« Why we should be concerned about further planned austerity | Main | Home rule fiscal autonomy ‘doesn’t add up’ »

11 March 2015


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

Ron Sturrock

Indeed, I would also consider the effect of the possible tax regime changes on revenues.

Dick Winchester

What would seem extremely clear is that whilst Westminster maintains control over the so called fiscal levers and all the other levers that influence the economy - including things like financial sector regulation - then the chances of growing the Scottish economy and achieving anything like its real potential are extremely poor.

Ron Sturrock

As a layperson I view this from the aspect that our revenues are £54bn (with geographic oil) as per GERS 14.
I would therefore assume that this £54bn represents the base criteria of Full Fiscal Autonomy pre any borrowing intention. A further assumption is that Barnett would cease.

SG have said they will have liabilities towards the MOD and FCO.
However imo, this appears to neglect all other potential and real liabilities towards Westminster:
Debt repayment
National Security
DFiD - are SG proposing creating a separate department in Edinburgh?
Will borrowing rates under FFA be the same present.
Any borrowing under an FFA umbrella, who will be the LOLR?
As Dick mentions, continuation of the BoE and Treasury requirements.
I am certain that there are other areas of UK wide policy to which Scotland will have to contribute.

FFA was contained within the recent "Economic Strategy" document with the impresssion that these objectives will be pursued vigorously during the next Westminster parliament.

It is therefore essential in my view that the SG produces a detailed fiscal (with numbers) plan covering the next 5 years at least.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Top Economics Site
My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

Become a Fan