« Scottish Tax and Spend | Main | Stronger signs of recovery in Scottish labour market »

15 April 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


This is valid point "an independent Scotland will be faced with a higher interest rate on its long-term government borrowing than the UK" Scotland would have credit rating history to base a risk factor on of browing in the open market.


why are the London activities of the banks attributed to Scotland?


If the banks are Scottish debt...then why have the vast tax revenues from these banks not been attributed to Scotland...it would seem they are British while Westminster is squeezing cash from them but now that we are looking at independence,they are suddenly all ours

Ian Brooks

My point would simply be this:

Why does the SNP get to pick and choose how far back in time we go to decide what Scotland has and has not contributed to the UK?

Either we deal with it in terms of what is the case right now, or we go back 307 years to when it all started, find out what Scotland owes the rest of the UK if anything, and account for inflation.

Why go back to 1980? Is it perhaps because that's roughly when North Sea Oil was most productive? Coincidence?
It's nonsense.

This report also assumes that a maritime border with the rest of the UK runs all the 55th parallel, which it wouldn't because international convention is that it continues from the land border, which strikes a near North Easterly border line through the North Sea.
This, funnily enough, cut's "Scotland's Oil" from a 90-95% share to a 55% share.

Peter A Bell

Why would a share of the cost of the bank bail-out be attributed to Scotland on a per capita basis when there is a well established convention, at the very least, that governments are only liable for the bank operations within their jurisdiction?

And, of course, we have to acknowledge that governments are not necessarily liable at all. One might just as validly make a calculation based on an assumption that Scotland accepts no liability for banks and that the historic share of the bail-out cost is therefore zero.

John Hamill

Brian Ashcroft is married to Labour Party's Wendy Alexander. Just for the record.

Ken Armstrong

it amazes me that some folk think that the international marine boundaries are subject to what ever change they want to put into it, the movement of the boundary in 1999 was set by west minster through a back door policy without any vote, therefore should Scotland gain independence next year the international boundaries would be reestablished as they were previously, no one in their right mind could say that rUK waters lay just off Dundee, really get real.

I accept that Scotland should take a share of the current UK debt at a per capita rate, however the point regarding the "Scottish Banks" is ridiculous as the other poster mentions there is already guidelines laid out as to how any share would be dealt with in regards where the banks operations are, with that Scotlands share of the RBS and HBOS bail out would be around 10% of the total amount.

It surprises me that when the oil is talked about the full value of the 90-95% revenue is never actually attributed to Scotland to show how it would effect the balance sheets after independence. go figure it out folks, Scotland would do very well thank you and would be well placed to get rid of its debt reasonably quickly, getting to a point where it could even become a lender to rUK to help them out with their then spiraling debt...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Top Economics Site
My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

Become a Fan