interesting idea cliff

just wondering if you think it would be a good idea to make a DLC that allows you to play as Scotland as a celebration of the referendum that is soon to come deciding the fate of Scotland for generations to come. anyone with ideas please post them, i hope you see this cliff, i think it would be a really good idea. :slight_smile:

Make a mod

Scotland would be an interesting mod :smiley: Although I an for-see all kinds of argument about exactly how much of the oil revenue should be allocated to the Scottish, and also whether or not they have the UK military or not. As I understand it, the assumption is that the UK military still defends Scotland in exchange for the scots still allowing the faslane naval base to keep UK nukes there, but maybe that’s all changed now?

Being Scottish and Pro Independence this is a mod I would love to see. Unfortunately I know nothing of modding so it won’t be coming from me. However I am more than happy to assist with information to anyone willing to do the techy bit.

I would be interested in learning more about how to make a new country. As such, given that this seems to be something people are interested in, and I think is kind of an interesting issue myself, I would be willing ‘to do the techy bit’. I am also from the UK, so I know a bit about the issues involved. However, I’m far from a Scotland expert. The most immediate issue for me seems to be that no-one knows what exactly what the deal would be between Westminster and Scotland. E.g. the debt, oil, military, how the Civil Service would be split up? Some of these people quite strongly disagree about, like the MoD and SNP do not agree at all about the future of Trident if Scotland become independent, and what happens with Scotland and the pound and Scotland and the EU isn’t clear at all either.

Happy to hear people’s thoughts or see people’s references for what an independent Scotland might look like.


Obviously no one can say for certain how discussions would pan out should there be a yes vote. However I can add what I know so far on the topic.

Firstly on the issue of debt, Alex Salmond has already openly admitted that Scotland would take its fair share of the UK debt. There have been two formulas branded so far, One way to share the debt would be on a population basis. If Scotland assumed a population share of UK public sector net debt in 2017-18, the group estimated it would be worth £126 billion, equivalent to 72% of Scottish GDP. This would be slightly lower than the equivalent UK figure of 77%.

An alternative way to determine Scotland’s share of UK public sector debt could be to base the calculation on an estimate of Scotland’s previous contributions to the UK’s public finances.

According to the economists, this would imply that Scotland’s estimated share of UK debt would be worth £40.6 billion. This is equivalent to approximately 27.6% of Scottish GDP (including North Sea oil), lower than the population share calculation.

On share of oil, there is unlikely to be an agreement between Holyrood and Westminster on the exact percentage so close to a referendum therefore the closest figure there is can be found in this wiki extract explaining the theory. Note I am assuming this was before Westminster changed 6000 miles of Scottish waters to English waters by moving the Scottish maritime boundary from Berwick upon Tweed to Carnoustie.

However due to the existence of two separate legal systems in Great Britain — that of Scots law pertaining to Scotland and English law pertaining to England and Wales, constitutional law in the United Kingdom has provided for the division of the UK sector of the North Sea into specific Scottish and English components.[5] The Continental Shelf Act 1964 and the Continental Shelf (Jurisdiction) Order 1968 defines the UK North Sea maritime area to the north of latitude 55 degrees north as being under the jurisdiction of Scots law[6] meaning that 90% of the UK’s oil resources were under Scottish jurisdiction.[7][8] In addition, section 126 of the Scotland Act 1998 defines Scottish waters as the internal waters and territorial sea of the United Kingdom as are adjacent to Scotland.[9] This has been subsequently amended by the Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundary Order 1999 which redefined the extent of Scottish waters and Scottish fishery limits.[10][11]

Military is another issue where no official agreement will be made, however the SNP have stated that as they are willing to take a population share of debt they want a population share of assets, I am guessing this would mean approx 8.4% share of all UK assets. I think we can safely say that Faslane is not going to be annexed as part of England (a story we hear in Scotland have been faced with) I dare say the personnel would have to be given a choice as to which side they went to as there are Scots in English regiments and vice versa.

On the subject of the civil service Scotland already has alot of its own departments and authorities but for those parts that are based and operated in England I dare say the 8.4% rule would be the simplest way to get an idea of splts.

Trident. Im afraid there is nothing the MoD can do about the SNPs wish to get rid of Trident. That is ofcourse assuming the SNP were voted in as Scotlands first independent government in 2016. They would be forced to take Trident to their deep water port by Portsmouth where they dont want it kept at the moment as its too dangerous to have it near a village of 3000 people, but they are happy to have it on the doorstep of Scotlands biggest city home to 1million.

