Will RoUK really give up some of its financial freedom to the independant Scots?

MFW_ASAP

I'm currently working in Scotland and enjoying the coverage on Scottish Independence up here. The SNP released their 'manifesto' yesterday and so we had blanket coverage on the news and I even watched the debate on the Parliament channel.

What I find really interesting is that the SNP always seem to give a 'best case scenario' in their proposals, without even a nod towards a plan B. They state that they will be allowed into Europe (at the 'top table' no less, according to Salmon) without having to join the Euro, they will be allowed to rejoin Nato and they will definitely be allowed to keep the pound and have a say in monetary policy (rate rises, government borrowing limits, etc).

I just can't see the RoUK (rest of UK), after resisting calls for us to join the Euro because we wanted control of our own currency, allowing a foreign nation to have a say in our monetary policies. The SNP keep saying that it's to the RoUK's benefit for the Scots to stay in the £, and they are correct because of currency conversion costs and the convenience of sharing a currency, but that benefit is significantly reduced if it comes at the cost of losing some control of our own finances.

There were far more benefits to the UK in joining the Euro than there is in joining a Sterling Zone, and yet we refused to go down that path because we wanted control of our own finances, I just can't see us giving that away just to help the Scots.

This is especially true if they start to threaten us with defaulting on their portion of the National Debt (some of which is used to pay for Bank of Scotland and Royal Bank of Scotland bailouts) and if the SNP are correct that the Scots pay more in tax than they receive and so the RoUK taxes have to go up when they leave. I just don't see the RoUK citizens having a benign and friendly attitude to the Scots if taxes and energy bills rise because they decided they were better off without us.

If the Scots do vote for independence, then the RoUK should also get a vote on whether we want to give up some of OUR independence through monetary union with a foreign country. I know I'd vote "no", for the same reasons I'd vote "no" to joining the Euro.

What does everyone else think?

Generali

Britain has no say over whether a foreign country uses her currency. Scotland included.

However, Scotland would have no influence over things like the money supply and interest rate policy.

The SNP, along with many Scots Nat posters on here, live in LaLaLand. It seems like a lovely fantasy world but, luckily for them, their bubble will never be burst as most Scots are far too sensible to vote for independence.

MFW_ASAP

Generali wrote: »

Britain has no say over whether a foreign country uses her currency. Scotland included.

However, Scotland would have no influence over things like the money supply and interest rate policy.

I'd imagine the SNP would want a representative on the board of the BoE that votes each month on QE and interest rates. Salmond is threatening not to accept Scotland's share of the national debt. I just wonder what would happen if this did happen and how the Scots would feel at the backlash from the populations of the RoUK if they just walked off and left us holding the baby?

The SNP are quite good at making all this seem just a political thing, with any bad feeling contained between Westminster and Edinburgh, but when RoUK taxes rise and if we have the debt dumped on us and if our utility bills rise, do they really think that the RoUK citizens wouldn't start to despise them?

Generali

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

I'd imagine the SNP would want a representative on the board of the BoE that votes each month on QE and interest rates. Salmond is threatening not to accept Scotland's share of the national debt. I just wonder what would happen if this did happen and how the Scots would feel at the backlash from the populations of the RoUK if they just walked off and left us holding the baby?

The SNP are quite good at making all this seem just a political thing, with any bad feeling contained between Westminster and Edinburgh, but when RoUK taxes rise and if we have the debt dumped on us and if our utility bills rise, do they really think that the RoUK citizens wouldn't start to despise them?

This is part of the Nationalist fantasy. They get the good bits of the UK (the oil, the BoE, the AAA rating, subsidies from English taxpayers) and get to dump the bits they don't like (Tory Governments, bankrupt banks and debt).

It's all a bit silly really; the world simply doesn't work like that. A country of 50+ million which has a seat on the Security Council and which is still one of the world's great economies can simply crap from a great height on an independent Scotland and there is absolutely nothing they could do about it.

It's one of many reasons why Scots will vote no. Most of them simply aren't stupid or naive enough to vote yes.

angrypirate

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

I'd imagine the SNP would want a representative on the board of the BoE that votes each month on QE and interest rates. Salmond is threatening not to accept Scotland's share of the national debt. I just wonder what would happen if this did happen and how the Scots would feel at the backlash from the populations of the RoUK if they just walked off and left us holding the baby?

The SNP are quite good at making all this seem just a political thing, with any bad feeling contained between Westminster and Edinburgh, but when RoUK taxes rise and if we have the debt dumped on us and if our utility bills rise, do they really think that the RoUK citizens wouldn't start to despise them?

Salmon is unable to just walk away from the UK's debt. If there is a majority that want to leave the UK, then Salmon then has to negotiate with the RoUK on the terms of Scotland becoming its own country. They cant just walk off - if they do then there is no independent Scotland.

