THE CLAIM
"Any country joining the European Union must have a fiscal deficit at 3% or below. With the Scottish deficit at almost 8% the SNP must outline how Scotland could join the European Union as an independent country."
WHO SAID IT?
Scottish Labour MP Ian Murray at Scottish Questions. And we have a video.
WATCH: Any country joining the European Union must have a fiscal deficit at 3% or below. With the Scottish deficit currently at almost 8% the SNP must outline how Scotland could join the European Union as an independent country. pic.twitter.com/TzaqBCerWa
— Ian Murray MP (@IanMurrayMP) January 8, 2020
THE DOORSTEP ANSWER
The 3% target is actually a guideline which most EU members (including Germany) have breached – which is perfectly acceptable under the Maastricht rules if there is an economic problem. Scotland, either as an applicant or full member, would have to agree a medium-term plan to seek to reduce any potential large deficit. But the existence of such a deficit (particularly if the result of a hard Brexit) is not a barrier to entry. Also, the Scottish Government runs a budget surplus, not a deficit.
BACKGROUND
The Maastricht Treaty, which entered force in 1993, laid down new, collective rules for EU member states governing their public borrowing. The idea was to promote price stability and sustainable economic growth by discouraging excessive public debt (which drives up interest rates and taxes). Those EU members joining the new euro common currency zone also wanted to ensure the stability of the new currency.
The so-called Maastricht “criteria” include a provision that member states – including those outside the eurozone – should aim to keep their annual, net public borrowing to no more than 3% of national income (GDP). This figure is usually referred to in EU documentation as the “reference value”, rather than an iron specification. Clearly, as an EU member, Scotland would be expected to aim for a 3% annual deficit as a best course.
However, the EU has always accepted that varying economic circumstances – domestic and global – will mean there can be divergence from the 3% reference value. In fact, between 1998 and 2017, the 3% deficit target was breached at some point by every single member state bar three exceptions (Belgium, Luxembourg and Sweden). Spain breached the rule for the whole of 2008-20017. France breached the rule in 2002–05 and 2008-2016. And the UK breached the rule in 2003–05 and 2008–16.
As a result, in 2011, following the euro debt crisis, the EU adopted new procedures for dealing with breaches of the deficit reference value. These are called the Excessive Debt Procedure rules. Essentially, they boil down to the Council of Ministers (not the European Commission) making “recommendations” to the member state concerned “for bringing the deficit back below the reference value”. The timetable for such a correction can be elastic “if it is found that the country concerned has made good progress” but “has not been able to fully correct its deficit because of an exceptional economic context”. In other words, the process is political rather than judicial.
For a country joining the EU, the heart of the matter would be to agree a process and timetable for convergence towards the 3% reference point, depending on the current state of the domestic economy at entry. Assume hypothetically that an independent Scotland had a deficit above the 3% - not something anyone can actually know prior to when independence negotiations are complete. Say this deficit was due to Brexit having distorted the Scottish economy (a not unreasonable assumption and one the EU would understand). Under the Excessive Debt Procedure rules, Scotland would have to present a reasonable plan for reducing the deficit. This already exists in embryo in the SNP’s Sustainable Growth Commission report.
Ian Murray’s reference to a notional 8% deficit refers to the 2018/19 Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS) report published in August 2019. This makes hypothetical assumptions regarding the notional allocation of a proportion of existing Conservative Government borrowing and spending for 2018/19 to a future independent Scotland some years hence. An SNP Government in an independent Scotland is unlikely (to say the least) to make similar borrowing and spending decision to a London Conservative administration. Currently, the SNP Government at Holyrood runs a budget surplus. The provisional surplus for 2018-19 is £449 million.
WHAT DO THE EXPERTS SAY?
Following the publication of the 2018/19 Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS) report, Mr David Phillips, the associate director of the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies, was asked if an independent Scotland’s budget deficit would pose a barrier to the country re-joining the EU. Phillips replied: “I’m not sure whether [the deficit] would necessarily be a binding thing as ultimately the decision about whether Scotland could join would be a political one rather than economic.” (The National, 22 August 2019).
FACT-CHECK RATING: FALSE
Sorry Ian, must do better next time...
FURTHER READING:
- https://www.ecb.europa.eu/mopo/eaec/fiscal/html/index.en.html
- https://www.gov.scot/publications/ministerial-statement-provisional-budget-outturn-2018-19/
* All our National Fact-Checks are excluded from our site's paywall so as many people as possible can read them. Please sign up to support us here: www.thenational.scot/subscribe
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