He says (rightly) that:
"In terms of trade, in order to keep the land border open and to avoid tariffs, Scotland would have to agree to stay in the UK Single Market and Customs Union. The UK regulation of goods (including food products and medicines) would be incorporated into domestic Scottish law. Scotland would have to agree to maintain dynamic alignment with UK regulations of goods as they change over time. The UK Supreme Court would have jurisdiction over the regulation of Scotland’s goods market. UK State aid law would apply in Scotland in so far as it may affect trade between the UK and Scotland. Scotland would remain within the UK’s single VAT area."
That's hardly 'independence' is it? He admits this is "incompatible with Scotland joining the EU Single Market and Customs Union" and says if Scotland left the UK Single Market and Customs Union, then border controls would apply. He goes on to list all of the negative things about borders (a lot) - all of them are the ones warned about (scaremongering) in 2016 or have come to pass because of the type of deal we asked for and negotiated.
According to Blake:
"The UK would not provide a land bridge for goods moving between Scotland the EU and vice versa, because of the risk that Scottish soil on the tyres of vehicles entering the UK could contaminate UK soil. All goods destined for the EU would have to go by ship from Scottish ports."
I'm not sure where Blake has been for the past few months but HGVs continue to come in and out of the UK with nobody checking what's on the tyres. That rule applies to tractors and the like with tyres caked in mud. He also says as a downside:
"Customs declarations and rules of origin paperwork for goods entering the UK from Scotland and the payment of tariffs. In terms of rules of origin, Scotland must demonstrate that at least 55% of all components in goods manufactured in Scotland were made in Scotland."
Note this is precisely what has been imposed by the Brexit he supported when presumably it was an upside?
Anyway, it does raise the question of a border and I looked at how long it is (96 miles) to compare with the Irish land border (310 miles) and while doing so I came across a nicely balanced blogpost from January 2020 asking what an England/Scotland border might look like. It's quite long but very interesting.
It would be far easier than in Ireland where a land border is more or less proscribed by the GFA anyway. There are just four major A or trunk road crossings and two rail links through which the majority of goods would need to pass, with significant new infrastructure - some of which I assume SNP supporters would welcome as signifying a real separation. I think an extension of the Common Travel Area that already exists between the UK and Ireland would take care of most day to day crossing of people.
The post argues that similar border posts between Norway and Sweden or Switzerland and France don't cause huge queues. The writer says:
"If the UK were no longer in the single market or customs union while an SNP Scotland was, it seems inevitable that the border between the two would have to be managed in some way to monitor and control the flow of both people and goods across it. Other external borders the EU has with its friendly neighbours of Norway and Switzerland can provide examples that are relevant to the UK/Scotland situation. But their relationship with the EU is closer than the UK’s will be. So any control on the UK/Scotland border itself will surely be at least as thorough, and probably more so.
"The first minister is quoted above as saying she ‘wants to avoid a hard border’. But talk of a hard or soft border by any politician is unhelpful and aimed more at particular audiences they might wish to influence than the reality of what might happen.
"The fact of the matter is that the border between the UK and a separate Scotland would probably be little different from most international borders in the world between states that are not hostile to each other. Crossings by both road and rail would be controlled in some way, there would be infrastructure at the border or elsewhere to enable that control, people and goods would be liable to inspection, the number of crossing points would probably be limited, and border patrols would keep an eye on the rest of the border."
Blake points to a "study by the European Research Group in February 2021" which he says "outlined the costs" incurred in Northern Ireland since 1 January 2021 due to the NIP and similar costs will apply in the case of Scotland, he says. In fact the study contains no specific measure of costs at all. It is just a list of all the problems, delays and difficulties being experienced due to the NI protocol, which have a cost of course, it simply isn't calculated.
The list applies to the border down the Irish sea but it applies equally to the border down the English Channel since the rules being applied are the same. But about that border the ERG and Blake are silent, presumably on the grounds that it's a price worth paying for independence.
Scotland may well think the same.
