Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
crashmonitor

Orkney And Shetland Demand Independence Vote

Recommended Posts

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/shetland-orkney-and-the-outer-hebrides-demand-independence-referendums-of-their-own-if-scotland-votes-yes-9217514.html

Not trusting Salmond with ''their'' oil they want independence if Scotland say yes.

Would be poetic justice I suppose, going for an oil grab only to see it taken away by Shetland and Orkney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha. Let's see fatboy Salmond wriggle his unctuous way out of that one, deny them their independence and be a hypocrite or support it and go skint.

Those islanders will be pretty rich if they do go it alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha. Let's see fatboy Salmond wriggle his unctuous way out of that one, deny them their independence and be a hypocrite or support it and go skint.

Those islanders will be pretty rich if they do go it alone.

I'd let 'em have a vote next week - only they can't keep the oil, just that slimy,fat barsteward, Lib Dim Minister Alistair Carmicheal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha. Let's see fatboy Salmond wriggle his unctuous way out of that one, deny them their independence and be a hypocrite or support it and go skint.

Those islanders will be pretty rich if they do go it alone.

I bet that will put their houses prices way up. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha. Let's see fatboy Salmond wriggle his unctuous way out of that one, deny them their independence and be a hypocrite or support it and go skint.

Those islanders will be pretty rich if they do go it alone.

According to Wiki Orkney was taken in as a part of Scotland in 1492 after being annexed by Norway a in 875 (originally being Scottish). Does that not mean that it has never been an independent country? If so then it would be easy to deny independence to them.

The reason Scotland can become independent is because it was the Act of Union (and the Act of Crowns) that caused it to join with England but it was always a country in its own right. The Scottish independence movement is simply dissolving the two treaties in order to separate from the governance of England. Orkney could not do that unless it was once an independent country only governed by Scotland under treaty. I don't think it was, and so it can not ask for independence in the same way Scotland has. It can only be done by agreement and not by dissolution of treaty - and Scotland does not need to agree.

Otherwise I could make my house independent and never pay any taxes!

Edited by doahh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trusting Salmond with ''their'' oil they want independence if Scotland say yes.

Would be poetic justice I suppose, going for an oil grab only to see it taken away by Shetland and Orkney.

Salmond would be all "we'd all be better off staying together" :lol:

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Wiki Orkney was taken in as a part of Scotland in 1492 after being annexed by Norway a in 875 (originally being Scottish). Does that not mean that it has never been an independent country? If so then it would be easy to deny independence to them.

The reason Scotland can become independent is because it was the Act of Union (and the Act of Crowns) that caused it to join with England but it was always a country in its own right. The Scottish independence movement is simply dissolving the two treaties in order to separate from the governance of England. Orkney could not do that unless it was once an independent country only governed by Scotland under treaty. I don't think it was, and so it can not ask for independence in the same way Scotland has. It can only be done by agreement and not by dissolution of treaty - and Scotland does not need to agree.

Otherwise I could make my house independent and never pay any taxes!

I gather many of the locals would prefer to be reunited with Norway rather than be a cash cow for Glasgow. 1492 or 1603....in historically terms it is waver thin.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the alternative is to go for a new Barnett +++++ formula recognising the fact that the Shetland and Orkney populace own most of the oil just as the original formula was recognition of Scotland's claim over England. Let's say a cool five million per inhabitant Mr. Salmond and then we might be in business.

Meantime there is still room for incomers. they are not Jersey yet.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Wiki Orkney was taken in as a part of Scotland in 1492 after being annexed by Norway a in 875 (originally being Scottish). Does that not mean that it has never been an independent country? If so then it would be easy to deny independence to them.

The reason Scotland can become independent is because it was the Act of Union (and the Act of Crowns) that caused it to join with England but it was always a country in its own right. The Scottish independence movement is simply dissolving the two treaties in order to separate from the governance of England. Orkney could not do that unless it was once an independent country only governed by Scotland under treaty. I don't think it was, and so it can not ask for independence in the same way Scotland has. It can only be done by agreement and not by dissolution of treaty - and Scotland does not need to agree.

Otherwise I could make my house independent and never pay any taxes!

Surely by that logic no new independent countries can be created?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely by that logic no new independent countries can be created?

Yes I'd like to see this explained to a gathering of young Turkish, Iranian and Iraqi Kurds please, from behind bulletproof glass though.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I'd like to see this explained to a gathering of young Turkish, Iranian and Iraqi Kurds please, from behind bulletproof glass though.....

So much for my new Yorkshire Independence Party then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Northern Shetland has more oil than Southern Shetland, so perhaps Northern Shetland can claim independence from the southern part of the island?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely by that logic no new independent countries can be created?

I assume that if there are enough problems between two groups then they could agree to separate the country. I think that is what happened with India and Pakistan.

However I think a very small group would have trouble in the same same way that me declaring my house an independent nation would not be accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went with my mother to the Shetlands some years ago.

They were very emphatic in telling us, 'We are not Scottish! We are Shetlanders!'

Quite. When they talk about the mainland, they actually mean the biggest island in the Shetlands, not Scotland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So much for my new Yorkshire Independence Party then.

England was formed as a single kingdom from kingdoms such as wessex and mercia at the battle of Dore (now in Sheffield, Yorkshire) under King Ecbert. I am sure that should count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salmond could let them go but they aren't getting the oil.

Looking at a map Scotland, Shetland or Norway seem to have equally valid claims on the oil.

Secondly and more importantly, how would Shetland defend and enforce their rights. As has been demonstrated with Russia recently, international law is only worth anything if people want to abide by it, as soon as vested interests become involved you can forget it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Orkney and Shetland were to vote to join England, what then becomes the nearest analogy:

* Gibraltar or the Falklands?

* Crimea?

* Other?

They may not like Edinburgh much but I doubt if Westminster and the Bullingdon government is liked any better. They'd be better off learning Norwegian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is nonsense designed to muddy the waters. There's only a handful of people on Shetland who seriously want independence from Scotland. One of them (depending what month it is) is Tavish Scott, who is a Unionist MSP desperately trying to obtain a No vote in the referendum.

Anyone can 'call' for something and claim to be speaking for their neighbours. I will be very surprised if this petition goes anywhere. I note that quite a few of the 844 signatures are from outside Scotland, never mind the islands themselves.

I am however not surprised at the Telegraph's uncritical reporting of this - the media jump all over anything that might give No a boost.

Note that the Scottish Government has already been talking about a greater say for island communities post-independence. Shetland Islands Council already has a lot of autonomy - Shetland is the only part of the UK with an oil fund. And a lot of people in Shetland support an independent Scotland:

http://www.shetnews.co.uk/features/scottish-independence-debate/8211-majority-favour-independence-at-althing-debate

If Shetland really does want independence then there should be a referendum and they should be an independent country. But don't mistake this political jiggery-poker for a serious proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I hoped, Scotland independence begs the question for smaller regions within Scotland too.

Who is going to ask whether the land their house is on can become an independent region? Why not? What is the difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   210 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.