THE UK is a deeply unequal Union and London continues to capture a greater and greater proportion of the wealth of the state to the detriment of everywhere else. This single fact has to frame everything we think and say about the finances of Scotland.
The GERS (Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland) figures published this week show some encouraging signs for the Scottish economy. Onshore GDP and revenue is up even as the offshore industries continue to contract but overall, the Scottish economy is growing again.
However, the notional deficit, whilst improving, remains high and has not closed as quickly as the UK’s deficit has. But this is due to our singular fact at the top of the page. The UK is sucking more and more of its wealth and productive economy into the south east.
This also explains why Scotland’s income tax take and capital gains tax are relatively lower than our population “share” of the UK — many of the high paying jobs and high paying people are down south — and it explains why revenue such as alcohol and tobacco duties may be higher in Scotland — people stressed by inequality suffer lower levels of health and wellbeing. The Glasgow Effect is very much visible here.
Of course, many commentators will be wondering what GERS means for independence. The answer — confirmed from multiple sources now — is that it, itself, does not indicate the finances of an independent Scotland. It merely speaks about Scotland as a region of the UK.
Simply put, too much changes as a result of independence. Last year Common Weal produced a paper called Beyond GERS which attempted to identify some of these changes.
For example, Scotland would need a new civil service to replace Whitehall and may need new government departments like a Central Bank or a replacement to the DVLA. This would bring thousands of highly skilled and well paid jobs to Scotland which would boost our economy and our tax revenues by billions.
Defence is another sector where even if we maintain spending at its current level, if we deployed more of it defending Scotland rather than in foreign bases or in foreign wars, we could boost the economy significantly.
Debt and assets would certainly be up for negotiation and the historical and legal precedents confirm that if the rUK wishes to hold onto its status as the “continuing state” then it would have to accept all of the debt for the UK in a manner similar to Russia taking on the debt of the USSR. Even after borrowing to build our new infrastructure, this would save Scotland some £2.5 billion per year in debt interest repayments.
Finally, accepting that the UK’s obsession with austerity and anti-immigration sentiment would allow us to redesign our customs (currently stripped to the bone. When was the last time you saw a customs official in “Anything to Declare” in the airport?) and our tax structures to better close the tax gap.
Just capturing a third of Scotland’s share of the gap would be worth £3.5bn per year. All in, the very act of independence could be worth £7.5bn per year to Scotland and that’s before we do too much to grow into the country we want to be.
The UK is failing Scotland. And the debate around GERS misses the fact that any small country which joined the UK and ran its finances this way would soon be told how “badly” it is doing compared to the “UK average”. We need to step away from the regionalisation of Scotland and start to look beyond it. This is the true meaning of GERSmas.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel