Laurie MacFarlane had an excellent post out on Open Democracy yesterday. This was the heading:
The piece is a critique of the work of Andrew Wilson and the Scottish Growth Commission, with which I (to put it mildly) have some considerable difficulties. To get a feel for what he had to say try this:
A generous interpretation of the report is that its recommendations were designed to ensure that independence involved minimal changes to the present UK arrangements. But if that is the case, then what is the point of independence?
And then note what he has to say on the proposal that sterling be used in Scotland after independence:
The claim that with sterlingisation “the monetary policy situation that we have now would continue” is either deliberately disingenuous, disturbingly ignorant — or both.
This is fair summary:
Without a central bank to accommodate such a fiscal expansion, a sterlingised Scotland would have been entirely reliant on international investors willing to lend sterling. The absence of a lender of last resort would mean paying higher rates of interest on Scottish sterling bonds, and tailoring public policy to look ‘credible' to financial markets. It would also leave Scotland vulnerable to predatory investors looking for vulnerable prey to exploit during a crisis.
And, as Laurie noted, when asking how this terrible piece of thinking came about:
The report begins by thanking the “wide range of interests” the Commission asked for ideas about how Scotland's economic performance could be improved. Among those consulted, 17 out of 23 were business lobby groups, such as CBI Scotland, the Scottish Property Federation and the Institute of Directors. Notably absent from the list were trade unions, environmental groups, or any group representing workers or marginalised communities in Scotland.
This is a report by big business for big business in Scotland, serving its interests, which are undoubtedly promoted by sterlingisation, most especially if you're a hedge fund. It's not a report for the people of Scotland.
As Laurie concludes:
With the right plan on currency, economic model and transition, there is no reason why Scotland could not become a successful independent nation. But that plan needs to come from the 2020s, not the 1990s. And it needs to come from a broad cross section of civil society, not just business groups.
Far from being an asset to the independence cause, the Growth Commission is its biggest liability. It's time, as we say, ‘tae think again'.
I could not agree more. One only hopes the SNP listens. As things stand, it would be taking Scotland towards disaster by trying for independence on this basis. Please read the article: it's worth the time.
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:
You’re not alone hoping the SNP listens. There is a worryingly steady stream of stories that might be characterised as “Something’s seriously wrong in the SNP.” Some in the party have a deaf ear for the wider Indy movement. Too many? A few wonder why, citing cause for concern in everything from legal proceedings to the 2019 accounts* just published by the Electoral Commission.
None of this sounds like a party working toward independence for Scotland. I am bewildered and not a little worried.
* https://wingsoverscotland.com/youve-been-robbed/
It does not appear as if independence for Scotland is going to happen any time soon. The SNP accounts for 2019 have finally been published, and it would appear they don’t even have sufficient funds to fight the election next May.
Where has all the money from subs/donations gone? Perhaps we’ll find out yet but in the meantime, as Wings over Scotland (https://wingsoverscotland.com/youve-been-robbed/) infers if Westminster agreed a S30 tomorrow would the SNP have sufficient funds to be able to fight an independence campaign?
I read somewhere that the SNP are now a party of devolution, not independence. It would seem this is very true. Bang goes my dreams for fifty years that I would see my country as a nation again on the world stage.
I think I heard Mervyn King say on ‘Any Questions’ last week that Scotland would need to keep Sterling….
The pantomime audience in my house, shouted ‘oh no it doesn’t’
Meanwhile my long suffering wife just shrugged.
🙂
In a nutshell Nicola Sturgeon is effectively just another poor Neoliberal politician for not understanding the importance of a government having fiscal space and how to achieve it!
I hope what follows is not off topic. Amongst the nations of Europe, Scotland (& perhaps Spain – given its sun) has the largest renewable resource – wind. This can be measured in 100s of GWs offshore and perhaps 200GW on-shore.
On-shore wind when coupled to electrolysers could make every community in Scotland outside of the major cities, energy independent. What’s more they could get their energy (both electricity and hydrogen) for peanuts (see last para).
The issue for Scotland, independent or not, is how to maximise local content and how to build communities that are not just energy independent but also have a significant measure of independence in terms of goods that make life easier but are part of the circular/build for maintenance economy(white goods, brown goods etc). This requires a level of planning by government that barely exists at the moment. But it could be done – provided there is a will to do it.
Neither does Scotland lack talent as a cursory consideration of engineers of various sorts over the last 100 years shows, ditto a consideration of various Universities such as Strathclyde. How to get the ball rolling is the key.
& for the record, involved in an entertaining albeit small project up on the A74 in Lanark – wind turbines and electrolysers – with the hydrogen (& the oxygen) destined for a range of uses. Capacity factor of the wind turbines is jaw dropping (= very very low cost electricity).
Common Weal have also addressed Scottish food independence – which is net possible
But it will take planning
Mike, An example of a community making itself entirely self-sufficient in energy already exists in Scotland: the Isle of Eigg. Following a community buy-out from the owner of the island, the community set up a programme of wind, solar and mini-hydro electricity generation, developed an island grid and set up a battery farm to store excess electricity.
Previously the islanders had to rely on noisy, polluting diesel generators for power and were dependent on the owner’s monopoly of diesel deliveries at a high cost. Now with a reliable, non-polluting power supply for the first time in the island’s history, small businesses (including a brewery) have opened up using the internet to market their produce. It’s a stunningly beautiful island and well worth a visit to take it all in.
Thanks Mike
Always interesting and encouraging to see these things developing.
Fake news from taxresearch. Majority continue to support independence.
I never said otherwise.
Independence and policy proposals from Andrew Wilson fir the SNP are not the same thing
I do not and neither should any Scot wanting Independence, trust Andrew Wilson, he is openly hostile and dishonest towards Nicola and ScotGov and I fear any suggestion made by him is intentionally made to jeopardise our Independence. If Scots can see through that man, why aren’t Nicola and her Gov seeing through him.
I wish I knew
Phil,
Eh? In what way is this fake news?
Richard is reporting on a critique of the Growth Commission report and agreeing with it – it’s an opinion. An opinion isn’t news, so can’t ever be fake news.
And besides that, current (actual) SNP policy doesn’t adhere to the Growth Commission Report, Nicola Sturgeon is personally ignoring that and carrying on regardless.
Supporting independence is not directly related to the SNP or Nicola Sturgeon – more people are realising the value in becoming an independent nation again; taking back control, if you like.
The SNP, the party, are a vehicle to politically achieve independence. Or, they should be. We haven’t seen too much movement or effort in that direction lately have we? By lately, I mean in about the past 6 years.
Nicola Sturgeon, by her behaviour, has now compromised herself, the party, and so the independence movement. She is dishonest and unfair, and has been, through the Scottish Government, actively interfering to delay any progress by others towards independence. The list of evidence to show these things is far too long for me set down here, so just a brief few things:
– her promotion of the idea that there is such a thing as an ‘illegal’ referendum, and that we ‘need’ a s.30 I.e. Permission from Westminster to hold one, are just out-and-out lies – she doesn’t know that, no one does. There are other, legitimate, routes to independence that she steadfastly refuses to acknowledge.
– delaying tactics by the Scottish government in the Martin Keatings s.30 judicial review case, delays are used in courts to try and make the case too costly to continue, lawyers cost a lot of money. They have now withdrawn, for no reason, but still have representation from the Lord Advocate (a minister).
– she lied to parliament about when she knew about the allegations against Alex Salmond (a resignation offence under the ministerial code), after all the hoo-ha about it, she now claims she forgot,,, and that’s after hearing evidence in (criminal) court (under oath) about the earlier meeting. It turns out there are even earlier meetings – in 2017. There is an awful lot of ‘forgetting’ happening among ministers and civil servants, despite the memory-jogging amount of scrutiny on this matter, and that there is written evidence they took place. The ScotGov has been holding back a lot of evidence from the harassment committee. Gordon Dangerfield, with a blog of the same name, is a good source for unentangling some of the convoluted evidence. There is no doubt in my mind that there was and is a conspiracy, that she is central, and the scandal will break at some point. The MSM knows exactly what’s been going on, and will be waiting for the most sensational time to break the news in its glory – to the greatest damage for the SNP and for our chances of independence – and I say don’t let them delay, get it out and done with now.
– Nicola Sturgeon’s adherence to the Growth Commission Report shows she is a neo-liberal, and admirer of that (failed) doctrine – this is not in any way a ‘centre-left, caring, socialist’ position that she tries to promote. She has expressed admiration for the likes of Hilary Clinton and Henry Kissinger in tweets – those are not ‘nice’ people.
