Seal

For me, along with many others, it's the economics that matter most.It's all fine and well having an estimated exchequer balance of £82m, but it does seem to be missing quite a few large things. Firstly, it appears to miss large expenditure items that are currently the responsibility of central government, with the two most significant off the top of my head being, the north boat, and crofters grants. The grants for the north boats, is about £36m for the whole shooting match, so it'd be safe to assume circa £20m for only the Shetland connection. Similarly, crofters grants (if they ever get paid) are between £8m-£9m per annum. Straightaway that's almost £30m gone from the positive balance, and I'm fairly sure if you started looking at aspects such as the NHS (which has an annual budget of over £50m, offset against National Insurance contributions of around £40m) you'd soon start to run out of cash. Similarly, state pensions are a pretty big cost, and I can't see folk being happy not getting their pension. Lastly my most acute fear that I doubt can be assuaged is population. Currently, the Shetland population is growing, partly thanks to immigration from the rest of the UK and more exotic locales. If Shetland removed itself from the jurisdiction of the UK, it would certainly put people off from moving up here. A quick look at the census data indicates that 1308 people (people who weren't born in Scotland) moved to Shetland between 2001 and 2011, and the real number will be higher as there's no distinction between where people were born in Scotland. Without this immigration, and assuming that emigration, such as youngsters going to uni and not returning, stayed roughly level, there would be a decline in the Shetland population. If this was to happen, then it would be very difficult to reverse, and I think would harm Shetland in every way for future generations.

I'm going to suggest something crazy here that the council would probably never even think of doing. This first assumes that the council has found there to be a need to reduce the speed of vehicles along the esplanade (which I'm not sure there is). Instead of installing all of the speed bumps and raised islands, why don't they simply stick up some signs saying ‘20’. Some drivers, myself included, would slow their speed a little bit and this might have the desired effect without pulverising everyone’s lumbar region. It would also be a lot cheaper and with significantly less disruption than doing heavy work to the road. They could always review it again after a year or two and see whether it has actually had the desired impact, and then if they have to they could put their beloved speed bumps in.

Is everyone aware that if one is born in a British Overseas Territory, they become a British Overseas Territory Citizen, and that this does not hold the same rights as a UK citizen. It is possible to become a British Citizen, but needs to be applied for, and presumably is not guaranteed. British Overseas Territory Citizens are still subject to immigration controls, and as such need a vise to either live in, or work in the UK. Do people not think that would be slightly limiting towards the future bairns of Shetland not being able to move freely even to Aberdeen? Also, I assume that further education would be charged at the exorbitant rates that they charge to other international students, currently £13,800 a year at Aberdeen University. Below is a good quote from the Wikipedia article showing how wise it can be: