The price of greatness

There were many Anglo-Shottland wars in history, but the one that happened in 2014 ended in a decisive victory of Scotland. Having voted as a result against the proclamation of independence, the Scots have achieved such a privileged position in the United Kingdom, about which residents of other parts of this country can only dream. So, at least, many people think in the English political elite.

The British tradition of "swimming" from separatists dates back to the 80s of the XIX century. Such tactics did not work against Ireland, but more than once helped calm passions in Scotland. So this time, the leaders of the three main parties of the UK, including Prime Minister Cameron, promised the Scots to expand even considerable self-government rights. This will affect tax and social policy and much more. In fact, as the author of this project admitted, the former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, is about a radical change in the constitutional, state structure of the kingdom, about a step towards federalization. But at the same time, the Formula Barnett formula, which was accepted about 35 years ago, will also remain the fury of many British and Welsh: Scotland receives more than 10 thousand pounds per capita from the central budget, while England is only eight and a half thousand. Now financial inequality can become even more flagrant.

About a hundred years ago, the Scots earned many times less British, but now the situation was practically leveled. Scotland has become the third in terms of the level of economic development by the region of the kingdom, second only to London and the southeast of England. Yes, and from a historical point of view, because the Scottish king got the English crown in the 17th century, and not vice versa. A hundred years later, the parliaments of the two countries ratified the union agreement, no one won anyone. True, a richer and stronger partner always set the tone in this union, giving rise to an unpleasant sensation of some inferiority, the “younger brother” syndrome. Nevertheless, over the centuries, the Scots played a colossally important role in politics, industry, and in the armed forces, and second -grade citizens would be difficult to call them. In addition, two ethnic groups mixed up. Some say: "Rub the British and, quite likely, find the Scottish roots from him."

Having voted against the proclamation of independence, the Scots have achieved such a privileged position in the United Kingdom, about which residents of other parts of this country can only dream

Of the 18 preceded prime ministers, eight were born or grew up in Scotland. Yes, and Cameron is the surname purely Scottish, as well, however, like Blair. Well, the direct predecessor of the current head of government, Gordon Brown, the Scot and ethnically, and at the place of birth, and now he lives in a fire, where he voted in a referendum. By the way, in most cases, in most cases, in the last centuries, the Scots received exactly the government for which they voted for the parliamentary elections. The last time, however, there was a discord: Tori won only in one of the 59 districts. As many Scots now say, the British imposed on them a hated party and her policy of strict savings. And this circumstance was one of the main trump cards in the propaganda separatist campaign.

So, the referendum ended peacefully, but now another “war” begins-the Anglo-English. The referendum caused a sharp revitalization on the right flank of the conservative party, which has long been sharpening its political knives. Now there was talk that Cameron should almost resign with his liberalism and willingness to compromise Cameron. Or at least abandon your excessive promises. “For too long, 55 million Englishmen trampled for the sake of four and a half million loudly screaming Scots. It’s time to put an end to this,” said James Gray, a member of the House of Commons. Another parliamentarian-conservative, Philip Davis, said that he would vote against the expansion of the Scottish autonomy. He believes that this promise was given "in a state of panic" when surveys showed a rapprochement of the number of supporters and opponents of independence. "I definitely are not ready to give Scotland a check with an unfinished amount by which my voters will have to pay," he said. And the former vice-chairman of the conservative party, Michael Fabrikant, said that “serious questions” arise about mistakes made at the stage of preparation for the referendum and the prime minister and the leader of the Labor. They allowed themselves to critically speak about attempts to appease the Scottish nationalists “too high price” even close associates of the prime minister, including at least one minister.

The leader of the United King of Nigel Faraj, who said: "England must find its voice, could even more sharply have a spinning of these moods. The tail cannot continue to turn the dog." It is not only about the material component of relations within the kingdom, but also about its state structure. Now 59 deputies elected from Scotland vote in Westminster on all issues regarding England, and in some situations their voice may be decisive. And this is also inequality, since the English parliamentarians can be less affected by Scottish affairs. Prime Minister Cameron and his deputy, leader of the liberal democrats Nick Klegg, had already hastened to say that the rights of the British should be protected. Apparently, a new formula will be found, according to which English deputies will be able to vote separately from their Scottish colleagues in some cases.

The divorce was avoided. But, the observers write, the referendum took place in an atmosphere of such a fierce ideological dispute, the intensity of emotions has reached such a level that it will now be a marriage without love, in which spouses are difficult to suffer each other for the sake of children, for example (and in this case, for the sake of maintaining a single currency and based on other economic reasons). Matthew Paris’s commentator even announced that, regardless of the outcome of the voting of the Scottish-English Union, Dead . But it seems to me that this is an exaggeration: wounds may well live - and faster than it might seem now. A referendum can have other far -reaching consequences for the entire kingdom. It is clear that both the Welsh and the inhabitants of Olster will inevitably begin to demand something similar to Scottish privileges for themselves. But the point is not only this. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the struggle around the problem of self -government of Ireland led to the deepest political crisis in Britain, the radical restructuring of the system. She split in half and as a result ceased to exist the largest and most important party of the country-liberal vigs, the place of which was soon occupied by the Labor. And the "Scottish question" can lead to a radical change in the entire political "landscape" of the United Kingdom.

Andrey Ostalsky - London journalist and political commentator

Opinions expressed under the heading "Law" may not reflect the point of view of the editorial office