Sep 122014
 

scotland2By Keith Marley.

Now, I am not a politician or an economist. I have 2 o’levels, Arithmetic and Engerlish, so I hope you don’t mind if I offer a simplified view of the situation. No doubt some ‘learned’ person out there may be able to illuminate me with a bag full of numbers, but, this is just the way I see it.

There still seems to be some confusion about the currency, so what happens if Westminster says no to a currency union?

To me Westminster does not have a choice. Ask yourself what would happen to the pound without Scotland. At the end of June the national debt of the UK was £1,304.6 billion.

A figure which has continued to climb despite all the austerity measures put in place. In other words we are currently failing to pay off the debt and actually accruing more debt. Refusing Scotland to share the pound would mean the rest of the UK would have to service this debt themselves. This would mean the pound would have 4,000,000 less people helping to service a debt they are failing to meet at the moment.

They would also not have the massive benefit of oil revenue contributing to pay off this debt. Put in simple terms the debt would be unserviceable and the pound would be well and truly screwed. To refuse Scotland the pound would make the austerity measures currently in place seem like a walk in the park.

Of course we could use an independent pound in the same way as Tokyo uses the dollar, but we are told by the ‘No’ people that this would leave us high and dry because we had defaulted on our side of the national debt. Without the Bank of England as lender of last resort other countries would be scared to trade with us or loan us money because we have no track record or credit history.

However, the way I see it is if Westminster does not allow Scotland to continue to pay our side of the ‘debt’ then it is them who are defaulting.

It’s a bit like borrowing from a bank to buy a car, making your payments regularly and then the bank coming and taking away your car and then claiming you were defaulting if you didn’t continue making the payments…..I don’t flaming well think so!

As for the other scary side of this suggestion, ask yourself this question. Two people you know come to your door looking for a loan. One is deep in debt, regularly gets into fights with other people costing him a fortune, (Argentina, Iraq, Afghanistan to name just a few) pays a high price for personal protection (Trident) and is having trouble meeting the repayments he already has, he’s just lost his major asset, (Oil), which will only make it more difficult for him to earn the money he needs to service his current debts.

The other has no debt at all and has an asset which provides a good regular income (Oil), has no wish to get into fights with strangers and doesn’t have any need for personal protection.

Which one would you be happy to offer a loan to?

Speaking personally, I would choose to say stuff Westminster, we will use our own currency, however, Alex Salmond says we should share the pound, a currency union. Mr Darling says it’s not on offer. One thing they both agree on is that all the other options would not be as good for Scotland.

So what would happen if Scotland votes ‘Yes’?

Mr Salmond would press for a currency union, but what is more important is what would all the other Scottish politicians do? If they truly have the interest of Scotland at heart then they would have no alternative but to pursue a currency union as well.

So, if we vote ‘Yes’ we won’t just have Alex Salmond arguing for a currency union, he will also be backed by Alistair Darling, Ruth Davidson, Johann Lamont and Willie Rennie, all their parties, as well as all the rest of the ‘No’ campers too who still have a job in Scotland.

The formation of a united ‘Team Scotland’.

Despite all the political posturing Scotland will have a currency union if it wants one and I suspect we will also get it on our terms too.

This is just my opinion and the way I see it.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

[Aberdeen Voice accepts and welcomes contributions from all sides/angles pertaining to any issue. Views and opinions expressed in any article are entirely those of the writer/contributor, and inclusion in our publication does not constitute support or endorsement of these by Aberdeen Voice as an organisation or any of its team members.]

Aug 292014
 

“Just the way I see it” writes Keith Marley.

scotland2As I understand it the Scottish Government is currently responsible for 7% of taxes raised in Scotland. However it does have the ability to reallocate some, if not all, of the funds it receives from Westminster.
As a result we have a superior education system at all levels, a not perfect but superior health service, free university places for Scottish students, free prescriptions, free travel for the elderly and have even done away with toll bridges, yet despite all these benefits I am not aware of any services or standards which are in any way substandard to the rest of the UK.

Our country has massive oil reserves with enough oil discovered in the North Sea already to ensure prosperity for at least the next 3 generations.

We are at the forefront of renewable energy technology with 25% of Europe’s tidal and wind potential. All this in addition to our successful, established industries in Whisky, Tourism, Manufacturing, Construction, Agriculture and the Creative industries from fashion to computer games which is enough to make us a wealthy country even if we didn’t have oil.

Here’s the bit I don’t understand……If we vote ‘Yes’ we will have complete control over our whole economy, but if we vote ‘No’ we may be given some more powers such as raising taxes.

I don’t know about anybody else but the promise of paying increased tax hasn’t swung my vote yet. As for these other ‘powers’ there seems to be much shuffling of feet and unconfirmed mumbled answers. Of course it will all depend on who is in power if and when Scotland actually becomes independent.

It seems to me that just as many in Westminster will take a ‘No’ vote as a good enough reason to put an end to the Barnett formula resulting in a decrease in money coming back to Scotland as well as fewer M.P.s which means less representation for Scottish interests.

If we vote ‘Yes’ we are told we will lose the pound, but I think, and I suspect the majority of Scots also think, that this will also be detrimental to the rest of the UK and simply political posturing. If not, there are other options many of which are becoming more appealing as time goes on.

We are told that an independent Scotland will no longer enjoy the status of ‘being a world power’ influencing international politics. That suits me just fine, I didn’t agree with getting involved in Iraq or Afghanistan any more than I agreed with the conflict with Argentina over the Falkland isles. If we are no longer a nuclear force then I am confident we will be no longer a nuclear target either.

We have been told by the ‘No’ campaign that we will be out of the E.U. which frankly, seems to be strange threat for 2 reasons.

Why would Europe not welcome a country with a strong economy, which already meets all the standards and criteria for acceptance as well as having Europe’s main oil reserves, wind and wave potential and is Europe’s main provider of fish as well as being an existing trading partner with strong import and export links already established? It seems to me that there will be a rush to ‘fast track’ Scotland as quickly as possible.

The second reason for my doubt about this being a potential threat is the fact that the UK government has already promised (if re-elected) to hold a referendum about staying in the EU which judging by the recent U-KIP wins could well result in Scotland being pulled out of the EU like it or not along with the rest of the UK.

I am not affiliated to any political party and my hope is that come independence and Scotland’s first general election I will be able to vote for a party that truly reflects my own opinions and desires.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

[Aberdeen Voice accepts and welcomes contributions from all sides/angles pertaining to any issue. Views and opinions expressed in any article are entirely those of the writer/contributor, and inclusion in our publication does not constitute support or endorsement of these by Aberdeen Voice as an organisation or any of its team members.]