Have the whingeing Scots got the nerve to go-it-alone? Perhaps, after a referendum on independence, the Scots will either get
on with being part of the UK or stand up and be counted as independent and "Scottish".
The Scots are finally going to have a referendum on full independence. The main political parties in England are opposed to Scottish Independence. The Labour Party will lose about 40 MPs from Westminster if the Scots secede, as a result Labour has taken over the "NO" campaign to try to avoid becoming marginalised in England. Although the Scots imagine that ex-Chancellor Darling, who runs the NO campaign, and ex-Prime Minister Brown, care about them they truly care about power for the Party in England.
The Conservatives are also worried about Scots independence. They are dangerously close to splitting over Europe and if Labour is seriously weakened by the loss of the Scots MPs and the UK representation in the Council of Europe is decreased to less than 29, then several Tories, perhaps ten or twenty, will defect to UKIP. Cameron will be finished. From the point of view of Westminster the Scots referendum is actually about England and the survival of Cameron and Miliband. Will their henchmen be able to scare the kilts off the Scots enough to get a NO vote? The BBC represents the UK according to its Charter, not Scotland, so it's apparatchiks will press home the fear uncertainty and doubt of independence.
(Use http://tinyurl.com/orjvwqb to link to this article).
There are numerous technical problems relating to Scots independence.
The first problem is the border. According to Article 15 of The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Note 1 below) the maritime boundary between England and Scotland runs so that both countries' coastlines are equidistant from the boundary.
The true international border will be approximately similar to that shown above. Many Scots people are being told that the international border runs along administrative boundaries within the UK, for instance the boundary that specifies whether boats in a particular part of the North Sea are subject to control from UK authorities based in Aberdeen or UK authorities based in Berwick. The UK administrative boundary was aligned with a line of latitude for administrative convenience but the international boundary depends on UN Maritime Law.
Fortunately it is only a few extremists who are insisting upon the wrong borders. The current Scottish Government seems to be using the recognised, UN, international boundaries in estimates such as geographical share of North Sea oil revenues (See Government expenditure and revenue 2009-2010: North Sea Oil Revenue).
This means that the bulk of North Sea Oil is in Scottish territorial waters:
And the bulk of North Sea gas production is in English waters.
The Economics of Independence
Currency
A great deal has been made of the currency that Scotland might use after independence. The only real issue here is whether Scotland can convince another country or group to take responsibility for its national debt (to be part of a "fiscal union"). Obviously a newly independent country is unlikely to get this arrangement. There are plenty of countries that use other countries' money without fiscal union. Even Cuba uses the US Dollar! But of course, Cuba would never expect the US to pick up the bill for its National Debt. Other examples are Ecuador using the dollar, Bulgaria and Montenegro the Euro etc.
The Scots have three choices: to use their own currency, to use the Pound Sterling outside of a fiscal union with the rest of Britain or to use the Euro outside of the Euro fiscal union. However, in purely economic terms the main problem is money changing. If Scotland has the Euro then the £45 billion a year trade with the UK would attract money changing charges, if it uses the Pound Sterling then £11 billion a year trade will attract charges. At a few pecent money changing charge this would cost between £300 m if Scotland uses the Pound, over £1 billion if it uses the Euro and the sum of these amounts if it uses its own currency. These charges could be minimised if Scotland has a central money changing facility. Ultimately this is a non-issue if the Scots want independence, it is only about 0.5% of GDP. If the Scots chose the Euro then, within a few years they would be part of the Eurozone.
General Economy
The Scots get more government spending per head but, with the rising price of oil, contribute considerable oil revenues (see BBC REPORT, Scotland: A Case of Give and Take.). Over the years the figures have gone from a subsidy of the Scots to, with rising oil prices and using the BBC approach, a slight subsidy by the Scots of the UK economy. This does not include the British subsidy to RBS and HBOS.
If we check the BBC figures a slightly different picture appears. Government expenditure on the different countries in the UK is:
Source: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pespub_pesa11.htm (Chapter 9)
Where "ID" is identifiable expenditure that can easily be apportioned and "Non" is non-identifiable expenditure of £121665m. Examples of non-identifiable expenditure include the majority of expenditure on defence, overseas representation, and tax collection, non identifiable expenditure has been apportioned pro rata to population in the table above.
For reference, here are the population figures
Part Population (2010) Percentage (2010)
England 51,809,700 83.8
Scotland 5,222,100 8.4
Wales 3,006,400 4.8
Northern Ireland 1,789,000 3.0
United Kingdom 61,827,200 100
The total expenditure for Scotland was £63226m.The Scots believe they are spending £52770m (See Scottish Government:Current and capital budgets) but this is only the part of expenditure that their government actually "sees", it excludes all the non-identifiable expenditure.
The exclusion of much of the non-identifiable public spending from the Scottish government figures makes them appear £10456m better off than they state. This deficit is made up from UK Government funds provided by the English. Even without this money the Scots budget is in deficit by about £9000m - a similar level of deficit per head to the UK as a whole. Overall Scots independence is either beneficial to England or neutral. There is no evidence that it would have a negative effect.
Effect of Scottish independence on Westminster.
Scotland elects 59 MPs to the Westminster Parliament. The party allegiance of these MPs is given below:
The Scots are socialists, they like their country to be run like a kid's school.
If these MPs were removed from the Westminster Parliament the political parties would have the following representation:
The Tories should be campaigning with the SNP for Scots Independence! Once the Scots have gone the English will scarcely ever have to suffer their country being run like a school and the Scots will never be governed by Tories.
Certainly Scottish independence would resolve the West Lothian Question so all British people should support it. Without Scots independence this constitutional stain on British government will never be removed.
The Need for Self Government
Many Scots whinge about being second class citizens who are not properly represented at Westminster. If you go to Scotland it is clear that it is very different from England. They "whinge" because the UK government is happy to let them decide to be independent but the Scots have not got the nerve to go-it-alone. Perhaps, after a referendum on independence, the Scots will either get on with being part of the UK or stand up and be counted as independent and "Scottish".
If the Scots vote NO the British Elite know what to do. They will fill Scotland with people who do not have such firm allegiances so that the desire for independence never happens again - Scotland will be "Londonized".
Note 1: Law of the Sea, Article 15 Delimitation of the territorial sea between States with opposite or adjacent coasts
"Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each other, neither of the two States is entitled, failing agreement between them to the contrary, to extend its territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two States is measured. The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two States in a way which is at variance therewith."
First version published 17/10/12
The Scots are finally going to have a referendum on full independence. The main political parties in England are opposed to Scottish Independence. The Labour Party will lose about 40 MPs from Westminster if the Scots secede, as a result Labour has taken over the "NO" campaign to try to avoid becoming marginalised in England. Although the Scots imagine that ex-Chancellor Darling, who runs the NO campaign, and ex-Prime Minister Brown, care about them they truly care about power for the Party in England.
The Conservatives are also worried about Scots independence. They are dangerously close to splitting over Europe and if Labour is seriously weakened by the loss of the Scots MPs and the UK representation in the Council of Europe is decreased to less than 29, then several Tories, perhaps ten or twenty, will defect to UKIP. Cameron will be finished. From the point of view of Westminster the Scots referendum is actually about England and the survival of Cameron and Miliband. Will their henchmen be able to scare the kilts off the Scots enough to get a NO vote? The BBC represents the UK according to its Charter, not Scotland, so it's apparatchiks will press home the fear uncertainty and doubt of independence.
(Use http://tinyurl.com/orjvwqb to link to this article).
There are numerous technical problems relating to Scots independence.
The first problem is the border. According to Article 15 of The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Note 1 below) the maritime boundary between England and Scotland runs so that both countries' coastlines are equidistant from the boundary.
The true international border will be approximately similar to that shown above. Many Scots people are being told that the international border runs along administrative boundaries within the UK, for instance the boundary that specifies whether boats in a particular part of the North Sea are subject to control from UK authorities based in Aberdeen or UK authorities based in Berwick. The UK administrative boundary was aligned with a line of latitude for administrative convenience but the international boundary depends on UN Maritime Law.
Fortunately it is only a few extremists who are insisting upon the wrong borders. The current Scottish Government seems to be using the recognised, UN, international boundaries in estimates such as geographical share of North Sea oil revenues (See Government expenditure and revenue 2009-2010: North Sea Oil Revenue).
This means that the bulk of North Sea Oil is in Scottish territorial waters:
And the bulk of North Sea gas production is in English waters.
The Economics of Independence
Currency
A great deal has been made of the currency that Scotland might use after independence. The only real issue here is whether Scotland can convince another country or group to take responsibility for its national debt (to be part of a "fiscal union"). Obviously a newly independent country is unlikely to get this arrangement. There are plenty of countries that use other countries' money without fiscal union. Even Cuba uses the US Dollar! But of course, Cuba would never expect the US to pick up the bill for its National Debt. Other examples are Ecuador using the dollar, Bulgaria and Montenegro the Euro etc.
