WHAT'S THE CLAIM?
OFFICIAL figures show Scotland is running a 7% deficit - the highest in Europe – Ruth Davidson tweet, August 21, 2019
THE DOORSTEP ANSWER
THE Scottish Government at Holyrood runs an annual surplus not a deficit and has done so every year since 2007. The provisional surplus for 2018-19 is £449 million.
On the other hand, the UK Governments (Labour, Conservative and Coalition) have run annual deficits every year since 2001 – and most years since 1945. Scotland only has a notional deficit if elements of this endemic UK deficit are apportioned hypothetically to the normal Scottish Government surplus, as happens in the annual Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS) paper exercise.
When the same hypothetical exercise is conducted across all UK nations and regions, nine areas show a notional deficit and three (the zone constituting London, the South East and East of England) show a notional surplus. This result reflects the bias that most commercial UK tax revenues are booked in London and environs because that is where most company headquarters are based.
BACKGROUND
THE following table shows the notional net fiscal balance (spending versus local tax revenues) of the standard UK regions and nations, calculated by the Office for National Statistics.
It shows that the English North West (Liverpool, etc) has the biggest notional deficit, while the so-called Scottish deficit is broadly similar to that of the West Midlands and Wales. The notional deficit in the West Midlands (Birmingham, etc) was actually greater than Scotland’s in 2019: £15,015 billion versus £13,499bn on the ONS calculation.
READ MORE: The National launches Unionist rebuttal fact check service
READ MORE: FACT CHECK: Claim Scotland has slid down global well-being rankings
READ MORE: FACT CHECK: Does the SNP have a cast-iron mandate to hold indyref2?
READ MORE: FACT CHECK: Claim learning Gaelic first could 'disadvantage' pupils
In other words, there is nothing unique about the Scottish notional deficit. (Note, these ONS figures differ from the GERS numbers because of different assumptions underlying each paper exercise – which proves the uncertainties for both results.)
The notional surplus projected for London and environs in this chart represents the fact that corporate headquarters (especially banks) are situated there, so tax revenues earned from pan-UK and international transactions are booked there, artificially boosting notional Treasury income. For instance, because of the concentration of UK financial institutions in the City of London, most interest payments, profits, leasing revenues, insurance fees, credit card fees and bank charges are recorded there as corporate taxable items – regardless of where in the UK or abroad they were earned. In an independent Scotland, on the other hand, these revenues would be taxed locally and register as Scottish Treasury income.
In addition, the East of England registers tax revenues from offshore gas fields in the English North Sea. Finally, the monopoly effect of London within the UK means that prices of property and living expenses are higher in the capital, which in turn generates above-average revenues for the Treasury. The imbalance between the notional deficits across the UK regions and nations compared with the notional surpluses in greater London is largely a statistical optical illusion.
Ruth Davidson’s claim there is a 7% deficit in Scottish public finances relies on misrepresenting the 2018-19 GERS paper exercise. Using her misleading methodology, it is the English North-West and West Midlands that have the highest deficits in Europe! Actually, those English regions are just as
short-changed by the GERS and ONS figures as is Scotland.
FACT-CHECK RATING: FALSE
Sorry Ruth, better luck next time.
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