Is it really so great to be British?

Published on Tuesday 16 January 2007 11:53

THREE hundred years ago today the Act of Union was passed, joining Scotland and England together.

But has being part of Britain been good for Scotland?

Here leading figures from arenas including business, sport and health in Edinburgh give their views as Scots and Britons:

Alan Tait, rugby star

"I couldn't have lived with myself if I'd played any form of rugby for England. The highlight of my rugby life was pulling on a Scotland shirt and running out on to Murrayfield. To wear an England shirt might just take the shine off that amazing memory."

Strong words from Scottish rugby legend Alan Tait in 1995, explaining why he refused to represent England in Rugby League when he was qualified to do so because he was living south of the Border.

But Tait, who has played for Scotland and the British Lions in rugby union and for Great Britain in rugby league, admits that, in career terms, the Union allows players to reach the "pinnacle" of their career - playing for Britain.

He says: "When you're a kid growing up you dream of playing for your country. But once you have done that the next step is to be better than players in England, Wales and Ireland.

"You are more proud playing for your country, but playing for the British Lions is a higher honour, it's the pinnacle of your career."

When asked if Scotland should stay in the Union he is unequivocal saying: "Definitely."

He adds that by giving Scots the chance to play for Britain the Union also gives Scots players access to better facilities in England.

Sir Tom Farmer, Kwik-Fit founder

Before the Act of Union in 1707, business relations were so poor between England and Scotland that Scots had been barred from trading in cattle, coal and linen with the English - a move which wiped out half the export market for Scottish businessmen in one blow when it was introduced by England under the Aliens Act.

Today, perhaps unsurprisingly, millionaire entrepreneur Sir Tom Farmer, below, says the Union has not done his 1971-founded empire - of hundreds of centres through Britain and Europe - any harm at all.

He says: "For me business life has been very good obviously. I can't say that there has been at any time anything because of the circumstances [being part of Britain] that has held us back."

But while he is clear that being part of Britain has not been a hindrance, he stops short of saying it has helped.

"I cannot say what difference it has made," he says, adding that now at such a "crucial" time in Scotland since the Act, he is only looking to the future.

And after donating 100,000 to the Scottish National Party last year, he seems to be leaning towards independence.

Paul Scott, historian , ex-president of the Saltire Society and former vice-president of the SNP

"I think the Union had certain beneficial effects in the 19th century when the Empire was at its height and it provided very well-paid careers for lots of Scots. But at the same time a lot of discreditable things happened during the Empire as well and we Scots must take responsibility for that."

Without the Empire, he believes Scotland would now be better off on its own, as a small nation like Norway. "Because of the union we were involved in the Iraq War and having nuclear submarines on the Clyde, because we are tied to a country that's trying to be a great power."

David Price, senior research fellow in health at Edinburgh University

"Scotland in the 20th Century benefited enormously from being in the NHS, which is one of the most cost-effective health care systems providing a free healthcare service for the whole population.

"It has been used as a model for healthcare around the world and is a fantastic achievement which Scotland has shared."

Not all the influences of the Union have been positive though. Price says that the Barnett formula - a complex economic equation under which Scotland receives funding from Westminster for services including health - limits health spending in Scotland.

He also warns that today the Union is also a negative influence on Scotland's healthcare under the NHS because he believes England is wrongly heading towards massive privatisation.

Instead of following suit he thinks Scotland should use its devolved powers to exert some independence and steer clear of privatising services here.

As for whether Scotland should stay in the Union he says it is "irrelevant" as far as healthcare is concerned, adding: "It's the policies of whichever party is in power that are relevant, not whether Scotland is in the Union or independent."

Graham Birse, deputy chief executive of Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce

"Scotland was refloated economically as a consequence of the Union.

"The original Scottish banks, like the Royal Bank of Scotland, were founded amidst the disaster of the Darien scheme [Scotland's failed attempt to build trade links with the colonies which cost many businesses dearly at the time], itself a major contributing factor to the Union because a lot of Scots were broke, including MPs voting on the issue."

He adds, however, that for a time more recently the Union was a negative influence, on tourism.

