calmie doun: the Scotland question

"The Ship Comes In"
JD Fergusson (1931)

Why independence? Why not independence? Who needs to prove what?

There's a lot of inertia in the current arrangement (dubbed "Ukania" by one sarcast) - and let's not forget that inertia is a species of fear. But either way we need arguments: the burden of proof is on everyone.


POINTS FOR INDEPENDENCE

• Localism & subsidiarity. A simple civic principle: the less distant an authority is from its jurisdiction, the more informed it's likely to be, and the less arbitrary.
  



• Civic nationalism (actual representative democracy). Centralization also leads to unconscionable things like the current situation, where one seat out of 59 is Tory, yet a Tory government have executive power.



• "The devolved union is unfair on England." Ah, cunning. Here we to wade into muddy finance waters. It's not fanciful to say that tuition fee inequality, of all things, has stirred up the most popular dissent against the UK since Thatcherism. Less fashionably: Scots seem to get more stuff and the MPs vote twice / on some English matters. (Although note that on this last point the SNP are canny.)



• National self-determination (sigh). The UN Charter, 1:1:2 reads: "The Purposes of the United Nations are...To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples..."
  
  I'm actually not convinced by this where no genuine oppression exists. The world can keep fragmenting forever under the guidance of silly quasi-real divisions, and we'd be no better off - again, unless localism and legislative fairness increased by it.
  
  

POINTS AGAINST INDEPENDENCE

• "Scots don't really want it." Ok, so polls are no way to live, and majorities are hard, but only 26-39% of respondents?




• "Brits don't want it." "Well, so what if they don't?" you might say. But there's a mini-debate running at the moment about the "ground rules" of the referendum, % thresholds and so on. The decision affects the UK's future massively; it's not obvious that there oughtn't be some say.




• "Parochialism will follow." Aye, it could well do. (See tourism point below.)




• "Ethnocentrism will follow." Tribalism is indeed a bad reason to do anything. But the rancour is overstated: something like 8% of the population of Scotland are English, and yet overt racism is rare. But there's at least two forces counteracting - first, against racism, the relief of unhappily married grievance (among both Scots and English), but, secondly, also a process of distancing: a division writ in law. I don't know which force will win. And neither do you. Civic nationalism is the rule: the arguments are largely (surprisingly) economic.




• "Scotland won't survive on its own." This isn't particularly credible, though Ireland is a cautionary tale.




• "Scotland will be poorer on its own." Mibbe, mibbe no. The Barnett formula is relatively kind to Scotland. ("whit aboot the oil?")
  
  

  1. Defence. Scotland has been economically military-industrial since the C18th; with the likely fall in the post-independence defence budget, that'll have to change. You cannot imagine the size of headache that'll be, since closing bases is the only thing highlanders really protest about.
  
  2. Debt. If the UK total were split by per-capitas, we'd take home about minus £125bn. Moreover: oil economies don't get AAA credit rating, hiking borrowing costs. (Even Saudi Arabia is AA-.)
  
  3. Deficit. See below.
  
  4. Currency. Sterling, euro, or new quid? The options ain't good; with the first two, you lose control of monetary issue (and so gain a default risk); and with a new Scots pound you have to swallow a large gilt rate hike to get investors interested (which will compound the credit downgrade) and leads to either lower growth or an import price hike.
  
  5. The key variable is of course oil, but there's no clear answer on that (see below). The lost annual oil revenues and the higher Barnett per-capita spending probably equalise out to zero.





• "Tourism will have to intensify to make up. Scotland will caricature itself: even more Robertthebruceism, Walter Scottism, shortbreadtinny crap." Aye.




• "There is no such thing as independence, in these global days." Ooh now you're talking. There isn't (thank god there isn't). SNP: "Independence in Europe". Scotland would integrate hard into Europe - twice the MEP seats, apparently (Scotland has 6 atm; Ireland is the same population and has 13) but god knows if that'd be enough, or what terms the EU would demand.




• "Scotland is a post-imperial province; not a benighted, stateless colony." We should endorse the historical point here; Scotland is, on the grand scheme, an oppressor, not the victim many imagine. But why should the historical constrain it? Historical and cultural ties are no better a reason to stay than the tribalism is one to go.




• "The Tories will rule England for a hundred years without Scots!" No they won't (though lots more years are likely). Besides; do you stand for democracy regardless of your personal disagreement or don't you?
  

CONTESTED

• "It's Our Oil!": If there were as much oil as the upper estimate suggests, it might well be worth it. But we can't trust either the SNP's report nor the others' (for all that Salmond has been thinking about this for 40 years straight.)




• Scotland's deficit(?) Each side stretches the figures unti they suit them - whether it's Holyrood smugly claiming a surplus (and prudence), or think-tanks claiming that the Scots deficit is actually £17 billion now, and would stay like that year on year. Well? Is it -1% or +12% ?




• "Decentralised government is efficient." Eh, would be nice if this were true. But consider that regions will have to duplicate departments, thus losing some economies of scale. (I should stop talking - there's just not enough data.) And Holyrood is already relatively powerful, and has its own class of racketeering inefficient buggers.

GO GROW YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE

• The Scottish registry, which has proper demographic stats.



• And a dedicated Glasgow Uni economic unit can't hurt.



• Gerry Hassan is a balanced Independencist.



• Bella Caledonia are mostly lefty civic nats.



• Jim Murphy is not obviously a Unionist whip or shill.




• And the Lib Dems (if you care) are nominally nice federalists.




• What are you scared of, Scotland Office?
  

I actually haven't made my mind up; the swithering above is not feigned. Go spit at anyone who pretends it's simple, would you please?