When is a UDI not a UDI?
The two governments are committed to continue to work together constructively in the light of the outcome, whatever it is, in the best interests of the people of Scotland and of the rest of the United Kingdom.
In theory, this should mean that Westminster after a Yes vote will negotiate the terms of independence constructively and as fast a reasonable possible. The Scottish Government has already stated that it believes it should be possible to conclude the talks in time for Scotland to become independent on 24 March 2016, and several independent observers have agreed this is a realistic time scale.
However, what happens if the 2015 General Election becomes a competition about who will be toughest on Scotland, and the resulting government is unwilling to compromise in order to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement? Or what if Westminster gets distracted by other issues (such as UKIP and the Brexit) and kicks the independence negotiations into the long grass?
A unilateral declaration of independence (a UDI) is normally something a prospective country issues when it has been denied a proper democratic path to independence.
So if Scotland votes Yes, and the Scottish Government does its best to negotiate in good faith, but Westminster acts as described above, will an independence declaration be a UDI, or will Scotland be entitled to do so as a result of the Edinburgh Agreement? Basically the independence declaration would say something like this: We have followed the Edinburgh Agreement in letter and spirit, but the Westminster Government is refusing to negotiate in good faith, so reluctantly we have come to the conclusion that we have to declare independence and resume the negotiations as an independent country.
Surely other countries would study the Edinburgh Agreement and conclude that Westminster was the culprit and that the Scottish independence declaration was just, valid and legal.
Hopefully this will be unnecessary, but when I read articles about how the Westminster Government isn’t even planning for the negotiations, I can’t help thinking they might need to be given a deadline in order to conclude them in a timely fashion.
As I’ve mentioned before, I do worry that the 2015 General Election will be such a mess if conducted during the independence negotiations that the only reasonable solutions are either to conclude the negotiations before April 2015 or to postpone the election till after Scottish Independence Day. Hopefully Westminster will soon wake up to the real possibility that we’ll vote Yes and will start planning for this scenario in earnest.
Oddly enough, I was thinking about UDI this morning.
Were you?
Yup. Not in a good way.
Oh dear…
The UK Gov may not be negotiating now but the Civil Service will have done most of work by Sept. All it should take after that is for the politicians to choose which of the options they will have prepared.
For the politicians to play silly buggers would be seen to be inviting international condemnation. Do you think the EU, USA, all the Commonwealth Countries and the UN would not exerting pressure.
rUK a pariah state?
The £ would tank.
Good points. However, the Telegraph article I linked to in the post claims that Cameron has decided no preparations should take place: “The Prime Minister, I gather, has concluded that the damage that would be done by being seen to be preparing for independence outweighs the benefits of preparation. Imagine the fun the SNP would have with the news that London is drawing up plans for a handover.”
Thomas, he can’t say anything in public but, as I said, I bet plans are being laid and are being made right now.
Cameron’s position is just bluster.
You’re probably right. 🙂
I believe that Cameron is a politician who says anything he thinks the public want to hear, anything. Afterwards he relies on the Press to cover what said when he lies later in a completely different direction.
Short termism, no core values.
Yes, I’d agree with that assessment.
Postponing the election will make us really popular if the Tories look like losing?
Of course any postponement might be in the interest of one party, which is why it’s probably best done in conjunction with establishing an rUK unity government. Anyway, what interests me is basically how the negotiations can be concluded swiftly and in a manner that benefits both sides, and I’m starting to conclude that holding a general election in the middle of the negotiations would be a recipe for disaster.
We live in interesting times.
I am sure That AS and his team have a gameplan for negotiations in such a situation, specifically the UK GE and they will have tested different war game scenarios.
There will be a Golden Bridge for Cameron to withdraw over and save face.
I don’t have any doubt that the Scottish Government will be well prepared for the negotiations (and to a large extent, the White Paper presents their initial position). My worry is that the negotiations will take much longer than necessary if Westminster haven’t done their homework before the referendum.