Alf Young: Fiscal discipline key to new Scotland

Published on Saturday 4 February 2012 00:00

THE Bank of England will not want to become a central bank for all of a fragmenting UK

Inch by inch, day by day, we are getting to the nitty-gritty of that big decision we all have to make in the autumn of 2014. I had feared that fierce arguments about the means by which that choice would be made would dominate the next 30-odd months. But already we are into the meat of the issue. What independence might look like. What key ends it would pursue.

In his foreword to the Scottish Government’s consultation paper on the referendum, Alex Salmond makes it clear this is not a liberation struggle. In various interventions this week, John Swinney has repeatedly said the SNP’s core case for independence is having the power to deliver higher sustainable growth in our economy and greater material prosperity for Scotland’s people.

We currently measure such things in pounds and pence. Scotland’s finance secretary has now said that is how it will remain for as far ahead as any of us can see. Through both the short and the medium term. Well into the 2020s certainly. But, for me, the really striking thing in his Scotsman interview this week was the reasoning he offered for kicking the prospect of an independent Scotland joining the euro into the far yonder.

He and his party want nothing to do with the moves towards tighter fiscal integration within the existing eurozone. Mr Swinney doesn’t think fiscal union in Europe is either achievable or desirable. Countries, he tells us, should have the flexibility “to run themselves as they see fit”. Of course national economies should exercise “fiscal discipline”. But that is their individual responsibility. Collective pacts or treaties on fiscal conformity simply don’t work.

Given their current plight, were the 17 existing members of the eurozone to follow that advice, it is arguable there won’t even be a euro for Scotland to join in 2025 or whenever. However, if it’s to be sterling for the foreseeable future, the SNP’s stated position on fiscal discipline, as far as the euro is concerned, raises huge and as-yet unanswered questions about how it is going to negotiate an independent Scotland’s continued participation in a new sterling zone, including the Bank of England continuing its role as lender of last resort to an independent Scotland.

Mr Swinney says there will be “dialogue” with the Bank of England, but no negotiations with the government of the rest of the UK, over these plans. That view seems to be driven by a nationalist conviction that sterling and the Bank of England as a central bank are collective assets of the existing United Kingdom that both parties to the Treaty of 1707 will have a say over in any break-up.

There are other assets and liabilities of that union that the SNP wants nothing to do with. The Trident bases on the Clyde are an obvious example. But the First Minister has even suggested an independent Scotland would want nothing to do with the liabilities of the two big commercial banks, RBS and Lloyds, currently part-owned by the UK taxpayer, some of their exposure underwritten by that same Bank of England.

If Mr Salmond means what he says about their liabilities, one must presume he doesn’t want an independent Scotland to have a share of any return when they are finally returned to the private sector. As I pointed out in this space on 14 January, these two banks, incorporating Scotland’s 300-year-old twins, Royal and Bank of Scotland, could end up, post-independence, as rest-of-the-UK institutions with no more than branches here.

There are other assets, notably North Sea oil, where an independent Scotland would claim a geographic lion’s share. But, in the event of a yes vote, it is within this context of protracted horse-trading that the precise nature of Scotland’s continued participation in sterling and our access to the Bank of England would have to be thrashed out.

In Mr Swinney’s proposed dialogue with Threadneedle Street, the pitch would presumably be some solemn and binding gentleman’s agreement that an independent Scotland would pursue fiscal discipline while trying to use all the economic levers independence brings to achieve a consistently higher trend rate of growth than the rest of the UK. That’s the inexorable logic of his dismissive comments on tighter fiscal union within the eurozone.

But the last thing the Bank of England will want is the prospect of becoming the central bank for all of a fragmenting UK, where one of the constituent nation states wants to use its regained sovereignty to pursue a much more expansionist growth policy than its immediate neighbours, albeit one adorned with promises of continuing fiscal rectitude. Mervyn King must be having a quiet chuckle to himself. He won’t be around when this prospect crystalises, if it ever does.

Of course some argue there are clear precedents for what the SNP is proposing. On these pages yesterday George Kerevan cited the creation of the Irish Free State in 1922, when the Irish pound was pegged to sterling and Dublin banks kept their reserves in London. Of course that newly-independent Ireland remained for many years a pretty impoverished state with few natural resources. It was in no position to destablise sterling.

Scotland is already the most prosperous part of the UK, outwith the south-east of England, with reserves of oil on its doorstep. Its initial ambition is not to be poorer. But to be much richer still. And George’s sketch of the Irish parallel stops well short of the creation of the Central Bank of Ireland in 1943, the punt’s entry to the European Exchange Rate mechanism in the 1970s or, over the following two decades before the adoption of the euro, big swings of up to 25 per cent in the punt’s value against sterling.

