An Independent Scotland

[Stavros]

All this week the Financial Times, the only proper newspaper still published in the United Kingdom, has produced an in-depth analysis of the arguments for and against an Independent Scotland. On Thursday the 18th September 2014 the population of Scotland will be asked to vote in a referendum, with one question on the ballot paper:
"Should Scotland be an independent country?"

Because most of the FT's current articles are locked behind a paywall (but there is a free taster for those who need it online) the prose is limited, but a set of 30 charts are a critical guide to some of the key issues. I have selected a few to illustrate some key points that I think are at the heart of the dilemma.

On the face of it, Scotland is in a strong position as a country with a solid industrial base, a modest population -albeit one that is going to grow older in the next 25 years with a declining population of youth- an economically successful relationship, in terms of exports with the UK, European and world economy; and perhaps most important a belief amongst its people that independence is a better prospect now than it has ever been before.

The problem is that many of Scotland's positive achievements have been based on its relationship with the UK and the European Union, and it is by now means guaranteed that an independent Scotland, which has pledged to retain Sterling as its currency and the Queen as its head of state, will be able to remain in the Sterling area or the EU, and that this would have a profound impact on the tax regime within Scotland, and the consequences for the 'national' economy of the new state needs to commit itself to long-term borrowing, not least because the importance of North Sea oil and gas, currently 2% of UK revenues but estimated to become 19% of an Independent Scotland, is a projection which cannot actually estimate revenues from a province in decline where Scotland's share is still unclear.

I am opposed to an Independent Scotland because I see contemporary nationalism as a sickness which believes separation is the only cure, in a globalised economy where the concept of 'sovereignty' is a conceit through which a narrow-minded clique of bigots intend to take rights away from some people and privilege others, mostly themselves. In the end it comes down to the question: 'Do you belong here?' as if it were only possible to be a Scot because one's name is Hamish rather than Hakim, and one prefers Haggis to Haloumi.

Enjoy the tables anyway, the complete set of articles can be found online @
www.ft.com/scotland (http://www.ft.com/scotland)


http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/Eligibility-to-vote-in-the-independence-referendum-BBC.jpg


http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/Scotlands-demography-FT-590x329.jpg





http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/Issues-voting-referendum-decision-Enders-Analysis.jpg


http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/Support-for-independence-by-perceptions-of-economic-consequences-NatCen-590x279.jpg


http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/Scotland-public-finances-FT-590x333.jpg


http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/Scottish-trade-statistics-FT-590x335.jpg


18. Last year, Scotland’s estimated fiscal deficit (public sector net borrowing as a percentage of national income) was narrower than the rest of the UK’s. The future is less rosy, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. These projections are heavily dependent on demographic and oil & gas forecasts. (Source: IFS)

http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/Public-sector-net-borrowing-UK-vs-Scotland-IFS.jpg


http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/North-Sea-oil-forecasts-FT-590x332.jpg



26. The Ministry of Defence footprint in Scotland covers 1,648 square km. The country has about 15,000 MoD personnel. (Source: MoD / Enders Analysis.)

http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/files/2014/02/MoD-footprint-in-Scotland.jpg

[robertlouis]

You might have expected a response from me earlier than this, Stavros.

The problem I have with getting involved in a debate over Scottish independence is that while I can readily see and accept a lot of the pro's and con's, I find it virtually impossible to step away from the emotional impulse which says that, almost regardless of the economic and political arguments, the single driver of self-determination which lies at the heart of every independence movement, has to take precedence.

Or, at its weakest, the opportunity to make your own fuck-ups rather than trust them to an increasingly oligarchical and remote bunch of public schoolboys in London has an enormous appeal.

To everyone who says we're "Better Together", I simply say, remember Thatcher. You never voted for her, yet she foisted policy after policy utterly inimical to the Scottish polity, which differs profoundly to that of London and the south east, and that's increasingly the only part of the UK that government gives a damn about.

[Stavros]

I do understand your emotional commitment, what I thought was interesting about the FT's presentation is that it showed how successful Scotland is. My hypothetical is whether or not this success would continue if Scotland was independent in a world where independence in practice is limited. The trend toward the creation of micro-states at a time of globalisation may be a response to that feeling that national identity is being submerged by immigration and globalisation, yet the same micro-states -Scotland, Catalunya- cannot survive without those same, global connections. It just seems to be a feeling that a few people have that they will be be richer in a smaller state. It might work, but is it worth the gamble to find out if it does -or does not?

