Effect of Scottish independence on Scottish aviation?
 

Can't see it being discussed anywhere else on PRUNE, but what impact do we think Scottish independence might have on Scottish aviation?

What might be the implications on matters such as the relationship with EASA, UK CAA oversight, border controls, Schengen, APD, other tax regimes, import duties, VAT, fuel pricing. Could there be a Scottish aircraft register? Would there be a need for that?

Would operators opt to base HQs outside of Scotland for tax, operational or legislative benefits?

Seem to be quite a lot of unanswered questions on this front.

Anyone got any answers?!

And will they have their own CAA ?

Controlx
 

If they vote NO then nothing changes, if the vote YES then thats their problem to sort, but in the event of a YES vote they will in time become an independent country and will have to establish the bodies to which you refer, some they may be able to outsource to rUK as customer and pay for the services they receive. This will apply to lots of agencies outside aviation, but it will be very much a one way flow from rUK to Scotland, the fact that the rUK will still be a 55m+ population and Scotland a 5.3m pop; will see to that.

My gut feeling is that Alex Salmond suffered premature popularity last weekend and the tide is now running against him, the big money boys have indicated they'll move South will unsettle voters whether they hate banks or not

my personal view is that it would stop the traffic growth currently seen at most Scottish airports as 1/ relocation of many businesses and business people to England would reduce the need for business travel to Scotland and 2/ I think longer term the Scots would be individually poorer thus reducing (outbound) leisure travel. As an Scot resident in England and thus voteless, I have everything crossed that the voters will see sense and vote no.

If the scots were clever about it, immediately start building a second runway at Edinburgh or Glasgow, and scrap APD tax. Then offer subsidies to airlines to fly from there, and boom, the likes of flybe, cityflyer, Aer Lingus etc. can fill aircraft with passengers coming to catch long haul flights at a massively reduced rate from the UK.

Funded by/from ?

Short term they may not have enough passengers to fill a Jetstream if the UK Government cancels the passports of all Scottish people. After all, they would not be part of the UK.

" 1/ relocation of many businesses and business people to England would reduce the need for business travel to Scotland"

Not sure thats a given. If they had any plan at all for a split, they'd do like Ireland. Reduce their corporation tax,they have an educated English speaking workforce...and many of those business would stay. Many others could move there. No guarantee businesses will move to England at all imo.

Well I hope they vote 'No' but if they elect to divorce the UK they can sort it out themselves. I'm sure they'll be able to afford whatever they need, because they will have their oil. I am a bit confused though. I thought I understood that the oil revenue would be 15% of GDP. Listening to the SNP I roughly calculate that post independence it will suddenly increase and provide about 85% of the extra money they will have to find. They can't be lying, they're politicians.:eek: If they can't afford it they can always allow EASA to administer Scottish aviation...but then they wouldn't really be independent.

Not having a pop at anybody in particular but I really hate this 'rUK' nonsense. The name of the country is the UK. If the Scots vote 'Yes', they will leave the UK and what is left will be...the UK.

Drifting a bit off topic, but hey ho ...

It's just a handy term to differentiate between the UK as it stands at the moment and a post-Scottish-independence UK. Other suggested terminology welcomed.

Except that it isn't. The name (at present) is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Again, UK is just a handy abbreviation and would presumably continue to be used, albeit with a different meaning, if the Scots vote to leave.

The Edinburgh agreement between the UK and Scottish governments explicitly protects the citizenship of current UK citizens who would live in a post-Independence Scotland.

Nice try - but no cigar:ok:

Great Britain means England Wales and Scotland. The term Britain used to be applied to mean Wales, and subsequently it meant England and Wales. It has fallen out of use as such, but could be resurrected as the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland.....

If the vote goes to a Yes, i think there will be retrenchment of UK airlines from Scotland. At present as EU operators, we can fly EU-EU, and EU-non EU. However if Scotland does go, and as is suspected ceases to be part of the EU, it restricts where EU airlines can fly from EDI etc.

There won't be any issues flying Scotland-EU, but Scotland-non EU will be difficult for EU airlines. There's a lot of charter trade from Scotland to Egypt & Turkey that have to find another option.

To our English friends, worry not. The great liar's chickens are finally coming home to roost.

We'll vote no, probably not by as big a margin as I'd like but nevertheless it will be a no.

Hopefully once it's over Dave will abolish that waste of space, Mickey Mouse establishment in Edinburgh and it'll be onwards and upwards from there.

Certainly not Lloyds Bank.;)

Typical Jocks; act first, think later:D

National Airline? are we going to see the resurrection of Caledonian perhaps?

If Scotland becomes non EU, then logically, all flights will be outside the EU Duty Free regulations (incl. England). Will there be an upsurge of Duty Free shops selling cheap alcohol and tobacco?

I can't imagine that this will be allowed to happen.

Interestingly, if Scotland becomes independant, but retains the Royal Family, they remain within Great Britain a term which was coined after the union of the crowns before the union of the countries. The term United Kingdom of Great Britain was not used until after the union of the two countries and after the union of the two Parliaments.

Britain is a derivation of the Roman name of an area they controlled; 'major' for the parts of theses islands and 'minor' for the parts now in France - Brittany now. The parts of our islands included areas north of Hadrian's wall, not all of what is now Wales and most of what is now England. To equate the Roman term Britain to current political boundaries is rather pointless. To be British is to be a subject of Her Majesty and from Great Britain, thus someone from an independant Scotland under the crown would still be British as well as Scottish whether we, or they, like it or not.

Pedant hat now off!

Does that mean that Australia and Canada, for example, where the Queen is still Head of State, are part of GB ?

No, it's called being part of the Commonwealth? Commonwealth of Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:rolleyes: