
I know a lot of Scots would take issue with that headline but I will try to explain why I belive it to be true.
But first I would like to explore why some Scots are calling for the break up of the United Kingdom.
Brian Adam is the MSP for Aberdeen North
Independence is a state of mind.
We can seek to be totally independent and reject any responsibilities for others. We can aspire to share rights and responsibilities, to be co-dependent and participate in society with others. Or we can be dependent and leave the responsibility with others, reserving the right only to complain.
I also want Scotland to accept its responsibilities, as well as assert its rights, by recognising that we share this world with others with whom we are co-dependent. Hence I want us to engage directly with other countries through membership of the EU and organisations such as the UN.
Dr Ian McKee is the SNP candidate for Edinburgh Pentlands.
The most successful nations in Europe are not the largest. The advantages of economy of scale are more than offset by other factors. But when you look at the reasons for success of small to medium size countries, you may at first be confused. This country is rich in oil, that country has few natural resources. One successful country levels high taxes whilst yet another prospers by providing a low tax, business friendly environment. The consistent formula for success does not seem to exist.
Yet it does. Because what all these countries have in common is their independence. They can speedily make decisions regarding tax, investment or social policy that suit their own circumstances. Norway invests its oil revenues in a fund for future generations because that is what its citizens wish to happen. The Republic of Ireland has invested heavily in the education of its people so that it now attracts hi-tech investment from overseas.
Graeme McCormick is the founder and senior partner of Conveyancing Direct and the SNP candidate for Dumbarton.
‘In 1974 I was a student at Edinburgh University when Gordon Brown was University Rector. Then, Norway and Scotland had a similar standard of living. At the 1974 elections, Scotland was within an ace of voting for Independence. Today Norway is internationally recognised as having the highest standard of living in the world. Scotland is 21st.
There is only one significant thing which separates us from Norway and Ireland: That is Independence. They have it; we haven’t!
It seems the idea is that Scotland feels independence will allow it to become co-dependent and participate in society with others, through membership of the EU, but that is not independence.
The SNP says it is a strongly pro-European party, but wants national governments to retain control over many key issues like their countries’ taxation, spending, and constitutions.
They argue that with Independence, Scotland will at last be able to represent itself to the world on international bodies like the United Nations.
The problem is that the SNP is painting a picture of the EU which is very far from the truth; “There is no comparison between the centralist structures of the UK, and those of the EU, where member states co-operate but retain their sovereignty”.
The SNP are ignoring the EU Constitution, the EU claim to represent its members in international bodies like the United Nations, the WTO and Council of Europe. They are, by claiming that Scotland would have a greater voice in the EU, ignoring the fact that the EU is not about retaining the sovereignty of Nation States, everything it does takes it in the opposite direction towards a centralised structure.
The SNP claim that Scotland would have seven votes in the Council of Ministers and would be able to nominate a European Commissioner. Just exactly what power they think seven votes would give them they do not say, but with the increase of QMV within the EU councils seven is not a very big number and the Scots will find themselves outvoted on every occasion. Working together is all very fine but it only assists a nation if the working together is in the direction it wants to go, if not, then working together forces it to accept rules a and regulations that do not benefit the nation. Their Commissioner would of course have to swear allegiance to the EU so would not be representing Scotland, in any event in the EU Constitution there are plans to reduce the size of the Commision and Scotland like the rest of us would find they were only represented on a rotational basis.
The main problem with the SNP argument is that they are pointing to dissatisfaction of rule from the south, from the Westminster Parliament. Even ignoring the fact that for the last three parliaments the Scots have dominated Westminster with every major position of power in the British state being filled with Scotsmen and the majority of the British Cabinet being Scottish. Dissatisfaction with rule from Westminster is misplaced because most of the powers of Westminster has now been passed to the EU level, so if the Scots find themselves dissatisfied the way forward cannot be through the same institutions that have created that dissatisfaction. If they were calling for independence so that Scotland could take more power back from the EU it would make a great deal more sense than their present position. What exactly are they hoping to achieve by breaking apart the union.