[Prospero]

Two questions are niggling me.

I. What is the status of ex-pat Scots 9in the UK) ? Why can't they vote? (When expat brits living in Scotland can)

2. If we are looking at a separation from the UK should not the whole of the UK be entitled to some part in this decision making process?

I think the emotional argument for many trumps the hard reality of economics. It is an issue of identity. And RL has blasted the distant rule of Westminster. (Londoners who don't like the present or past Conservatives rulers any better than the Scots have no such option to walk away)
But in a divorce both parties have rights.

[martin48]

The opinion polls currently are YES 37%, NO 47%. Plenty of time to change. I'm in two minds about Scotland going it alone. The biggest problem is that England will be dominated even more by Tory Governments. Yorkshire will became the new boundary as Tories only really worry about London and the Home Counties.



Two questions are niggling me.

I. What is the status of ex-pat Scots 9in the UK) ? Why can't they vote? (When expat brits living in Scotland can)

Well, Scottish MPs can vote on laws that only affect England. And UKIP demand the repatriation of Scots in England back to their own country?


2. If we are looking at a separation from the UK should not the whole of the UK be entitled to some part in this decision making process?

Yes - we should be able to vote ourselves separate from London.

I think the emotional argument for many trumps the hard reality of economics. It is an issue of identity. And RL has blasted the distant rule of Westminster. (Londoners who don't like the present or past Conservatives rulers any better than the Scots have no such option to walk away)
But in a divorce both parties have rights.

[Stavros]

Two questions are niggling me.

I. What is the status of ex-pat Scots 9in the UK) ? Why can't they vote? (When expat brits living in Scotland can)

2. If we are looking at a separation from the UK should not the whole of the UK be entitled to some part in this decision making process?

I think the emotional argument for many trumps the hard reality of economics. It is an issue of identity. And RL has blasted the distant rule of Westminster. (Londoners who don't like the present or past Conservatives rulers any better than the Scots have no such option to walk away)
But in a divorce both parties have rights.

The answer to the first question is practical -the vote will be organised along the lines of a general election so registered electors in Scotland have the privilege. Presumably, students who are registered to vote in, say, Glasgow but who study in England, will be able to vote and other arrangements available for general elections -postal votes, proxy voting- will also apply.

The second question is irrelevant to Scotland -it is a decision made by 'the people of Scotland', for Scotland.

[Stavros]

The opinion polls currently are YES 37%, NO 47%. Plenty of time to change. I'm in two minds about Scotland going it alone. The biggest problem is that England will be dominated even more by Tory Governments. Yorkshire will became the new boundary as Tories only really worry about London and the Home Counties.

I am not sure that this will hold in the long term. If Scotland were to become independent the argument to re-draw the consitutency boundaries in England and Wales would be stronger than it has been since 2010 when the Conservatives abandoned their plans for re-drawing the boundaries in order to form the coalition with the Liberal Democrats, just as the latter have dropped their demands for proportional representation. Because the Commons would lose 59 MPs they would have to decide if they wanted to remain a smaller house or re-draw constituency boundaries to add 59 consituencies. This would then raise the question of how large a constituency should be, whether all the boundaries should be re-drawn or if not, where new constituencies would be created. If the Boundary Commission does a fair job -and it usually does, unlike in the USA where gerrymandered House districts are allegededly if not actually drawn to favour the incumbent- then the outcome in theory ought to benefit all three main parties. If anything, given the lack of trust people have in all tree parties, coalition government, rather than single party rule could be the consequence.

[NRT]

would there have been an independence movement if there was no oil?
Secondly they still want to keep the pound sterling as the national currency. what is the point? isnt that an admission that independence would not work in reality if they had their own currency or used the Euro? They may end up like greece, and other EU nations that needed a bail out due to currency problems

[Stavros]

There has been an independence movement in Scotland for a very long time, the difference is that the oil industry and the wider achievements of the economy have given the independence movement a belief that they have a more solid practical foundation on which to break away -but as your post suggests, what does independence actually mean if the currency is the same, the head of state is the same -and the newly independent country wants to give up part of its 'independence' to join the EU? -I am not sure, incidentally, if Scotland ceases to be a member of the EU if it wins the referendum, this is a matter of law on which I have no expertise.

[Ben]

Scotland pushes for Independence...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc31pfEN2b4

Scottish independence: The complication of separation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1xTpbs0sKA

[Ben]

A yes vote in Scotland would unleash the most dangerous thing of all - hope:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/yes-vote-in-scotland-most-dangerous-thing-of-all-hope

[holzz]

I'm English...I want a yes vote!!

