, 2011 But the clear case that should lead the way is England/Scotland. It's not so clear that smaller nations like Wales or Cornwall would be viable. You obviously havn't read Adam Price's research. It's incorrect to say that 'England/Scotland' is leading the way. It is Scotland whose doing all the groundwork. England is doing SFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krackersdave Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 You obviously havn't read Adam Price's research. It's incorrect to say that 'England/Scotland' is leading the way. It is Scotland whose doing all the groundwork. England is doing SFA. Does it have to do anything? The Union is a union of England and Scotland.... Not England, Scotland, Wales and NI... Neither Wales or NI are or have ever been independent nation states with modern institutions.. Wales was conquered long before such things evolved and NI is just a colony... If Scotland breaks the union then whats left behind is by default English... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbonic Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Does it have to do anything? The Union is a union of England and Scotland.... Not England, Scotland, Wales and NI... Neither Wales or NI are or have ever been independent nation states with modern institutions.. Wales was conquered long before such things evolved and NI is just a colony... NI is as much a creation of Scotland i.e. the 'Scots Irish' proddies of the Plantations of the 17th c, and waves of Scottish emigration to Ulster after 1680. Perhaps we could leave an independent Scotland to sort out that mess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caius Posted August 9, 2011 Author Share Posted August 9, 2011 Does it have to do anything? The Union is a union of England and Scotland.... Not England, Scotland, Wales and NI... Neither Wales or NI are or have ever been independent nation states with modern institutions.. Wales was conquered long before such things evolved and NI is just a colony... If Scotland breaks the union then whats left behind is by default English... So, what were the Acts of Union 1536 about then? http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/periods/tudors_04.shtml But I will agree with you that the Acts of Union between England and Scotland were as a result of mutual agreement by the ruling elites whereas in Wales' case it was different in that it was done by conquest. Nevertheless, Wales still remained as a distinct legal entity until 1746 when the ‘Wales & Berwick Act’ categorically stated that any reference to England would henceforth include Wales (and Berwick). In the late 19th and early 20th Centuries a number of Welsh National Institution were set up and in 1967, the Berwich Act was repealed and from then on, any mention on England would not from then on include Wales. So, in legal terms, Wales is separate from England. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.