The SNP points to two countries they see Scotland aspiring to emulate, Norway and Ireland, yet Norway is not a member of the EU, it has retained its independence and therefore its sovereignty, Ireland on the other hand has given away both its independence and its sovereignty, but has been and still is, the recipient of massive EU subsidies. The Scots might like to contemplate the fact that as Britain is a major contributed to EU funding they have contributed to Irelands success because it is their taxes that have been and are being spent in Ireland to make it the success it is.
Ireland is a dependant state of the EU, the Scots say they do not want to be dependant yet a recent calculation estimates that just 163,000 Scottish taxpayers, from a population of 5m, make any net contribution to the British exchequer. The rest receive more than they pay out in reliefs, subsidies and benefits.
Even Alex Salmond, the SNP leader, admits that Scotland has the highest unemployment, the highest proportion of income support claimants and the lowest business survival rate in Britain. Of course he blames the UK for Scotland’s poverty.
Scotland is not just dependent on the UK state; it is state-dependent full stop. A full 50% of Scottish GDP is spent by government. The state employs one Scot in four. To have any hope of creating the thriving independent economy of which they dream, an SNP government would have to impose economic policies Scotland has rejected at every election since 1945 and which the party dare not even propose, Scotland has not voted for a party prepared to cut taxes since 1955.
I would argue that Scotland far from wanting independence is prepared to become a minor actor within the United States of Europe, with less power than it presently has to determine its direction, and it will remain a dependant state within that union. None of the SNP arguments hold up to scrutiny because they are not addressing the real cause of their problems which are basically the same problems we all face and that is we can no longer determine who will be our rules who will make the laws and what direction the laws or our country should take, those decisions and that power has been transferred to the EU. If they really do want independence and really do not want to be dependant, they should address this real problem and then face up to the fact that without support for either the British Taxpayer or the EU Taxpayer Scotland and the Scottish people will have to make their own way in the world, and that will require doing a lot more than pumping oil out of the sea and waiting for the support cheque to arrive.
Technorati Tags: democracy, devolution, the-eu, tony-blair, uk-government, west-lothian-question
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | reddit | Furl |
I am Scottish and I along with thousands of others want Independance from the English, so please do not assume or spread lies about what the Scottish people want.
Congratulations, I have news for you like it or not you are British, the call for independence from the English is just so much rubbish.England is not even an officially recognised country.
Yet you write as if the English kept you in chains; the people who live inScotland are fully integrated into British life and have as much say in the destination of Britain as any other part of the country. Without the Scottish vote it would be very unlikely that England would ever vote in a Labour government, yet the Labour Party has won the last three elections.
The Prime Minister is Scottish the Chancellor is Scottish, all of the other major departments of the British state are filled with Scots, even the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor is Scottish and the Scots have by far the biggest presence in the British Cabinet.
So if you do not like the War in Iraq, blame the Scots they took us in, if you do not like Trident, blame the Scots they are the ones in charge of it, and they are the ones who say we must update it, if you do not like your taxes blame the Scots they are in charge of Exchequer. So please do not try to ignore the facts and promote the stupid idea that you are a poor down trodden victimised race of people who are struggling for your independence from an oppressive state.
IfScotland does want independence then you will vote in the SNP and you will also vote for it in the referendum they will call if elected. But you need to decide exactly what you will gain by continuing membership of the EU, which is why I say the Scots do not want independence; if they did they would understand that it is not an option in the EU.
If however you prefer to bury your head in the sand and continue to belive in SNP fairy tales that will be you own problem, because all you will be doing is replacing dependency on the British state with dependency on the EU state.
Oh just one other small point I have already mentioned that Tony Blair the Leader of the British Labour Party is Scottish, so to is Sir Menzies Campbell leader of the British LibDem Party and of course David Cameron the leader of the British Conservative Party, as his name suggests is also from a Scottish Family. The previous leader of the Labour Party was Welsh, the LibDem Scottish, and the Conservative leader was second generation Polish. I just do not see the argument thatScotland is not fairly represented in the British parliament, if anything it should be the English who are complaining.