Why?

We don't need Scotland...

We're not a poor country, and we don't need to export oil and gas.

And fuck Trident, I don't see why we need nukes anyhow (Germany hasn't got them, they do fine).

And the Act of Union was only signed out of convenience anyhow. Scotland had fucked up their colonialism and England didn't want a potential ally of France.

Let them go, I don't really give a shit either way.

[MaleChromosome]

If Scotland chooses to leave the UK then their membership of the EU lapses. This is the position of the European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso "If part of the territory of a member state would cease to be part of that state because it were to become a new independent state, the (EU) treaties would no longer apply to that territory," Barroso said, meaning an independent Scotland would no longer be part of the EU."

If Scotland reapplies to the EU then every member state must agree and Spain will have to consider the effect this would have on the Catalans and their own drive for independence.
There could well be an EU fudge allowing EU privileges to Scotland after a Yes vote and a fast track application process but under EU rules Scotland would have to accept the Euro and if an EU membership application were to fail then what?

Re NATO membership - NATO is pro nuke, NATO members "share" nuclear weapons and there are plenty of American nuclear weapons in Germany, Greece, Belgium, Canada etc. This allow Germany to have an anti-nuke policy but in reality is armed to the teeth.

For me the real clincher is the pensions position. Pensions are paid from General taxation not from some pot of money built up over the years. Yes, you pay NI for your working life but the payments made to you in retirement are funded from other peoples income tax. If Scotland votes Yes then the pension burden falls upon the taxpayers of Scotland and NOT the rUK. Why risk your personal financial future on a tax pool of 2.5million Scottish tax payers rather than the 30 million combined UK tax population?

Ship building, IF Scotland votes Yes and becomes a part of the EU then the rUK government MUST put tenders out to the whole EU. If the German or Polish ship yards are cheaper then the tender MUST go there. Independence will take away the opportunity for the MoD to place work with Scotland, it will be open tender.

This vote is for a permanent independence not one on which you can renege if the oil runs out or the employers relocate. Oil is a volatile commodity. OPEC could raise production. US shale gas production is ramping up and there is currently a surplus in production. Yes, this will change and that is the point. Oil is finite, independence is forever.

I don't think that devolution is a bad idea at all but it do think that the current position doesn't include answers to crucial questions. The rUK will be sitting pretty as a successor state. Scotland can default on its financial obligations to London and the market will decide what it thinks about that. I'm sure the Scots hate the Tories and a London based parliament but have certainty on what you are voting for before risking financial decline.

[flabbybody]

Latest poll indicates vote for independence next week will be defeated and Scotland will remain in UK. Sterling rallying against dollar confirming that financial markets believe polling data is correct.

[Prospero]

But the polls are very erratic. I think it is too close to call.

[flabbybody]

any idea what the latest odds are in the London books?

[Stavros]

Bookmakers give longer odds for the 'Yes' campaign, with odds-on prices for the 'No' campaign. A comparison with the passionate campaign for a separate Quebec which failed suggests that people prefer a status quo rather than radical change, and that what was true of Quebec in 1995 will be true of Scotland in 2014.
Although the 'Yes' campaign have achieved something no other independence campaign has matched -making independence look like a reality-, bookies believe many people tell pollsters they will vote 'Yes' rather than admit they will vote 'No'; but there are still many undecided voters, and it is not clear who the 16-17 year old group who are allowed to vote will choose. 97% of the adult population in Scotland has registered to vote suggesting the turnout of 63.8% in the last General Election in 2010 will rise to 80% or more next week. Postal votes have already been cast.

Bookies odds:
http://www.justbookies.com/election-odds/?gclid=CMyC1LGG28ACFY_ItAod9BsApA

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/11/referendum-registered-voters-scotland-four-million-97-per-cent

[flabbybody]

spot on analysis Stavros.
I agree that polls are skewed in favor of YES and handicappers see reality more clearly.

[flabbybody]

Election eve Flabbybody prediction from across the pond:
Late wave of big business media campaign will tap into voters' fears of NATO-less, UK- less, EU- less Scotland. NO will win by a surprisingly easy margin of victory.
Stavros Quebec analogy is brilliant as always. The radical change folks always have a louder bark than bite in these type of affairs. They can fool the polls but not the bookies.

