The possibility of the UK re-joining the EU

[Robert66]

It is vital to maintain a united front against transgender people.

I don't think this is the right topic to express such distasteful views; this topic is about Brexit and the EU.

Trying to force the "U" back into UK, by disallowing the Scottish attempt to be a little more kind to transgender people, illustrates the impossibility of re-joining the EU. Sturgeon's pledge to challenge the UK government's decision suggests further devolution rather than strengthening of the union. Interested EU observers would be less inclined to say "welcome back".

An independent Scotland, back in Europe where they belong, sounds about right to me.

[Fried Egg]

A "loose integration" is what you have now as a consequence of Brexit. It's not as if the UK were divested of all European concerns. It's still a country in Europe among whom there are many common concerns. That won't change.

When I say "some form loose integration", I mean something tighter than what we have now but not as tight as being a fully fledged EU member (as we now understand it).

It may be "a consummation devoutly to be wished" by the Brits in one form or another but the probability of it being allowed by any member of the EU is near nil. Why should they? England's status is no higher than any other country in Europe.

Well, you yourself said that the UK is still in Europe and retains many shared European concerns. In particular, military and security concerns, especially with what's going on in Ukraine and the soured relationship with Russia. Dreams of a European military force capable of acting independently of America are far more likely if they include the UK. In many ways, brexit or no brexit, the EU and the UK still need each other. And once the rancour of the bitter split has eased and the dust has settled, I foresee a new and more constructive relationship emerging...

This is going off topic a little but as far as Scotland is concerned, it is far from automatic that an independent Scotland would have an easy ride joining the EU. There are a number of other countries in the EU that have their own would-be break away regions that might have their own cause emboldened if the EU was so willing to accept Scotland. Such countries might veto the decision in order to send a message to their own separatist movements.

Furthermore, I don't understand the argument that goes something along the lines that the case for independence is strengthened since they were dragged out of the EU against their population's wishes. That may be true but if leaving the UK and joining the EU would involve adopting the Euro and a hard border with England (and Wales) it seems pretty clear that becoming independent would be far more disruptive than it would have been the last time they had a referendum.

[Robert66]

I'm also not sure whether the British people would (in the near future) accept the conditions of re-entry which would entail loss of sovereignty well beyond what we had lost when we were previously a member. I also wonder whether they would so readily accept a situation in which we would be far bigger net contributors to the EU than we were before?

Furthermore, I don't understand the argument that goes something along the lines that the case for independence is strengthened since they were dragged out of the EU against their population's wishes. That may be true but if leaving the UK and joining the EU would involve adopting the Euro and a hard border with England (and Wales) it seems pretty clear that becoming independent would be far more disruptive than it would have been the last time they had a referendum.

I'm probably missing the mark here (from halfway around the world, in Australia) but it seems like Britain suffers from an identity crisis. Most people born in Scotland don't refer to themselves as British. I think the same could be said of the Welsh. For the English (and I assume Fried Egg is English, but then again I could be wrong) the use of "English", or "British", or "UK" are freely interchangeable. Perhaps it is just a subtle distinction, however I sense that it is important to perceptions of identity both within and outside Britain. I sense that the English want to have things their way AND insist on a United Kingdom.

According to Fried Egg, it is doubtful the British would accept the loss of sovereignty a return to EU membership would entail, however the reward of sovereignty by becoming independent is not worth the effort for the Scots, what with disruptive issues like currency and borders to deal with. I think if I were Scottish and reading Fried Egg's comments, I would be inclined to "I'll take the hard border and the Euro, and an independent Scotland, you can have Britain".

[Pattern-chaser]

I sense that the English want to have things their way AND insist on a United Kingdom.

That has been the status quo since Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland were conquered, invaded and occupied by the English, centuries ago.

Great Britain is not a country; it’s a landmass. It is known as ‘Great’ because it is the largest island in the British Isles, and houses the countries of England, Scotland, and Wales within its shores. — source

If we want to include Northern Ireland too, then we need to move from "Great Britain" to the "United Kingdom". Whichever one we choose, it is dominated and ruled by England, from the English parliament in England.

[Fried Egg]

Furthermore, I don't understand the argument that goes something along the lines that the case for independence is strengthened since they were dragged out of the EU against their population's wishes. That may be true but if leaving the UK and joining the EU would involve adopting the Euro and a hard border with England (and Wales) it seems pretty clear that becoming independent would be far more disruptive than it would have been the last time they had a referendum.

According to Fried Egg, it is doubtful the British would accept the loss of sovereignty a return to EU membership would entail, however the reward of sovereignty by becoming independent is not worth the effort for the Scots, what with disruptive issues like currency and borders to deal with. I think if I were Scottish and reading Fried Egg's comments, I would be inclined to "I'll take the hard border and the Euro, and an independent Scotland, you can have Britain".

Matters of sovereignty may well outweigh matters of economy in the minds of many with regards to Scottish independence (as may well have been the case with regards to brexit). I make no judgement as to whether they do or don't. I only pointed out that the economic case for Scotland leaving the UK has only weakened since brexit, not strengthened.

However, I wouldn't so lightly dismiss the problems of introducing a hard border between England and Scotland. There are currently tens of thousands of vehicles crossing the England/Scotland border every day (source). Trade with the rest of the UK amounts to around 61% of Scottish exports and 67% of Scottish imports (source). It looks more likely that if Scotland left he UK, it would do better economically retaining a "single market" with the UK rather than joining the EU because the gains of joining the EU would not offset the losses.

Furthermore, the burden of working out how they're going to enforce a customs border with England will fall on Scotland (and will likely need to be fully explained to the EU's satisfaction before being allowed to join). Whether it is even practical to enforce such border controls on what has been an open border for over 300 years is the question. Sure, the SNP will tell you they don't want a hard border but if they're hell bent on joining the EU, they might have no choice.

That has been the status quo since Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland were conquered, invaded and occupied by the English, centuries ago.

That's not true with regards to Scotland which freely chose to be joined to the UK in 1707 with the "acts of union" (it had previously been conquered and gained independence). Ok, Wales was conquered but you're going back to the 13th century. While they both maintain their own sense of identity within the UK, I don't think there's anything particularly unique here when compared to other countries throughout Europe that did not exist centuries ago in the form they do today and that have within their borders peoples with their own distinct identities (and their own separatist movements). I don't think there's any reason to single out the UK in this regard.

[Pattern-chaser]

That has been the status quo since Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland were conquered, invaded and occupied by the English, centuries ago.

That's not true with regards to Scotland which freely chose to be joined to the UK in 1707 with the "acts of union" (it had previously been conquered and gained independence). Ok, Wales was conquered but you're going back to the 13th century. While they both maintain their own sense of identity within the UK, I don't think there's anything particularly unique here when compared to other countries throughout Europe that did not exist centuries ago in the form they do today and that have within their borders peoples with their own distinct identities (and their own separatist movements). I don't think there's any reason to single out the UK in this regard.

I agree there's no reason to think the UK is any different to other modern countries, but I don't think that impacts at all on what I said.

Also, I'm not sure quite how much of a "free" choice the Scots had, but I'm not a student of history, and won't pursue this particular point; I've been wrong before...

[Fried Egg]

Fair enough, I'm no student of history either.

My feeling is that, after so many years, however the union of the kingdom might have come about in the first place, we've lived in peace and (relative) harmony for so many years that the tumultuous nature of how we originally came together is kind of water under the bridge. For all there is that separates us, there is so much more that we have in common. Quite different, I feel, to the UK leaving the EU.