The question of how much debt Scotland might owe the rest of the U.K. if it were to become independent has been a recurring theme on this blog this week, so I thought I would make a video about it as well.
I apologise for this one exceeding our target on video length: this issue seemed worth exploring in depth.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Hi Richard,
That was very insightful. I got a bit confused as to why the apportioned debt went up to £440bn from £106bn after accounting for the oil since the 80s. I would have thought the oil revenue contribution would have reduced it, not increased it?
Thanks
Farah Adams
I was allowing for gross sums at that point before apportionment to Scotland – apologies if the flow was not clear
It’s in the intriguingly linked blog post if you wade through it
Thanks as ever Richard.
Chuckled at your last comment – will UK still be used but mean Eng/Wal/Norn Iron? (which would not be historically correct) or change to rUK? or …? can’t wait for the day, it will be music to my ears.
An excellent companion to the article. This really does help highlight just how much of a bluff Westminster has been playing with regards to Scotland. It’ll be interesting to see what the latest GERS report that’s due in August will show and what the SNP response to it will be. I understand that the Scottish Government will publish their own alternative GERS report this year. With last years GERS showing expenditure for Public Sector Debt Interest of £3.16 billion, and with similar amounts having been allocated for previous years, no doubt this years GERS allocated PSDI will be similar.
With a greater understanding of GERS and a fairly widespread discontent with it in Scotland, allowing this and several other costs to pass in this year’s GERS report without rebuttal would be a huge mistake for the SNP given this critical period that Scotland is now in. GERS doesn’t reflect Scotland’s post independence position, but evidently neither does it reflect it’s true pre-independence position. Both need to be made as objectively accurate as possible to cut through the Westminster smoke and mirrors bluff and to prepare the ground for negotiations for independence.
I will be waiting with interest….
GERS is a Scottish Government report. How can they produce an alternative?
By saying it was wrong – and inconsistent with any known national accounting standard – and by replacing it, which will require that they demand the necessary data
GERS is produced to ESA2010 as required by EU law as well as the UK public finance standards.
If GERS is wrong the Scottish Government can change it . It Already did that when the SNP took control. The vast majority of of Scottish tax and expenditure is well known or can be cross checked. The Double Irish/Single malt tax fiddles along with others suggests that there is error in all government accounts.
The question is whether it is wrong or giving an unwanted answer? People seemed happy with it in 2014.
I would suggest to you that a significant part of Scottish tax is not known, and nor is spend
And I question compliance
The accounting for income and expenditure is on different bases and I know if no standard that permits that
Brilliant Richard. When the Indy ref gets going, you must do a wee speaking tour of Scotland explaining this and the basics of MMT.
The videos are a great idea.
I would love to be back on tour in Scotland
Honestly, I didn’t find that overly long and felt it explained quite complex economic issues fairly well.
Thanks
I know it would take additional time; this already useful content would likely be further improved with supporting graphics
I am sure you are right
What I am signalling is that I do not have the time to create them of the lead time to integrate them
Sorry….
Hi Richard,
No need for apols. I understand hours in a day are not bottomless.
Thanks
Lovely stuff, a thumb b directly in the unionist eye.
It would also be interesting to factor the implications for rUK of losing their energy & potable water security. rUK receives around 20GW of electricity from Scotland every day now (entire Scottish consumption is around 3GW). England nuclear estate end of life. They are building Hinkley C at a cost of £20Bn, taking 10 years, to generate 3GW. They would have to purchase electricity from us (or start fracking) immediately, or the lights in rUK go out.
Additionally, London is on a list of top 10 developed cities in the world with ‘at risk’ potable water supplies. Pipelines being built to divert water around England/Wales already to satisfy South East demands – their cheapest supply option will end up being Scotland.
That’s before you count the agricultural and fisheries output from Scotland that rUK would have to import from overseas on WTO tariffs.
Scotland would thrive post-independence. Post-Brexit rUK…not so much.
Tony, I personally can’t take any pleasure in anyone else’s hardship, but I also don’t think this is quite correct – I don’t believe England would necessarily suffer any hardship. Yes it would have to consider energy and water supplies and rearrange how they do it, but they needn’t be left short.
The fact is, just now it is easier and cheaper for England to use Scotland for these resources – water is already supplied to a small extent, and of course power to a great extent. That’s what we are used for – land (hunting shooting fishing ground, tax breaks, etc); power – we have the land to place all the massive wind farms, the water for tidal generators etc etc; water in natural abundance; and a population kept unnaturally low so that all those things can be provided from our country. We are used, without regard to our own needs or desires – which is really the nub of the problem and how we know nothing will change while we are inside the union.
England has already set up their big cable to get energy from Norway (for some reason Scotland’s similar project has halted,,,,), and their privatised water companies that have only done the basics in maintenance since coming into being – a lot of their estates are Victorian era! – are getting a shake up now to improve. They will be doing a massive infrastructure improvement – like we had in Scotland already – to stop leaks and that is the biggest problem, would you believe, in water supply – it’s the loss in the system (Southern Water I think got a massive fine for loosing literally tons of water recently). I think England will still need to buy power from Scotland (rather than us paying them to use their grid!?) but I’m sure it won’t be at huge cost. The Hinckley C is a vanity project – biggest waste of money ever – but I think other plans are afoot to keep energy security (enough? I don’t know though).
Of course, a lot of that depends on good governance,,,, oh. Oh dear.
Tony Wringe writes of future supplies of potable water to London and the SE: “…their cheapest supply option will end up being Scotland.”
Sorry to lower the tone, but comedian Fred MacAulay has explained that Scotland would be happy to sell drinking water at £1 per gallon, or £20 a gallon if the English don’t want us to pee in it first!
That was brilliant! Really enjoyed it. You seemed to make it very logical and flowing, and that’s not me being patronising, it’s just that I’m a bit numbers phobic/blind!
I want you working for the Scottish negotiating team, and in our new independent Scotland!
Thank you. Made a little donation, wish it were more!
Thank you!
Excellent video to accompany the blog. Very straight forward and easy to understand in sufficient detail to explain the “debt” position. Keep up the good work!
Thank you, Richard. As one who voted no last time, I shall be voting yes next time. I was worried frankly about the currency situation, with the BoE being in charge of Scotland’s money supply. You have reassured me about the debt. My vote will be yes. Thanks, again.
Thank you!