Economic arguments for leaving the UK will be central to the independence question – but 47% of Scots would vote yes if it meant being £500 richer
What price independence for Scotland? Well, about £500, since you ask. One of the latest polls in the referendum campaign, conducted by the ICM in September, found that 47% of Scots would vote yes to independence if they could be assured of being £500 a year richer as a result.
I don’t know what William Wallace would have made of it, but freedom seems to come pretty cheap these days. Indeed, the Scottish National Party government might be tempted just to give every Scot a cheque for that amount and win by a landslide.
But this was a serious poll and an illuminating one, conducted almost exactly a year before the Scots vote on whether to leave the UK. For a start, it indicates that there isn’t a great deal of affection for Great Britain if Scots would give up the Union for the price of a mini-break in Prague. By the same token, it means that the economic arguments for remaining in the UK are going to be absolutely central to the decision.
The Better Together campaign has clearly been on the money in raising fears among Scots that, if they vote yes, they might lose their pensions, the pound and EU membership. Most Scots in the ICM poll believed that independence would be bad for economic growth.
Other polls have confirmed that most Scots aren’t convinced of the merits of going it alone. Indeed, it has been one of the psephological constants of Scottish politics for nearly 30 years that only around 30% of Scots want independence, while around 60% want a Parliament with enhanced economic and social powers. This was confirmed also by the ICM and other September polls.
So what can the Yes Scotland campaign do to change the tide of public opinion in their direction? Well, the SNP government is putting out – somewhat belatedly – a series of papers on the economic case for independence, which we will see in the coming weeks before the government publishes its white paper on independence in November. This is supposed to address all the doubts and nail the case for leaving the UK.
Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has the task of reassuring reluctant Scots that they will indeed be better off by at least £500 if they say yes to independence. She will argue that some countries usually experience a post-independence ‘ boom’ that boosts economic activity. Mind you, some African and Eastern European states lapsed back into economic decline shortly after.
She will also argue that Scotland already has a GDP not far short of that of the Southeast of England. Critics will say this only confirms that Scotland does pretty well out of the Union, so why risk leaving it? Nationalists will insist Scotland needs control over business taxes – particularly corporation tax – if entreprenurial activity is to be stimulated. Businessmen like Jim McColl, founder of engineering group Clyde Blowers and one of Scotland’s richest men, agree that Scotland has a dismal rate of new business formation.
Then there is oil. There remains around £1.5trn of hydrocarbons in the North Sea, according to estimates given by industry body Oil & Gas UK. But how much of that can come out, and how fast, is open to question. The North Sea is a mature field, and while the oil wealth is considerable, and revenues are running at $8bn a year, it isn’t quite Saudi Arabia. Green energy has a bright future, but it still requires subsidies from the UK.
Frankly, no one knows how much better off Scotland could be with independence. Certainly, countries like Denmark and Norway have shown that small countries can – with or without oil – do extremely well in Europe. And now nationalists have a year to persuade the Scots to join them.
Iain Macwhirter is political commentator on the Sunday Herald
This opinion piece was first published in the October edition of Public Finance Magazine
