Scotland will face 'painful divorce', says David Cameron in emotional speech

theguardian.com ^ | 15 September 2014 | Nicholas Watt

[BillyBoy]

I think a much better case could be made that Wales joined the UK/Great Britian (whatever they called the union at the time) involuntarily compared to Scotland's circumstances. As other freepers noted, Scotland was deeply in debt at the time and merged with England out of desperation. Wales, on the other hand, was basically invaded and put under English rule, and the last Welsh "Prince of Wales" was executed so the King of England could honor his son with that title.

That being said, the Welsh really don't seem to harbor any grudges 700 years later, and are much more ingrained in British culture than the Scottish. The Scottish have always had a very distinctive national identity whereas many Welsh people just seem to be defacto English to me. (though I suppose they'd probably feel insulted if I told them that) There's very little support for Wales leaving the UK at the moment, but I think if Scotland left it would set the wheels in motion for all four nations to eventually become their own separate entities. Not much point in having a "United Kingdom" that consists solely of England and Wales.

Finally, the obvious solution to the English not having any government to represent their interests is to make one and revive the English Parliament. Why did they revive the Scottish parliament but not the English one?

[the scotsman]

Except it isn’t.

No matter if one party sometimes tells you. In fact that party gets more from the marriage than the other, and is better off in the marriage than alone.

[Impy]

Yes, Wales was flat out conquered, something England could never do with Scotland.

Scotland was itching for more local control, that’s why they got their Parliament back.

Blair’s plan for England, rather than an English Parliament, was to create regional assemblies, an idea despised by many, as of yet only Greater London has an assembly with expanded local powers.