The argument that 50% of Scottish GDP is spent by government is just plain wrong. Official Scottish GDP figures exclude North Sea revenues, which get hived off into a seperate ‘extra-regio’ category by the government statisticians.
When you include all of the economic activity which takes place in Scotland, the size of the state ’shrinks’ to 40.8% - below the OECD average and the equivalent UK figure. It’s also worth pointing out that unlike the ‘Scottish’ figure, the UK one is calculated including oil & gas revenues. Funny, that…
I’d be interested to know if you have any more idea than Tim ‘nae’ Luckhurst where this figure comes from that only 163,000 taxpayers in Scotland make any kind of contribution to the UK Treasury. Since there’s 2.5m in work in Scotland according to the ONS, it seems like another one of his feeble attempts to paint a picture of an economically and culturally backward Scotland which exists nowhere except in his own fevered little mind.
Scotland is not culturally backward and I do not belive anyone is suggesting that the people of Scotland are not capable of running their own country, for goodness sake they have been running Briton for the last 12 years.
It is not funny that gas and oil are included in theUK figures Scotland is part of the UK it is not a separate country. Who knows what the division of the UK assets will be at the time of separation, the oil might well be placed in Scottish waters but at present it is UK Waters and the UK has developed the oil not Scotland separately. To make its case the SNP are looking on the plus side and claiming all the oil revenues would be Scotland’s even if it were there might well be costs involved, do you think the British government is just going to say alright you take the oil, it does not matter that the British people have paid to develop the fields. The same argument can and probably would be made with any other asset, obviously the rest of the UK being that much larger than Scotland has contributed so much more to those assets than Scotland has.
We have been one country for three hundred years, no one has been keeping count of what one part has contributed or consumed, I do not in any way attempt to belittle Scotland its people or its affect on the UK, but if the break up comes at the behest of the Scotish people we must decide what will happen with the assets and I do not belive the UK government would just ignore the contribution the rest of us have made.
Hi Ken,
The point I was making about oil relative to GDP is that by including it in UK figures while excluding it from Scotland, it makes the Scottish GDP figure look far lower than it actually is while exaggerating the proportion of state spending which takes place.
It’s perfectly legitimate to include 100% of oil revenues in UK figures, but a proportion should also be included when looking at the Scottish economy. Otherwise, you just end up with a distorted picture, the effect of which is to create the illusion that Scotland is somehow more state-dependent than the rest of the UK.
Any independence negotiations will cover a range of areas, from Trident to overseas assets. However, the oil fields were developed by the oil companies and not the UK government, which only handed out the exploration licenses. As such, it’s hard to see how any sustainable claim can be made on them other than in a geographical sense.
For the record, based on the 1968 Continental Shelf (Jurisdiction) order, between 90-95% of the revenues accrue from the sector placed in the jurisdiction of Scots law by the UK government of the day. That’s what the SNP includes in its figures - nothing more, but certainly nothing less.
I’m glad you agree that Scotland is not culturally backward and Scots are perfectly capable of running their own country. If you ever run into Tim Luckhurst, the guy who wrote the article cited by the poster, maybe you can put him right on that score!
That which is devolved toScotland from the British parliament is not necessarily that which will be decided in the event of total independence. It could be 90%, but if a line is extended from the Scottish border it could be 33% this will be open to negotiation at the time, it is therefore not sensible to base the economic argument on something yet to be decided. It is also not sensible to base the argument on a certain price for oil from fields which are on the decline, development of other fields I understand would be extremely expensive. I also understand that Norway is preparing now for the time when their oil will run out as an “independent” Scotland would also have to do.
I think the main point is being missed ifScotland wants independence why would it tie itself to the EU, the SNP paints a rosy picture of life in Scotland after it has separated from the UK , for instance “Thousands of jobs in Scotland depend on exports to the European Union. In defending Scotland ’s interests, an independent government will be able to give priority to areas which are currently neglected by British representatives in the EU, not least the Scottish Fishing industry.”
