WIREDGOV

While English voters may now have a greater understanding of what is meant by a ‘Project Fear’ campaign thanks to George Osborne, many of us are somewhat baffled by the way the SNP is ignoring some basic facts that would seem to make Scottish independence (while maintaining EU membership benefits/ membership) a non-viable proposition, in the short term at least.

In a recent major speech to members of the IPPR in Edinburgh, FM Nicola Sturgeon said the UK’s negotiating position must allow those parts of the UK that voted to leave the EU the option of doing so, while those parts which voted to stay should have the option to remain.  She also condemned the lack of planning for a Leave vote by those who proposed the referendum. 

The first statement flies in the face of electoral democratic logic as a UK-wide vote has to end up with the majority having the final say, albeit the majority may be an alliance of voting blocs and its policies a compromise.  So in this case ‘Brexit’ means Brexit for the whole of the UK.

As for the second point, Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty provides for a minimum of 2 years negotiations AFTER the UK ‘pushes the button’, while the SNP’s own referendum timetable was to declare independence on 24 March 2016  – a mere 18 months later!

A few basic facts to consider:

• Spain does not want to see a ‘breakaway’ independent Scotland join the EU as it would encourage Catalonia and the Basque country to try something similar.  Its one vote could block their membership application.
• When the UK finally leaves the EU, it will benefit by a nett £8.5bn a year, while maintaining the current level of ‘EU spending’ in the UK (Membership fee).  An independent Scotland would have to pay a membership fee to the EU without the benefit of a rebate and Scotland would no longer benefit from the Barnett formula & its £1,200 per head premium.  Why doesn’t the ScotGov develop its current fiscal framework into a ‘theoretical’ (but not actual) physical autonomy to ‘prove’ it could survive financially and still pay for all those current & proposed extra benefits?  Will Scotland ever be able to afford the financial ‘cold turkey’ of independence? ~ Just like the SNP on ‘Syrian Bombing’, UK Parliament wants to know plan for Scottish fiscal independence ~ ScotGov:  Social security consultation (closes 28/10/16)
• Approximately 75% of Scotland’s ‘international’ trade is with the rUK, so how soon would an ‘EU Scotland’ be able to obtain a trade agreement with rUK?
• North Sea oil currently sells for around $42 per barrel as compared to $100+ in September 2014, with revenues dropping in parallel (North Sea tax receipts slump to £35m - BBC News).
• rUK would no doubt re-appraise any payments to pay for infrastructure in Scotland (An independent Scotland could require more than the ‘benefits of £24bn’ to both pay for the extension of HS2 and the subsidies of the existing railway(s) ~ PC&PE:  Uncertainty risks harming growth in Scotland's renewable energy industry)

Finally, before the UK PM gives her permission for another referendum, one would suggests she gets (in writing) agreement that Scotland would pay for its share of the UK national debt and accept that ownership of UK worldwide assets such as Embassies remained with the UK, thus avoiding a repeat of past ‘threats of the previous First Minister’!
ScotGov:  Options to protect Scotland in EU ~ ScotGov:  Scotland’s future in the EU ~ ScotGov:  EU environment pledge ~ Telegraph:  no-boost-in-support-for-scottish-independence-despite-brexit ~ Fabian Society:  The Barnett formula and the union