The Pound, another area where Westminster has tried to flex its muscles and failed. As stated Scotland has paid for and therefore owns its fair share of all assets this includes Pound Sterling and the BoE. So using the pound is really not an issue. (Hypothetically) Should Westminster get bitchy and dig their heels in and Scotland in the end can’t/don’t use Sterling in a currency union with the rest of the UK they can either use it as a imported currency (cant remember the real term) Countries do this the world over with the US Dollar for instance. As Sterling is a fully tradeable currency any country in the world can use it, whether Westminster like it or not. Should they not want that they could set up a Scottish pound and link it 1:1 with sterling just as Isle of Mann does with its Manx Pound. Or they could let the currency go its own way this could lead to trade and travel issues between the two should the Scottish pound be as successful as is predicted. Then there is ofcourse the ill fated Euro however I doubt we will even go there.

Scotland is already a member of the EU and has been for 40years or so. There is absolutely no precedent for a current member of the EU to be expelled, ministers from several EU countries have all stated they see no issue with Scotland remaining within the EU. Scotland ofcourse has huge fishing stock that are fished by nations all over the EU I doubt they would want these waters blocked to their fishing vessels. Plus with the addition of Poland, Bulgaria etc I really dont see Scotland having any issue in remaining within the EU. The only countries who have offered up any form of rhetoric on the issue are UK and Spain and as both are currently facing independence struggles it is really no surprise.

It is maybe worth noting that on the EU issue that the EU has stated that they will only give a straight and detailed answer on Scotlands circumstances should they be approached by a signatory with an interest in the referendum. This basically means Westminster, yet Westminster refuses point blank to make any request on the issue, make of that what you will.

Now as I stated before, I am pro independence so some people may view my input as being bias. I am happy to add more info and hunt down sources for all info needed. I am also open to debate and discussion on the issues above. I really hope this will help you Elinor or anyone else interested in creating an independent Scotland mod.

I think the pound is a bigger issue than you suggest. While, yes, theoretically Scotland could use the pound whether Westminster liked it or not, it would cripple their ability to set a lot of economic policy, e.g. quantitative easing. I’m not sure if this is important to the game, though, since these kinds of policies and currency values aren’t really modeled at the moment. Though Cliffski has suggested some it might happen in future.

I think the principle of a population split on assets/debt seems the simplest and not horribly unrealistic, and probably the most relevant immediate issue gameplay wise. Are there any details re: how the SNP would change the UK’s laws for Scotland outside of how things are different in Scotland already? I can probably find details of how the devolved government has set stuff up, but not sure where to look for policy details for others?

I also feel the need to lay my cards on the table and say that I’m against independence, which is why I think this is an interesting exercise. And also yes, I think large parts of your response do show bias (e.g. they build and maintain nuclear weapons not that far from London, I’m pretty sure keeping them in Scotland has nothing to do with how dangerous they are, they’re pretty safe), but then again I know I’m biased too so maybe through the wonders of compromise we can come to something that is relatively unbiased.



Scotland has a completely separate law system from England. So there would be nothing needing changed in terms of law. I don’t know if I have misunderstood what you meant with your point.

As for the Trident issue I apologise for a previous error It is Plymouth (Devonport) not Portsmouth. Here is a story from the Pro Union Guardian.

Quote “The problem is that the dockyard is in a densely populated area and, if there were an accident, thousands of people would be at risk. The worst accident scenario envisaged by the MoD would kill up to 11,000 people in Plymouth and would not meet the official criteria for what is acceptable, according to a new report.” … d-plymouth

Sorry, when I said law I didn’t mean ‘law and order’ law, which I appreciate Scotland has a separate justice system already. I meant more like, all laws? As in, all the stuff not currently devolved to Scotland, like gambling law or drug laws, or foreign policy.

Also, if you read the article you linked, it makes it very clear that the number of people at risk in the current Trident location is 2 orders of magnitude smaller than if they moved it. So your original characterization wasn’t really fair, and as I suggested, a bit biased.

Not bias in my opinion, neither Scots nor English should be put at risk by nuclear weapons. The point I was making was that they seem to be saying that Scots are collateral damage while the English are too precious to risk. What it really equates to is that basing nukes in Devonport would outrage the voters that Labour and the Tories must win to have any hope of getting into power.

Anyway we are getting side tracked we are not going to agree on all things but then thats what makes politics great.

As for the issues you mentioned ie gambling laws etc there has been no mention of these issues from the SNP yet the issue is these are more party policy rather than matters for an independence referendum. There is a white paper due to be released on 26th November by the SNP for their idea of independence. I seriously doubt it will touch on any of these matters which are more likely to be found in the parties manifestos for the 2016 Scottish elections which will be when Scotland officially becomes independent after a negotiation and transition period.

On military and foreign policy the SNP have clearly stated that they would take part in NATO peacekeeping operations only. Again this would all depend on the party in power and what their foreign policy is to be.