The Scottish Government

The one glaringly obvious problem with the current settlement is the complete lack of integrity shown by the Labour Party in its machinations to avoid its own law on donations. That Wendy Alexander has not already had to face arrest in itself says much about Labour's contempt for Scottish Law. The sad fact is she can continue to hide because of the way the law has been written.

The only way to break this cancerous link that is eating at the law of our land and the sovereignty of the people is to seek full independence so that Alexander and her ilk can no longer hide behind Westminster's coat tails and face due process like all and any citizen.

The nationalists ask the unionists to state their case, so here's my contribution.

We currently have Scotland in the United Kingdom, which is:

a) 7th in the world by GDP per capita (above the likes of Germany, France and Japan and now also the USA)

b) 5th in the world by GDP per capita by consumption (comparing average living standards),

c) 5th in the world by total GDP (only topped by countries with considerably higher populations) and

d) 6th in the world by total GDP (calculating in the cost of living).

So it can be seen that the UK is one of the wealthiest economies in the world.

Furthermore, The UK is one of the permanent five veto-powers on the UN’s powerful Security Council, one of the ‘Big Four’ in the EU, a member of the G8 group of major economies and also sits at the top tables of the OECD, OSCE, NATO, the Commonwealth, the Council of Europe, the World Trade Organisation, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, making it one of the most powerful and influential countries in the world.

The UK is the EU's strongest major economy, has the EU's strongest military, is the primary link between the two largest blocs of the EU and the USA, home of one of the world's principal cultures, home of the world's financial capital, home of Europe’s largest stock exchange and one of the largest in the world, is the leading destination for inward investment into Europe, is second only to the USA globally, the UK is the second largest investor overseas with investments/acquisitions by UK companies almost quadrupling in the past ten years, the UK has the third largest number of companies in the Forbes 2000 list of the world’s biggest companies (more than Germany and France combined), has one of the lowest government debt levels in the EU…

And all with a population of just 60m. That’s about 1% of the world’s population!

Finally, unemployment in the UK, at 5.3%, is the lowest in 30 years. In Scotland, unemployment is at its lowest in 33 years.

However, the SNP wants to take Scotland out of this and instead make it:
The 54th largest economy in the world
The 112th largest population in the world
The 22nd largest economy in EU
The 20th largest population in the EU (above the likes of Cyprus, Luxembourg, Latvia, Estonia, Malta etc).

Such rankings will inevitably result in considerably less influence in the international organisations, councils and forums that set European and global economic, political and security strategies currently enjoyed as part of the UK.

Within the EU, the SNP wants to take Scotland out of this ‘Big Four’ member-state and instead seeks just 1.3% of the European Parliament vote – with even this % inevitably decreasing as more countries join.

Within the UN, having lost its place on the Security Council, an independent Scotland will only have its single vote in the General Assembly which only meets a couple of times a year.

Economically, the SNP relies heavily on oil revenues when reserves are dwindling fast. Even the current sky-high prices aren’t guaranteed as history shows. In a worst-case scenario of oil running out completely (oil market forecasts predict a 65-75% drop over the next ten years), there would be up to a 25% drop in national production with the loss of many billions in tax revenues, resulting in a combination of higher taxes/lower spending/greater borrowing.

Internationally, the SNP seeks independence so that Scotland will have its own voice in the world yet it can be seen that this will be just one voice among a very large number of other ‘small nations’, considerable quieter than it has now within the UK.

#347

I recall a conversation with an Aberdonian who was waxing lyrical about the scenery, buildings, social life etc in Aberdeen. I asked him why he was now working and living in Fife? He thought for a minute before replying, 'Because it's, (expletive deleted) cauld up there!'. suggest this is the opinion of a lot of Scots who have chosen to live where the sun shines brightly in warmer climes. Ask Sir Sean.

Far from being a poor relative I suggest you look at the where the potential for expansion in many areas is taking place. Financial, electrical power generation. Here is where its happening, despite the inept government.

Paul Jonhson

Well said! It is refreshing to see someone putting forward some real statistics on a website littered with wild predictions.

No doubt you will incur the wrath of angry nationalists who will say 'oh aye but Scotland doesn't really gain anything' but that’s to be expected.

[353] The detail presented of support for the Union appears impressive.

However, to put this ‘positive spin’ in perspective, most of the rankings quoted are already sliding along with the UK’s standing and influence in world affairs, and Scotland’s economic growth has generally lagged that of the UK in recent years.

Perhaps most notable though is the lack of comment on Scotland’s relatively poor health and social rankings and the lack of argument on how remaining within the Union is going to turn things around and give our children better prospects for the future.

Would welcome a contribution that presents arguments on what fundamental changes could now be undertaken within the Union, that have not essentially been tried before, to reverse Scotland’s relative decline of recent decades?

353. Paul Johnson - UK
Please don't take this as a cynical or sarcastic attack, it's meant to try and put a perspective on statistics and rankings in general versus the meaning of those statistics for component parts:

x) planet earth ranked 1 on GDP on planet earth. Says nothing about rrelative disposition within planet earth, of personal wealth, services, quality of life, water, health, etc. etc.

