You're too small!
Leaving aside the "carry on" doble entendres, is this really true?
Is Cornwall too small to be a viable national unit as the unionits would have us believe?
This is the argument that I strugge to understand more than any other. It really puzzles me when I look around the world.
Do the 'too small brigade' mean population, geographic area, resources, or economy? I'm not sure they know themselves.
In terms of population - Cornwall has around 525,000 people (very approximate I know). The following is a selection of (there are quite a few more) independent countries (and remember that we are not calling for independence) with less than 1,000,000 population.
Cyprus - 866k
Fiji - 858k
Guyana - 785k
Montenegro - 620k
Luxembourg - 537k
Malta - 416k
Iceland - 325k
Lichtenstein - 37k
Monaco - 36k
San Marino - 32k
In addition there are around twenty countries with a population between 1 million and 3 million. Including places like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
I think you would have to agree that a small population doesn't mean that it is impossible to function as a distinct unit.
In terms of geography there are around 25 independent nations which have a smaller area that Cornwall.
Cornwall probably has a lot more going for it than many countries in terms of natural resources.
Cornwall has access to wonderful renewable energy resources.
It has a thriving tourist industry - which could be made more sustainable and which could benefit the Cornish economy a lot more.
Cornwall also has plentiful mineral deposits. The copper and tin (plus many other precious metals) never ran out - we just need to figure out how to mine them cost effectively.
Cornwall is also (just about still) a place of agriculture and is surrounded on three sides by the sea. No wonder we are renowned for our high quality food.
Does size matter? It's probably doess - but what is more important is what you do with what you've got!