System

If the Scots reneged on their share of the national debt wouldn't that push up their own borrowing costs? Who would want to risk lending to a new nation that had already defaulted so early in its existence?

I don't see how another nation could realistically use another's currency against its will. How would they get any notes - by smuggling them in across the border? Or would they print lots of their own and try to pretend that the fake notes could be exchanged at par in English banks?

It's true that a lot of the world will accept US dollar bills, even perhaps against the wishes of the US authorities. But that's surely only a small quantity aquired by limited private exchange. They couldn't just order a few billions-worth - what would they use to buy them with ? Gold? Scottish pound notes?

MFW_ASAP

Generali wrote: »

It's one of many reasons why Scots will vote no. Most of them simply aren't stupid or naive enough to vote yes.

I don't think it's quite so clear cut. When I first arrived in Aberdeen in April, most people I spoke to were against it or had no opinion. I'm now finding more and more people who are for it. I spoke this morning to a Scottish colleague who wants to remain in the UK and she also said that she was no longer convinced that a 'no' vote was guaranteed. From the polls I've seen, the vast majority are saying they're undecided. With such a poor 'No' campaign led by Alastair Darling (Conservative MP*), I can see how some people will be swept along with the SNP.

They did a poll on the street and one 16-19 year old girl said "I think we should give it a go and see what happens". Hmnn, and it if all goes terribly wrong, what then? No wonder the SNP wanted 16 year olds to be allowed to vote.

* There is a conspiracy theory that hard-core Conservatives actually want Scotland to break away because most of Labour's support will go with them. We'll have Conservative governments forever, and with the Labour's 'spend spend spend' benefit culture and immigration open doors policies, would that be such a bad thing?

Perelandra

If England took a vote and got their independence in before Scotland, could it walk away from the national debt first?

kabayiri

Why wouldn't Mr Salmond try and promise the earth?

The outcome of the vote will probably define his political career. If the Scottish people vote "No" how could he continue to work with Westminster parliament after a potentially vitriolic campaign?

I can't see how this campaign can be fought on hard facts. There are just so many things which will be unresolved after the vote.

On a plus note, I am just hoping it is a juicy field day for all those English and Scottish lawyers, accountants, IT contractors and business change consultants brought in to make sense of a post-Yes Scotland

ruggedtoast

The SNP's main, and massive problem, is that it became apparent that after their landslide win in Scottish government, most Scots still didn't appear to want independence from the UK.

At this juncture they could have started banging the drum for a warts and all vision of independence, with Scotland forging ahead into the unknown, taking on all comers, circling the wagons and to hell with the rest of the world.

But they didn't, instead opting for a fantasy where Alex Salmond is in charge of a country that uses the pound and the BOE, has the Queen as a head of state, watches the BBC every night, is a full member of the EU without the euro, keeps the UK NHS, the UK postal service, the UK benefits system, the UK embassies, the UK governmental apparatus; and also maintains every treaty including NATO that the UK enjoys, without having to do anything themselves.

Of course Scots might still surprise us all and vote in favour, I wouldnt be surprised. But they arent going to get what the SNP are promising.

MFW_ASAP

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The SNP's main, and massive problem, is that it became apparent that after their landslide win in Scottish government, most Scots still didn't appear to want independence from the UK.

At this juncture they could have started banging the drum for a warts and all vision of independence, with Scotland forging ahead into the unknown, taking on all comers, circling the wagons and to hell with the rest of the world.

But they didn't, instead opting for a fantasy where Alex Salmond is in charge of a country that uses the pound and the BOE, has the Queen as a head of state, watches the BBC every night, is a full member of the EU without the euro, keeps the UK NHS, the UK postal service, the UK benefits system, the UK embassies, the UK governmental apparatus; and also maintains every treaty including NATO that the UK enjoys, without having to do anything themselves.

Of course Scots might still surprise us all and vote in favour, I wouldnt be surprised. But they arent going to get what the SNP are promising.

I think the SNP have had their bluff called with the independence vote. They wanted the DEVO option included, thinking that few would vote for full independence (and indeed, the SNP not really wanting/knowing how to truly achieve it), but when the UK government forced them to have a straight Yes/No, then they had no option but to plough ahead.

I personally think it will be a disaster for Scotland, but I'm kinda pro-independence because I think that whatever the SNP might say, Scotland does receive a larger amount of money than they pay in taxes, and once they are gone, that money will instead be split across the remaining members of the UK, including the North of England where I live.

Scotland also have a greater aging population than the RoUK. It would be nice to 'lose' all those State pension payments from our benefit system, especially the cold weather payments for such northerly country. We'd also be ditching the public sector pensions for all the civil servants north of the border.