I'd be interested to see where Monaco (as a very wealthy nation for individuals) stands in world rankings on GDP, and also where the EU as a whole would stand, considering the relative standings of the poorer individual nations that make up the EU.

But your argument is clearly a valid and well put together contribution to the debate: union v independence.

[356] Happy to.

First of all, none of those rankings are “sliding”. After slowly climbing up the pecking order over the past decades, our economy continues to be stronger than our competitors.

Anyway, I am certainly not condoning the unitary system of government that has existed in the UK for so long. As so many people have said, you cannot govern large countries, with such varied social and economic needs, from the centre with 'one size fits all' policies. The vast majority of the citizens of all UK nations want greater local control and I am certainly one of them.

For starters, UK-wide economic policy since 1979, although brutal at first, has since allowed the entire economy to be rescued from the brink of bankruptcy (‘sick man of Europe’) to become Europe's strongest, overtaking all our major competitors. However, that growth, while steady in the past 10-15 years especially, has not been equal with the SE regions (and also parts of Scotland) outstripping many others. Scotland may have lost much heavy engineering to the far cheaper and more productive Far East (which would have happened regardless of Thatcherism) but hi-tech industry, IT and banking has taken its place with Edinburgh now the UK’s second financial city after London.

As for your comment on “Scotland’s relative decline”, try to be realistic instead of pessimistic. As I said before, Scotland’s unemployment rate is the lowest in 33 years and growth is steady. The Scottish economy exceeded the UK average in the 90s but dropped behind in recent years mostly due to a downturn in the global IT market which is still recovering. However, a benefit of being part of the large UK economy is that should major sectors of Scotland’s economy splutter, public spending is far more stable than if Scotland was permanently self-financing. And so while IT is a major component of Scottish commerce, it is a smaller percentage of the UK economy which was less affected by the downturn. And with the banking crunch initiated by the US sub-prime market expected to worsen considerably in the next few years, the trillion+ pound UK economy will again soften the blow for Scotland.

All nations of the UK clearly need an element of fiscal control over income tax, corporation tax and VAT (maybe down to regional level within England). I wouldn’t recommend full fiscal autonomy as that can only lead tax competition as we all compete for businesses and shoppers, leading to the low public spending seen, for example, throughout the USA (have you seen their roads, public transport, public healthcare, public education, crime levels etc.?). In unrestricted and unregulated tax competition, the wealthier areas of the country will always win as they can afford to have lower taxes than poorer areas. Again, compare California to, say, Louisiana or Alabama for an example.

Barnett’s days are numbered, thank God. This was only meant to be a temporary policy and has long out-lived its usefulness, creating pointless and self-destructive resentment throughout the country. The sooner it is scrapped and replaced with local fiscal control, the better.

Secondly, England should get its own Parliament (whether several regional or one national seat or both) and NI and Wales should have their Assemblies 'upgraded' to Parliaments of equal powers and responsibilities.

This would create a truly 'United' Kingdom of equal partners.

You ask about Scotland’s poor social and health rankings – Well, that is what devolution is all about. Now Holyrood, Cardiff and Belfast each have the ability to spend budgets as the local environment dictates and not based on the broad-brushed UK-wide statistics. Due to the UK’s economic success, public spending in Scotland this year is close to double that of just eight years ago.

As for Westminster, reinvent it as a pseudo-federal parliament with truly UK-wide responsibilities alone.

Suggesting that the highly uncertain future of independence from the UK is the solution to Scotland’s social ills is the sledgehammer-to-nut scenario. You don’t see Alabama, California or Texas wanting to break away from the USA. Neither do you see Bavaria or Brandenburg trying to break from Germany.

As a French citizen I think Scotland should be independent, not only because my country supported you in 1295 (auld alliance) but also because the UK is taking decision that many scots don't approve, like supporting the US gvt and its stupid decisions. The SNP leaders are right, stop spending your money on weapons, your children need it.

Anyway, it was just my point of view...

I think Scotland should give it a go as a fully independent functioning country.
With roughly the same population as New Zealand, Norway and Ireland, we’re clearly not too small because they manage fine. All we need to have a bit of self belief and the desire to make it happen. Some would say we’re fine as we are but for the past 300 years, we’ve been a subsidiary of a parent corporation that took us over when our stock was at a rock bottom price. It’s never really been a natural union, more of an opportunist acquisition by a much bigger organisation that had its eye on the bottom line. The takeover of Scotland is one of the best business moves England has ever made. Scotland has been good for England. Our military and engineering skills, our pragmatic pioneering spirit, our excellent seats of learning and oh, the oil has been pretty good as well.
However, what goes round comes round and I think now is the time for a change. I’ve been trying to think of an example to represent the relationship between Scotland and England and I think it can be best put by comparing it to a married couple who stay together because they don’t have the get up and go to admit they may be better off going their own separate ways. Don’t forget, people often get on a lot better after they stop being an item.
Post independence won’t be all plain sailing but it doesn’t have to be an ordeal. All we need is a bit of courage, of which the Scots have always had plenty and the will to make it happen.
I think that once we make the break, we’ll all wonder what the fuss was all about.