Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

SNP fear for independent Scotland's finances Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...internalSearch

    The Scottish government was accused of “covering up” its private fears that it would struggle to pay its bills if next year’s referendum produces a vote in favour of breaking away from the United Kingdom.

    Fresh acrimony was injected into the independence campaign after the leak of a paper by John Swinney, the SNP finance minister, which warned colleagues that the nation’s finances – and its ability to afford pensions and public services - would be imperilled by fluctuating oil prices and the cost of an ageing population.

    He said the cost of collecting taxes would soar and defence spending would have to be trimmed if Scotland went it alone.

    Mr Swinney said: “Demographic pressures will increase the demand for existing public services, particularly but not exclusively in health. Spending on state pensions and public sector pensions is also driven by demographics and is set to rise.”

    He raised his concerns over an independent Scotland’s finances in a paper written to Alex Salmond, the First Minister, and other senior SNP figures. It was leaked to the Better Together campaign which opposes independence.

    ...
    Will this damage the SNP's chances of gaining independence for Scotland? A Scottish government spokesman has said that the document is out of date, since it is around a year old, but will that wash with the Scottish public?

    Spending-cuts plans revealed: http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...aled-1-2822794
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Salmonds worst fear, its actually a yes vote.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I think Salmond just cares about Salmond; screw the economic damage to Scotland, he'd get into the history books as a Founding Father.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    More power to Scotland? Everyone gets the same vote throughout the UK, more like the Scottish parliament, that a minority of the electorate took part in voting for.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Already covered in the scottish independence good or bad thread.

    Their supporters have been surprisingly quiet.

    their supporters on the Scotsman website are claiming it's a fake letter. They're also claiming that shop stewards concern about the closure of faslane and the loss of jobs are traitors.

    Have a read of that thread and you'll see the SNP dream is in fantasy land, driven by greed of a minority of supporters.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Already covered in the scottish independence good or bad thread.
    I know but I thought it was significant enough to get a separate mention, plus this is more aimed at whether people will be turned away from the idea of independence, not so much about the consequences.

    Have a read of that thread and you'll see the SNP dream is in fantasy land, driven by greed of a minority of supporters
    I know; I think this evidence goes some way to exposing the fact that legitimate arguments for independence are only emotional.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tjf8)
    I know but I thought it was significant enough to get a separate mention, plus this is more aimed at whether people will be turned away from the idea of independence, not so much about the consequences.



    I know; I think this evidence goes some way to exposing the fact that legitimate arguments for independence are only emotional.

    Many people are pissed of with governments in general at the moment. So they'll vent and say and do silly things especially when theirs somebody telling them that it some one else's fault and they can promise them a better future. But when those promises seem to be continually proven to be lies, most people realise they like the idea if independence, but not the reality.

    I don't like using independence as that implies a degree of oppression. I'm not being oppressed by anybody other than the usual suspects who will still be there after.

    the SNP got voted in on the back of a protest vote and because they promised more free stuff..... Which amazingly is taking away from the more needy in society, and it is supported by tin foil hat wearing fantasists, whilst being led by some pretty poor politicians who realise they have one chance to feather their nest.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    The response has been even more bizarre than the actual report. First, they said it was out of date (more on this later), then they said parts of it actually showed an economic case for independence. Even the journalists were left scratching their heads on this one.

    As for why it was out of date, well, apparently this was due to a surge in oil extraction in the North Sea. Fine. The SNP previously said that the UK Government's change of the tax system out there a couple of years ago would decimate production. Which was obvious *******s. Now they're trying to justify that the increased extraction of a finite resource at a time where oil prices are falling is somehow securing Scotland's economic future. Somehow, I really don't see it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    From your Scotsman link.

    "The SNP added that over the seven years from 2010/11 to 2016/17, Scotland would have been better off than the UK to the tune of £16.8bn."

    Anyway, is it really a surprise that a country might want to control its spending and maximise growth? I think it could manage. It doesn't mention anything about possibly boosting other sectors too.