The Scots have three choices: to use their own currency, to use the Pound Sterling outside of a fiscal union with the rest of Britain or to use the Euro outside of the Euro fiscal union. However, in purely economic terms the main problem is money changing. If Scotland has the Euro then the £45 billion a year trade with the UK would attract money changing charges, if it uses the Pound Sterling then £11 billion a year trade will attract charges. At a few pecent money changing charge this would cost between £300 m if Scotland uses the Pound, over £1 billion if it uses the Euro and the sum of these amounts if it uses its own currency. These charges could be minimised if Scotland has a central money changing facility. Ultimately this is a non-issue if the Scots want independence, it is only about 0.5% of GDP. If the Scots chose the Euro then, within a few years they would be part of the Eurozone.
General Economy
The Scots get more government spending per head but, with the rising price of oil, contribute considerable oil revenues (see BBC REPORT, Scotland: A Case of Give and Take.). Over the years the figures have gone from a subsidy of the Scots to, with rising oil prices and using the BBC approach, a slight subsidy by the Scots of the UK economy. This does not include the British subsidy to RBS and HBOS.
If we check the BBC figures a slightly different picture appears. Government expenditure on the different countries in the UK is:
UK Government Expenditure by Country
Country
|
Non
|
ID
|
Total Expenditure
|
England
|
99282
|
442007
|
541289
|
Scotland
|
11597
|
51629
|
63226
|
Wales
|
6541
|
29121
|
35662
|
Northern Ireland
|
4245
|
18898
|
23143
|
Source: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pespub_pesa11.htm (Chapter 9)
Where "ID" is identifiable expenditure that can easily be apportioned and "Non" is non-identifiable expenditure of £121665m. Examples of non-identifiable expenditure include the majority of expenditure on defence, overseas representation, and tax collection, non identifiable expenditure has been apportioned pro rata to population in the table above.
For reference, here are the population figures
Part Population (2010) Percentage (2010)
England 51,809,700 83.8
Scotland 5,222,100 8.4
Wales 3,006,400 4.8
Northern Ireland 1,789,000 3.0
United Kingdom 61,827,200 100
The total expenditure for Scotland was £63226m.The Scots believe they are spending £52770m (See Scottish Government:Current and capital budgets) but this is only the part of expenditure that their government actually "sees", it excludes all the non-identifiable expenditure.
The exclusion of much of the non-identifiable public spending from the Scottish government figures makes them appear £10456m better off than they state. This deficit is made up from UK Government funds provided by the English. Even without this money the Scots budget is in deficit by about £9000m - a similar level of deficit per head to the UK as a whole. Overall Scots independence is either beneficial to England or neutral. There is no evidence that it would have a negative effect.
Effect of Scottish independence on Westminster.
Scotland elects 59 MPs to the Westminster Parliament. The party allegiance of these MPs is given below:
| Labour Party | 41 | |
| Liberal Democrats | 11 | |
| Scottish National Party | 6 | |
| Conservative Party | 1 |
The Scots are socialists, they like their country to be run like a kid's school.
If these MPs were removed from the Westminster Parliament the political parties would have the following representation:
| Party | Current seats | After Independence | |
| Labour Party | 254 | 213 | |
| Liberal Democrats | 57 | 46 | |
| Others | 30 | 24 | |
| Conservative Party | 305 | 304 |
The Tories should be campaigning with the SNP for Scots Independence! Once the Scots have gone the English will scarcely ever have to suffer their country being run like a school and the Scots will never be governed by Tories.
Certainly Scottish independence would resolve the West Lothian Question so all British people should support it. Without Scots independence this constitutional stain on British government will never be removed.
The Need for Self Government
Many Scots whinge about being second class citizens who are not properly represented at Westminster. If you go to Scotland it is clear that it is very different from England. They "whinge" because the UK government is happy to let them decide to be independent but the Scots have not got the nerve to go-it-alone. Perhaps, after a referendum on independence, the Scots will either get on with being part of the UK or stand up and be counted as independent and "Scottish".
If the Scots vote NO the British Elite know what to do. They will fill Scotland with people who do not have such firm allegiances so that the desire for independence never happens again - Scotland will be "Londonized".
Note 1: Law of the Sea, Article 15 Delimitation of the territorial sea between States with opposite or adjacent coasts
"Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each other, neither of the two States is entitled, failing agreement between them to the contrary, to extend its territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two States is measured. The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two States in a way which is at variance therewith."
First version published 17/10/12
Comments