According to key thinkers at the Centre for Public Policy for Regions (CPPR), understanding Scotland's economy is not straightforward, because of the high degree of overseas ownership of companies (especially with regard to North Sea activity) and because of the country's reliance on oil revenues.
Traditional measures of economic performance, such as GDP, are less relevant than for most countries, although it is very clear that Scotland's independence would require taxes derived from North Sea oil and gas. Unfortunately, CPPR analysts are warning that these are not likely to match the equivalent of the cash currently transferred from central government to pay for public services north of the border.
When compounded with other uncertainties, this makes it difficult to predict whether an independent Scotland would see a longer-term net fiscal gain or loss. There is the currency question: retaining sterling; adopting the euro; or inventing an independent currency.
Apparently there is no clear winner when it comes to making this choice - a decision on currency depends on selecting the criteria that seem to be most important at the time. In today's economic environment perhaps a crystal ball might come in handy.
So, not one to beat about the bush, I recently took the opportunity of asking the CEO of one of the UK's challenger banks, which happens to be based in Scotland, what the financial and emotional impact of leaving the Union would be?
Addressing a forum in the City, said CEO, who incidentally has plans to enter the SME market in the near future, replied that he had spoken to the First Minister only five minutes before stepping out in front of his audience.
All verbal interaction ended there as no further comments or opinions were forthcoming, but the CEO's complexion turned to a bright scarlet.
Whether this rush of blood to the head was at annoyance at my question or an indication of bottled-up rage at the prospect of an independent Scotland, I cannot say. But what's for sure is that, should Scotland leaves the Union, his challenger bank's status would change to that of "foreign institution" as far as the City is concerned, and the same would apply to a number of investment firms and insurance companies, all with household names.
This prospect alone has led me to question whether the Scots are set to become the Greeks of the North, with a leader who is prepared to see his followers leap off an economic precipice.
As I see it, the seven million inhabitants of the country could continue to enjoy the best of both worlds or take centre stage in their own tragedy with a "Yes" vote equating to a gathering of lemmings leaping over the cliff top.
Perhaps the Scots should be careful what they wish for and perhaps Alex Salmond should pay particular attention to the fate of William Wallace a.k.a. Braveheart, who was eventually turned over to the English for execution. After all, the history books are littered with people who have been stabbed in the back by one-time supporters for going one step too far.
Hopefully, when it comes to the referendum, Scots will be satisfied with certain privileges they already enjoy, such as their MPs sitting in parliament and voting on legislation for England in the full knowledge that aspects of their own legislature are already independent.
If I sound a little harsh, be assured that in my heart of hearts I believe that the UK would be a poorer nation without Scotland by way of enterprise, finance, law, reason, philosophy and ... the list goes on.
Leave a comment