    Peter Jones: Unreliable numbers don’t add up


    And yet.. "Of course, that isn’t the end of the story as far as independence is concerned, for these figures do not include the export value that would come from Scottish control of most of the North Sea. This would certainly turn a trade deficit, whatever it may be, into a whopping great surplus, but how much of a surplus no-one really knows."

    Warning over Scots EU costs

    "An independent Scotland, with oil reserves, would become the third richest country in the EU in terms of GDP per head."

    To be honest I don't even know what news sources are reliable these days, with bbc being found to show mega bias against independence. 1 2

    People keep mentioning the volatility associated with oil, but isn't there a similar volatility with being so dependent on the financial sector down in London?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cowsforsale)
    From your Scotsman link.

    "The SNP added that over the seven years from 2010/11 to 2016/17, Scotland would have been better off than the UK to the tune of £16.8bn."

    Anyway, is it really a surprise that a country might want to control its spending and maximise growth? I think it could manage. It doesn't mention anything about possibly boosting other sectors too.



    And yet.. "Of course, that isn’t the end of the story as far as independence is concerned, for these figures do not include the export value that would come from Scottish control of most of the North Sea. This would certainly turn a trade deficit, whatever it may be, into a whopping great surplus, but how much of a surplus no-one really knows."

    Warning over Scots EU costs

    "An independent Scotland, with oil reserves, would become the third richest country in the EU in terms of GDP per head."

    To be honest I don't even know what news sources are reliable these days, with bbc being found to show mega bias against independence. 1 2

    People keep mentioning the volatility associated with oil, but isn't there a similar volatility with being so dependent on the financial sector down in London?
    That's already been debunked and as for your links to BBC Bias. It would appear that Craig Murray has an axe to grind. Try doing a bit more research on Craig Murray and try not using his 'about me' page on his website. It's like listening to the Shouty man on Princess Street. He has an opinion, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's right.

    You're right though, we may be better off for a short period of time, but you seem to have missed some rather onvious flaws in your argument.

    1) We have a high proportion of Public Sector jobs in Scotland as as such tend to be recession proof to a certain extent. Remember, that somebody somewhere is paying for those jobs, so as even the SNP admit, we'd be cutting back on those straight away.

    2) Oil prices are volatile and not a particularly stable or constant. I'd like to have access to all inustries to mitigate risk. Anyway, wasn't there a report a few weeks back highlihjting the fact that the UK would've not been in recession had it not been for the North Sea Oil shutdown?

    It's alll very well cherry picking data to suit you're argument, but I like to look at all of the facts. Remember that these Shister (politicians) will be alright come what may as they'll ensure that they have nice comfortable jobs with rather lucrative pensions. I, and many more don't have the luxury of feathering my own bed at taxpayers expense.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    I think Salmond just cares about Salmond; screw the economic damage to Scotland, he'd get into the history books as a Founding Father.
    For once, I find myself in total agreement with gladders.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    The response has been even more bizarre than the actual report. First, they said it was out of date (more on this later), then they said parts of it actually showed an economic case for independence. Even the journalists were left scratching their heads on this one.

    As for why it was out of date, well, apparently this was due to a surge in oil extraction in the North Sea. Fine. The SNP previously said that the UK Government's change of the tax system out there a couple of years ago would decimate production. Which was obvious *******s. Now they're trying to justify that the increased extraction of a finite resource at a time where oil prices are falling is somehow securing Scotland's economic future. Somehow, I really don't see it.
    The figures have always looked unrealistic - given that the SNP have been busy rapidly expanding public spending in Scotland (at least partly with increased subsidy from the UK taxpayer generally) and Salmond is also promising 1-2% real-terms growth in public spending post-independence, the likelihood of a severe strain in public finances seems almost inevitable.