[blueeyeboy]

Thoughts?if the jocks break away how will it affect the ts world ;-)

[iagodelgado]

There will be a border between Carlisle and Dumfries. Importing and exporting ts girls will become subjected to regulation by Her Majesty's Customs. Oooh.

[Ts RedVeX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVbb6pZLfzU:cheers:

[holzz]

could easy ban escorting with no hindrance from London/Cameron.

damn in that case....means i can't go to Glasgow and fuck/get fucked lol..

[Prospero]

LOL... it will surely have NO impact at all on this world. Except maybe visiting girls from for example the US or Brazil might need to use their passports to get into a newly independent Scotland from the rest of britain.

[martin48]

Our present Prime Minister, David Cameron, will go down in history as the guy who made Great Britain into Little England. His next promise is a vote on EU membership - with feelings at present and the nutters in UKIP, this will be probably a NO vote. Then that's it for us. Bye

[Prospero]

Gawd... I fear you are right Martin. Blind passion has gripped the Scots... and like lemmings they are plunging headlong over a cliff of uncertainty.

[Stavros]

I think the margin of victory, either side, will be smaller than the bookies predict. It is difficult to call because most of the noise has come from the 'yes' campaign and one senses a momentum in their favour without knowing for sure as one often does in say, general elections.

What the campaign has exposed is a deep disaffection with established politics and politicians who are accused of being out of touch, and making policy for the UK defined as corporate interests and international finance, with no regard for the needs or desires of Scots or 'ordinary people' all over the country. And yet, Scotland has its own Parliament, its own currency, its own legal system, its own education system, its own language, its own sporting institutions, and for years has been sending 59, mostly Labour MP's to the House of Commons and while they complain about being ignored by Margaret Thatcher, they did so for 13 years when Tony Blair (born in Scotland) and Gordon Brown (born in Scotland) were Prime Ministers of the UK. But Labour too has been a casualty of this campaign as the 'Yes' campaigners are often heard claiming that they never got anything out of the Labour governments, while some 'No' campaigners have been equally disenchanted with Labour....it is certainly the most interesting vote we have had for some time even though the quality of the debate has often been poor. Incredibly, with so many voters in the UK claiming that immigration is a major issue, I have not heard any exchange of views on this subject in any of the debates, as if it was forbidden. My guess is that the secret, or not so secret history of nationalism suggests a hostility to the idea that with less than 5 million people an independent Scotland could easily absorb 50,000 immigrants a year from Africa, the Middle East and Asia, but I don't expect Alex Salmond or anyone in either the SNP or the Scottish Labour Party to offer refugees from the conflict in Syria or the Ukraine a new life in a country where the rain is often persistent and horizontal at the same time.

I don't know if there is a trend towards micro-states, it may be part of a 'cultural' backlash against globalisation, and may merit a new thread.

[Stavros]

If the currency of an independent Scotland depreciates against Sterling, the Euro and the Dollar, then either the escorts will have to raise their prices to compensate, or the £150 visit in London will translate into S£75 (or less) in Edinburgh and thus lure punters from south of the border in search of a bargain.

[flabbybody]

tgirl rates aside, Sterling at 3 year high vs Euro. Decoupling would be lunacy.
Scots come to their senses in privacy of ballot booth and will vote NO to independence. IMO

[nausicaa]

Well we will know in a few hours either way. I think its fair to say - no matter which side of the divide you are on - that the UK gov ran a truly shambolic campaign

[catherinefan]

tgirl rates aside, Sterling at 3 year high vs Euro. Decoupling would be lunacy.
Scots come to their senses in privacy of ballot booth and will vote NO to independence. IMO



Sterling appreciated about 5% against the Euro over that three year period.
Hardly a strong performance considering the crisis Euroland has experienced.

Besides, have you forgotten how much it lost against European currencies in the past?
Let's for instance look at Pound Sterling vs Dutch Guilder:

1970 GBP 1.00 = NLG 8.80
Today GBP 1.00 = EUR1.268553 = NLG 2.80

Clearly, it did not do so well long term.

[vex]

A yes vote would be an utter disaster ill tell you why...higher taxes higher costs uncertainty over currency pensions.depleted armed forces vulnerability etc,relaxed immigration.oil won't last forever.for me it's a no Brainer remain in the union it must be a no vote.

[Ben]

It's up to the people of Scotland to decide their own fate.
Personally, I've mixed emotions.
Do I have a stake in it? Sorta -- my background being British. I'm actually a quarter Scot. My maternal grandmother is Scottish.
But my parents are English.
I mean, I lean toward a united Britain. But, again, let actual democracy take its course.

