Scottish independence

I didn't mean to derail the topic with highly technical treatments of nuclear submarines, my point is that the prospect of Independence has become a very real and practical concern at official level in Whitehall, even in Boris has his head in the sand about it.

This doesn't help; quite the opposite. Glasgow is 65km south-east of Faslane.

One of the main attractions of independence for Scotland would be precisely to rejoin the EU. But they would want to do so on terms that made some allowance for their very close economic relationship with rump-UK.

This would be a moving target, though. Even assuming a successful indyref, as with Brexit some years would elapse between the referendum and actual Scottish independence, and some more years would elapse between that and Scottish accession to the EU. And over that period of time there would almost certainly be changes of government in rump-UK, and very probably changes of rump-UK policy towards the EU, most likely in favour of closer alignment, which would make the Scottish dilemma less acute, and the negotiation of terms to square the circle of Scotland's relationships with the Union and with rump-UK a little bit easier.

Not according to bob.

But, seriously, it would be insane to make decisions about the location of a nuclear facility on the assumption that in the event of a radiation release the wind will always be blowing in the most usual direction. At any given time, it could be blowing in any given direction, and planning and decisions need to take account of this.

What we can say, though, is that proximity to a large centre of population is clearly not a consideration that rules out a possible base for Trident so, if the UK does find itself relocating Trident, proximity to large centres of population won't rule out any site that they might be considering.

Will they move Trident? Well, obviously, a lot of things would have to happen before that even becomes an issue, but let's suppose that Scotland is going to become independent. Even if not reliant on the Greens at that stage, the SNP itself is not keen on nuclear armament; their 2014 proposals included removal of Trident, so I'd guess that would be their opening position even if the Greens weren't pressing for it.

But these things can be fudged; moving Trident would be project that would take years, and I doubt that the SNP would demand instant removal. So negotiations could go anywhere from a commitment in principle to eventual removal with no specified timeframe, to a detailed treaty provision specifying a removal process and timeframe, and arrangements for what would happen until them. And it would all be in the mix as part of larger negotiations. This isn't a simple binary.

But we are focussing on the question of whether the Scots would want them removed. There's also the issue of whether the UK would. Would they want their entire nuclear capacity to be permanently located in foreign territory (or, even if the Scots were willing, in an enclave within foreign territory)? No other nuclear power seems to think that wise; would the UK? What would their attitude be if the Scots demanded joint control, or a veto over use, or an agreed policy on use, as a quid pro quo for hosting the facility? Simple self-respect would prevent the Scots from licensing the UK to locate its nuclear offensive capacity in Scotland and deploy it from there as it wished, without any regard to the implications for Scotland, so there will certainly be some ask about this. Even if Faslane is physically the optimal location, if it comes with baggage of this kind the UK might feel that it's not the overall optimal location.

I think they're way ahead of you, Aegir. From the white paper, Scots citizens would be free (so far as the Scots government was concerned) to continue serving in the UK forces or, after independence, to enlist in them. And, conversely, non-Scots would be welcome to serve/enlist in the Scots forces. And, nuclear weapons aside, allied forces (including UK) would be welcome to be based in Scotland, or to come to Scotland for training or other operations.

The latest Tory move isn't going down well in Scotland:

Meanwhile, Keir Starmer has announced Gordon Brown will lead a commision to settle the issue of the Union.

If he won't supply a high speed rail line from Manchester to Leeds, then I don't think so. If only because the people of Yorkshire would string him up like Mussolini.

Interestingly, the same money would buy you enough brand new jet aircraft to put over one third of the population of the 6 Counties in the air at the same time.

Well obviously I was just highlighting the ridiculousness of the suggested budget.

I think by the time any bridge or tunnel would be built, the fuelling technology for both planes and ferries will be much more advanced. Either way, a physical connection between the island of Great Britain and the island of Ireland is never actually going to happen. Not in the 21st century anyway.