    I've said before on similar threads that the likelihood is that the SNP are gambling that the B of E will simply bail out a Scotland that remains within Sterling in that eventuality. In other words, another layer of fakery to the so-called 'independence'.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Nationalism is usually based upon emotion more than logic and reason so I doubt this will change much. The figures are so variable, so many estimates and assumptions I would think they could be massaged to fit which ever view one wishes.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    Nationalism is usually based upon emotion more than logic and reason so I doubt this will change much. The figures are so variable, so many estimates and assumptions I would think they could be massaged to fit which ever view one wishes.
    Which come back to the original statement of Salmond just cares about Salmond.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Which come back to the original statement of Salmond just cares about Salmond.
    Possibly, I just get the feeling nationalists like him just want to be independent. That is what it boils down to, and they will purse that agenda regardless of the figures because for them an independent Scotland is a better Scotland, for richer or poorer, "freedom" is worth more. Its just convenient if they can make an economic case to change the views of people who don't feel so strongly. What I mean is it not that he only cares about himself, but that the feeling that Scotland should be independent is what he think is most important for Scotland.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    Possibly, I just get the feeling nationalists like him just want to be independent. That is what it boils down to, and they will purse that agenda regardless of the figures because for them an independent Scotland is a better Scotland, for richer or poorer, "freedom" is worth more. Its just convenient if they can make an economic case to change the views of people who don't feel so strongly. What I mean is it not that he only cares about himself, but that the feeling that Scotland should be independent is what he think is most important for Scotland.
    Salmond wants power. But I'd agree with what you're saying. Fortunatley 70% of us are a little more switched on.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cowsforsale)
    To be honest I don't even know what news sources are reliable these days, with bbc being found to show mega bias against independence. 1 2
    I've had the questionable fortunate to have dealings with Craig Murray, as well as reading the book that made him relatively well-known. Whilst he can be rather charming, witty and has a number of interesting stories, his political beliefs are barmy, he is entirely unreliable and his behaviour is all over the place.

    If we listened to every barmy person that thinks the BBC is out to get them - and there are plenty of Tories, socialists and everyone else who does so - then it simply wouldn't exist. In reality, it pisses off people who don't have much of a grasp of neutrality themselves.

    People keep mentioning the volatility associated with oil, but isn't there a similar volatility with being so dependent on the financial sector down in London?
    Not really. For a start, volatility isn't a matter of dependence, it's a matter of fluctuating value. Commodities, unlike other revenue-producing streams, fluctuate considerably.

    With financial services, we're not talking about a commodity, we're talking about a whole industry which is hugely varied in the products and services it offers. The reliance for tax revenue is also considerably smaller: the City of London says it's about 11% of UK tax revenue (2010), however I think from their own report they're including a lot of things that are quite clearly not direct consequences of their business. Scotland's dependence on oil revenue in GERS figures has, even in recent years, soared beyond 20%.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)

    With financial services, we're not talking about a commodity, we're talking about a whole industry which is hugely varied in the products and services it offers. The reliance for tax revenue is also considerably smaller: the City of London says it's about 11% of UK tax revenue (2010), however I think from their own report they're including a lot of things that are quite clearly not direct consequences of their business. Scotland's dependence on oil revenue in GERS figures has, even in recent years, soared beyond 20%.
    I daresay the Salmond model will include the supposed effects of a business boom caused by his rootin-tootin very low corporate tax rate post-independence.

    The fact that he will be in competition with ever-more aggressive corporate tax cuts in Ireland and possibly in England is not entering the calculations. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I daresay the Salmond model will include the supposed effects of a business boom caused by his rootin-tootin very low corporate tax rate post-independence.

    The fact that he will be in competition with ever-more aggressive corporate tax cuts in Ireland and possibly in England is not entering the calculations. :rolleyes:
    And his supporters have still not grasped the fact that every country wants low corporation tax to promote growth, but in many ways it's set at an optimum level to cover government expenditure such as a rather large pensions liability and public sector payements.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I daresay the Salmond model will include the supposed effects of a business boom caused by his rootin-tootin very low corporate tax rate post-independence.

    The fact that he will be in competition with ever-more aggressive corporate tax cuts in Ireland and possibly in England is not entering the calculations. :rolleyes:
    So the strategy is to strengthen the Tory position in England (a party that would love more corporation tax cuts) and then engage in a corporation tax war with an economy ten times its size which it would likely lose given the other factors which draw business to the south of England.
 
 
 
Poll
Which Fantasy Franchise is the best?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.