[flabbybody]

Early returns confirming what HA experts have reported for weeks:
Scotland will remain in the UK.
At the end of the day humans behave rationally
God bless her majesty

[Ben]

Early returns confirming what HA experts have reported for weeks:
Scotland will remain in the UK.
At the end of the day humans behave rationally
God bless her majesty

Again, up to the Scottish people to decide.
And, too, will the Welsh want their own vote next? What happens with respect to Northern Ireland? These are questions worth considering. (I'm not really a fan of the nation-state anyway.)
I can understand either side: be it wanting to remain in Britain or, well, wanting one's own country and hopefully determine one's own policies.
Devolution can be risky... no question about that.

[Ecstatic]

Best solution imho (I'm clan Anderson on my mom's side) is greater autonomy while remaining part of the UK. But it's an ever-evolving situation, since the first king of Dal Riata sat on the Stone of Scone, or millennia earlier when the standing stones were first erected on Lewis and Orkney.

[flabbybody]

"what I did tonight was for Queen and country"

[jimbo34]

Scotland voted No for independence. Good sense prevailed in the end.

[Muzz84]

I was a yes voter so I am disappointed this morning. I just hope now that the UK government holds true on at least SOME of its promises. Regardless of the result, the biggest winner was Scotland being so engaged in it's future and in politics. It was a once in a generation thing that I felt truly excited being part of voting yesterday.

Onwards and upwards together!

[Prospero]

Democracy was a great winner. The voting figures, across the board, were truly remarkable.

The rest of the UK must now work hard to hold the Government to its promise to undertake genuine reforms across the board - and not allow it to reform things in a way that benefits the Tories in England to the detriment of everyone else. Once the focus of this historic vote has moved on,they must not be allowed to let this slip down the agenda and allow dirty tricks to become the normal order of play. Already some of the sleazier right-wing members of the Conservative party are hinting that Cameron promised too much in a bid to shore up the union.

[Stavros]

The most important aspect of this campaign is that it has shown that people, when motivated, are not cynical about politics, but can be engaged and turn out to express themselves without resorting to violence. A turn-out of over 84%, the highest since the General Election of 1951, is in itself a vindication of the referendum and the democratic process.

Looked at in detail one notes the lowest turn-out- and even that was 75%- was in Glasgow (which voted Yes) and that in the three districts with a voter turn-out of over 90% the No campaign won by a large margin (East Dunbartonshire 91%; East Renfrewshire 90.5%, an Stirling 90.1%).

I think the moral case for a government more in tune with what its people want, more concerned with poverty than wealth, and the creation of a fairer Scotland was made, but that people did not believe the economic case made by the Nationalists. The currency, oil revenues and the long term impact on jobs of being outside both the UK and the EU I think must have played a major role in decision-making, even if only to raise doubts about independence.

Nevertheless, the impact of the referendum will now be translated into the details of the increased devolution of powers for the Scottish parliament, a settlement of the 'West Lothian Question', and the as yet incoherent argument for more local representation in England.

[tsadriana]

I watched all night ,trully remarkable....

[trish]

Then let us pray that come it may,
(As come it will for a' that,)
That Sense and Worth, o'er a' the earth,
Shall bear the gree, an' a' that.
For a' that, an' a' that,
It's coming yet for a' that,
That Man to Man, the world o'er,
Shall brothers be for a' that.

[Ben]

American author Charles Eisenstein on Scottish Ind...

Charles Eisenstein on the result of the Scottish Referendum - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0l_lWZXy2No)

[Stavros]

Here we go again. Can Nicola Sturgeon achieve what Alex Salmond did not? Has the context, ie Brexit, fundamentally changed, not the justification, but the mechanics of 'independence' -and, just as in 2014, what does it mean to be 'Independent' and be part of the European Union, whose trajectory toward Federalism is stated in every Treaty since 1957, ie 'Ever Closer Union'- ?

In 2014 Independence meant -not British, not part of the UK. And this begs the question- how confident are the Scots that the levers of power in the hands of the SNP will deliver success, based on its record so far?

"Independence doesn’t guarantee success for any country – we should never pretend that it does.
But for Scotland, independence will put the levers that determine success into our own hands."
Nicola Sturgeon’s speech launching the case for independence — Scottish National Party (snp.org) (https://www.snp.org/nicola-sturgeons-speech-launching-the-case-for-independence/)