"In the past it has been bad for tourism because Scotland's identity has been subsumed within the Union Jack, and whatever you think of the Union Jack it does not immediately present Scotland's unique icons and images.

"The establishment of VisitScotland out of the old Scottish Tourist Board has been liberating for Scotland. Now VisitScotland's marketing budget is greater than VisitBritain's marketing budget."

As for the future, he says he can see benefits to both staying in the Union and to independence.

Richard Butt, head of media, communication and sociology at Queen Margaret UC

"THE irony is that television is a Scottish invention and the first director general of the BBC was Scottish but the benefits have gone to England. The history of the BBC and broadcasting in general has been very London-centred.

"The Union has not been satisfactory for the BBC in Scotland, which has been treated as one of the regions, which are underfunded and struggle to increase the amount of regional opt-out from national programming.

"Until very recently that has still been the picture, reflected by the fact the Scottish audience were a lot slower to purchase TV licences because they very accurately perceived that the BBC was very London-centred.

"Recent work to increase the amount of regional production is likely to pose a problem too because there is a limited pool not of Scottish talent but of talent in Scotland because they have all gone to London because that's where production is best."

He adds that the lack of Scottish funding has led to a shortage of home-grown programmes like Dr Findlay's Casebook.

However he thinks Scotland should stay in the Union to help it compete worldwide, saying: "The media is a seriously global industry these days and the larger the player the better."

Allan Wells, athlete and Olympic gold medallist

WELLS credits running under the British banner with helping him achieve his much-celebrated gold medal win in the 100-metre sprint at the 1980 Olympics in Moscow - an event viewed by many Scots as at least as important as the Act of Union.

He says: "If I look back at what I achieved at the Olympics I think that being part of the British team was a factor.

"The British Isles has a reasonably strong hold in sports at world level with a lot of clout behind it and I think you draw strength from that [as an athlete]. You are part of a bigger team with more experienced individuals.

"I think it would be much harder for Scotland to compete on the world stage if it wasn't part of the British team. It's like having a big brother looking after you.

"Scotland is a small nation. My feelings are that I'd like independence but that I think it's better for Scotland to stay in the Union at the moment."

Like Tait, he points out the benefits in terms of sponsorship and better facilities in England.

However he adds that Scottish sports stars do not need to be affiliated to Britain to succeed, citing stars like fellow city legend David Wilkie who trained in America.

And, while some might disagree, Wells says: "We don't have a British football team and it hasn't done us any harm up till now."

'We don't need anyone to survive on our own'

Does Scotland's future lie within the Union or with full independence?

John Ramsay, 60, blacksmith, Port Seton: "I think the two countries should stay together. I don't think we could manage on our own. I think there would be trouble like there is in Ireland if we split up."

Suzanne Herron, 36, florist, Leith: "I don't know if as a nation we could survive on our own. I think Scotland does have its own identity, I'm quite happy the way things are."

Andrew Gibson, 45, unemployed, Leith: "Independence, yes, because you hear so much about the amount of revenue we get from the North Sea that goes into the coffers down there, but at the same time you think, would we be able to survive as an independent country?"

Norman Campbell, 47, museums customer assistant, Cockenzie: "I'll be commiserating, not celebrating the 300th anniversary of the Union. I'd like independence. We're in the 21st century now, not the 18th. "We've got oil and the tourism industry, we don't need anyone to survive on our own."

Tim Scott, 21, student, Marchmont: "I can't really see Scotland having a strong enough economy on its own. I think it should stay in the Union."

Sophia Friedrich, 20, student, Marchmont: "I'm from down south like a lot of people living in Edinburgh. I think Scotland is fine as it is."

Ana De Bonrostro, 30, teacher, Holyrood: "I think it's alright the way it is. I'm Spanish and after two years living here I'm really impressed because Scottish people have a feeling that they are Scottish but at the same time they feel they belong to Great Britain. We don't have that in Spain."

Mary Stuart, 79, pensioner, Old Town: "We've been part of the Union for a long time and we should stay that way. I think it's good for Scotland, I don't think Scotland is strong enough for independence."

Is Scotland strong enough to survive outside the UK?