The Fishing industry is not now within the remit of the British Government it is an EU competence and has been since 1972, therefore a Scottish minister would have no more luck than a British minister, unless they were prepared to take back the power from the EU, which would mean a renegotiation of the treaties and would require ratification in all the other state parliaments.Scotland would be faced with exactly the same problems as Britian, except both would be that much weaker. The destruction of British fishing fleet is not just felt in Scotland .
The SNP says “Independence will give Scotland the freedom to interact with the rest of the world on our own terms.” No it will not because Scotland will be a minor state in the EU. it will be tied in exactly the same way it is now.
The SNP says “There is no comparison between the centralist structures of theUK , and those of the EU, where member states co-operate but retain their sovereignty.” That is just the point, the states do not retain their own sovereignty and the EU is becoming evermore centralised. What the SNP are doing is what a lot pro-EU people do and that is to take the present structure and assume that it is fixed when clearly it is not. Ratify the EU Constitution and install the Euro and see exactly how much independence you are left with.
Instead of British politicians lying to the people about the EU you would have Scottish politicians doing the same. The SNP say “Therefore Independence inEurope gives Scotland a say in Brussels it has never had before.” Just who do you think has been conducting our EU negotiations since Labour came to power it really has not been the English has it.
Ken - you say its not sensible to include oil in the economic arguments for Scottish Independence, as this would have to be negotiated. However, the SNP includes a debt interest figure in its calculations, despite the fact that this also would have to be negotiated. It’s about giving as complete a picture as is possible - surely you wouldn’t consider it sensible to exclude oil entirely then use the resulting numbers, as the government does, as a reason why Scotland shouldn’t be independent? The Norwiegans are indeed preparing for the day the oil runs out with their oil fund, just as we should have been. They started theirs about 10 years ago through Norges Bank and its now worth £90bn, with interest dividends exceeding oil revenues in most years. What a contrast with the ‘get it pumping as quickly as possible’ school of thought in Downing Street during the 70’s and 80’s, where government was desperate to shore up the balance of payments and prevent flight from Sterling after the removal of exchange controls.DTI projections show that there is as much to come from the North Sea as has already been extracted, and in view of increasing demand and global instability, it would be a very brave person who assumes that the days of low oil prices are about to return. It is and will remain a valuable resource, which is why so many unionists oppose independence. It’s so valuable to the Treasury that without it, the UK would have exceeded the Maastricht deficit criteria (3% of GDP) in 6 out of the last 10 years.I’m not going to get into a protracted debate about the EU, since I don’t see much prospect of our agreeing. Suffice to say, I would gladly trade Scotland’s current position with that of Denmark, which has the power to veto, build alliances and argue in her own interests which, with the best will in the world, Scotland does not enjoy just now. The fact that the temporary custodians of some cabinet offices happen to represent Scottish seats is supremely irrelevant - the majority of Scots didn’t vote for them either and in any case, whither that dubious advantage once the Tories get in and it’s all change round the cabinet table?
If the reason for Scottish independence is economic then the figures should be based on reality not on conjecture even educated guess work can be very far off the mark if the parameters are changed, in any event the worst case scenario needs considering and offering to the voters of Scotland.
Hey, I have to do an essay for school and I thought it would be interesting to do it on Scottish independance, so I am asking a bunch of people about their views and if they can give me reasons for their answers. Please help me, this is not cheating its a survey sort of thing.
Thank-you for your time.
Sarah 15 years old
There is absolutely no justifiable reason for Scottish independence at all! Scotland is fairly represented, and I believe most of the desire to leave the UK is a kind of collective memory of how Scotland was treated by England during the early dark days of the union. We are intermixed; we are the same people with slightly different accents. we benefit from being one!
If you watch any American cartoon, you will notice the bad guy always has an English accent! I think that’s because England used to throw its weight around in the past, but that England has gone - long gone!
The UK is a very small nation and its extremely powerful for its size! it has excellent infrastructure and it works! Its taken centuries to get to this stage. We would be even stronger if the EU could become one country, but we’re just too different for that to happen.
Have you ever heard of the saying, "if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!". Now is not the time to split-up our nation.