[Magdalen] An Independent Scotland?

[Roger Stokes]

On 12/09/2014 17:45, Cantor03--- via Magdalen wrote:
> Scotland will vote "yes" or "no" about staying in the UK on
> September 18th.  It's hard for me to imagine how it has all
> come down to this, but I guess I do not understand the factors
> underlying desire for Scottish independence.

After all Scotland has only been ruled from London for three centuries 
;-)  I can understand the desire to celebrate all things Scottish, but 
they can do that anyway.  Part of the reason for the referendum is that 
at the last General Election for the Scottish Parliament the Scottish 
Nationalist Party got a majority of the seats at Holyrood and having a 
referendum was part of their manifesto, so they had to push for it.

I fear that the Yes campaign has not thought things through and does not 
have convincing (to me) answers to some important questions. One of 
those is on the currency they will use.  They insist they will have a 
currency union with what will be left of the UK.  The value of the pound 
will then be driven by the English economy, which will seek a situation 
which is the best for England, Wales and Northern Ireland - but not 
necessarily for Scotland.  How independent are you if you depend on 
another country for your currency?

They would also need to have their own central bank as lender of last 
resort, which would need to be backed by the Bank of England until it 
had built up sufficient reserves by higher taxes and/or lower benefits 
so life would not be a bed of roses for a few years at least.  
Historically Scotland has been supported by England for most of its 
history since it has been a net recipient of public funds - receiving 
more from the public purse than it contributed to it.

Despite what the Yes campaign says membership of the EU and of NATO 
should not be assumed.  Countries with their own regions seeking 
autonomy will not be quick to endorse a Scottish application to join the 
EU, which could well mean they need to adopt the Euro and so put 
financial control even further away in Brussels, and make trade with 
England more expensive.

Scotland and England would also tend to drift apart politically as 
Scotland is essentially left of centre with Labour as the next biggest 
party after the SNP while the Conservatives would have an inbuilt 
majority at Westminster.  Currently there is precisely one Conservative 
MP representing a Scottish constituency.  That is not good for democracy.

> I note that among other companies, my bank, a USA affiliate
> of RBS = Royal Bank of Scotland (Citizens Bank) has stated
> that its headquarters will exit Scotland if the vote is "yes".

Financial institutions want to be where there is economic stability and 
a new country, which will have no credit record and so will pay higher 
interest on its borrowings, does not provide that.  These companies also 
do most of their domestic business in England.  Now the Yes campaign is 
complaining that some businesses are pointing out that the cost of 
living could rise in Scotland if it becomes independent.  This is the 
sort of information the voters should hear if they are going to cast an 
informed vote.

Basically the Yes campaign wants people to vote with their hearts rather 
than their heads.  That is not sensible and is liable to lead to 
heartache later.  If (as is quite possible) the Scottish economy falters 
more firms will move more than their headquarters South, reducing the 
tax base further as more of their young people emigrate to England just 
as a lot of the young Irish are emigrating now because there are no jobs 
for them in their home country.

>   I
> personally hope for a "no" vote.

as do I for all the reasons above.

Roger