– various internal SNP wrangling, and serious issues about transparency etc. Iain Lawson’s blog ‘yours for scotland’ is a good source there. Nicola Sturgeon’s unfair treatment of members and SNP politicians can be clearly seen by looking back over her years in office – some people are thrown to the wolves after minor – an sometimes unproven – infractions, while others are kept in post despite proven incompetence or unacceptable behaviour. That she has been promoting, most recently, her friend Shirley-Anne Somerville – a horrible piece of dead wood that shouldn’t be in post – using the political grandstanding at the Covid briefings, is not a moral action on a few fronts.
The list could go on – the leadership of the SNP at the moment is corrupt and unsuitable for office, and has no intention of taking us through to independence. What is the point in popularity when we will never get the option to actually achieve that popular thing? The Westminster-lite option that the SNP are trying to sell at the moment is not independence, it is to keep us tied to devolution and dependency forever, and corruption, and shows a lack of spine. Nicola Sturgeon does not deserve anyone’s trust and admiration – but that’s a personal choice – but also, she is very very, very, unlikely to be holding office for very long – she will not survive the harassment inquiry. We have been badly used; it is time to accept that and try to move on to better things.
The SNP might, just might, get themselves sorted out; but that won’t happen with Nicola Sturgeon and her husband at the helm (or any of her chosen successors for that matter). Economically speaking, we need them gone, along with Andrew Wilson’s weirdo devolution Report.
If Sturgeon could deliver Yes maybe she has a role
Thereafter she would be a disaster on the current policies
Oh I wish that was so Richard – I was hoping the same even up to a couple of months ago, and then Nicola Sturgeon’s popularity could be used for at least getting the SNP a majority in Holyrood – but, no, it’s never going to happen, she’ll never be forced into holding that independence referendum.
There really are just too many things, some small, some large, that make all indications of Nicola Sturgeon – or any of her chosen successors – holding a referendum or bringing about independence (or even preparing for the bloody event) remote – within the next century anyway. They are ‘gradualists’, which, given the circumstances just now, isn’t the popular stance to take.
That ‘internal SNP wrangling’ that I mentioned involves the leadership fixing things so that their choice of candidate gets selected to stand – a bunch of waste-of-space incompetents that only have independence as a secondary concern (if we are lucky; most of them appear to have independence at the bottom of their lists) – they are ensuring branches don’t get full hustings, votes are being taken without everyone being informed, contact lists are being withheld from branch officials so they don’t know who to contact. HQ appears to be a cesspit, and incestuous, and the membership appears to have very little say. Her husband has a lot to answer for, apparently. So – who wants an SNP majority when it will consist of folk that aren’t interested in independence?
Those accounts so recently published – they show a large increase in legal fees, for what exactly? No one appears to know. Where is our ring-fenced donations to the Indy fighting fund? ‘Woven’ into the accounts, says the treasurer, to clarify’?!
The Draft Bill for a referendum (which was flourished hastily to distract from whatever latest scandal there was) is apparently just a whitewash – according to Martin Keatings who has seen it; it hasn’t been published, of course.
We have Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond starting to snipe at each other publicly now – she isn’t going to stand down with dignity, she has dug her heels in. She doesn’t care about Scotland, all of it is about ‘her’.
She will have to stand down anyway – I can’t see any way that she will get away with the endless web of lies that’s being revealed in the harassment inquiry – the unionists are going to have a field day. The majority of the population don’t know about most of this, of course, and she continues to pretend everything she has done is above board. It’s going to be a shock to many people when it all comes out.
No, there’s no choice – she has no role in Scotland, not one that will be of any benefit to us. And let’s face it, her economic sense is zero – she doesn’t have the skills we need anyway. Being good a projecting a friendly image and debating doesn’t cut it when we need a job done. That even that ability is hiding a very rotten core,,,
That kind of comment from Phil is mostly standard – those that still believe Sturgeon will deliver, make up excuses for her: ‘she has a secret plan’, ‘but she’s popular so xxx can’t be true’ – they believe the memes along the lines of: criticising Sturgeon will mean we won’t get independence.
If Nicola Sturgeon stays in post it will be (a) a miracle, and (b) a disaster for independence.
This isn’t an economic thought, purely a political one, but I strongly believe the only way we can keep the union is to have an English Parliament. It is the way the English MPs think they are the UK that means there is a lack of unity in the kingdom in my opinion. What I don’t know is how this would affect us economically. If you have time perhaps you could suggest what would happen to the four countries.
The issue is currency – who decides on that, and how is it managed?
[…] make clear that my comments are not party political, just look at what I noted about the SNP a few days ago, and read the comments below the line there. It is apparent that under its current leadership SNP […]