He is much more forthcoming than John Swinney on the kind of serious fiscal conservatism that would be required of an independent Scotland without a central bank as lender of last resort if it were not to endure penal interest rates. But George’s prescription for how it could do that while going for growth at the same time is not convincing.

He offers as precedents on this Sweden and Finland in the 1990s. But both had their own currency and their own central bank. There was no euro then, only the ERM. And, of course, Sweden still hasn’t joined the euro. Their circumstances then are quite different from an independent Scotland attempting to stay with sterling, persuade the Bank of England to remain its lender of last resort, all on a promise of continuing fiscal discipline.

If and when the negotiations start for real, the least the rest of the UK will demand, I suspect, will be that the terms of Scotland’s continued participation in a sterling zone will be a binding treaty, with associated fiscal rules, on continued monetary union. And, as John Kay observed this week, that is certainly a possibility. But, as he also noted, “it might cause people to start wondering what the point of independence was in the first place”. One footnote. John is no longer a member of Alex Salmond’s Council of Economic Advisers.

• Join the debate. A Question of Independence: How will the referendum work?, 9th March Edinburgh. Book now for a highly-charged and thought-provoking event.

Comments

There are 29 comments to this article

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 2

• 1
• 2
• Next >
• Show all

29

rider000

Sunday, February 5, 2012 at 10:26 AM

This is all nonsense - the Bank of England is not going to underwrite a foreign country with English, Welsh and Northern Irish taxpayer lender of last resort insurance. End of.

• Report Unsuitable

28

rider000

Sunday, February 5, 2012 at 10:23 AM

15 Handsome Scotsman Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 01:43 AM Thats a big ten pound note. Must be inflation.................. It's clearly been blown up so it can fit King Alex on it in 2016.

• Report Unsuitable

27

Spooked

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 01:55 PM

#25 - You ARE making it up. LIke all SNP policy, made up with blind optimism to suit the conditions of the day and ready for change the day after tomorrow. One day you may have to actually defend a policy in the real world i.e. without the option of saying you'd have done it differerent with hindsight. That's when the real problems start and it'll be Scotland that pays and byt hat I don't mean the Oaf Eck and his minions I mean me and you. Just as the population of iceland, ireland and now Greece Spain etc. are paying

• Report Unsuitable

26

Colonialtoff

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 01:21 PM

Scotland will have nothing to fear because Westminster will be controlling it's budget. It's called a referendum on staying the same or staying the same. I bet the question will be worded in a bias manner towards staying the same but calling it independence.

• Report Unsuitable

25

and I'm not making this up

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 01:02 PM

Comment removed by moderator

24

Colonialtoff

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 01:01 PM

The problem is that if Scotland had their own currency the Scottish pound but pegged, then it would be hard to float with a good outcome. The price of oil is high because the middle east is in turmoil as is Africa. When they settle down they will sell oil to rebuild, and the markets will calm down sending the price back down. Therefore Scotland's main income would be seen as volatile by the markets and credit rating agencies. at this point Scotland would run at a large deficit with high borrowing costs.

• Report Unsuitable

23

Spooked

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 12:28 PM

And another thing. If the goal of indepedence is to remove Wesminster's influence in all things Scottish. Why is the SNP so keen to get Threadneedle street to take control instead. Surely its best to be involved in a government than ask permission from the same government's institutions with no involvement. What the SNO is asking for isn't independence, its swapping co-operation for subservience.

• Report Unsuitable

22

Spooked

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 12:24 PM

All I see here is the SNP saying it'll be all right on the night, everyone will do as we want and life will be easy. Whereas the Bank of England is staying quiet and offering no such re-assurances. Until both parties to any agreement have commented then the words of one are just pure blind optimism. Having now queried the SNP, will I now be, charged and found guilty of being a traitor.Hmm, looks like it according to Eck's minions

• Report Unsuitable

21

Colonialtoff

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 10:57 AM

20 the BOE is not obliged just because it did the same for Ireland many years ago in a different world and to a different country. The fact is that today the credit ratings agencies will penalise th UK for just taking Salmonds word for it instead of a treaty and going by the rhetoric he has fired at the English I hardly think we would put ourselves out for him. Plus he said he would not talk to Westminster about it. So Westminster is hardly likely to help. The man is so stupid he thinks that the BOE is just an independent bank. Now who the he'll would trust someone with a currency if they are clueless as to how it works

• Report Unsuitable

20

and I'm not making this up

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 09:56 AM

Comment removed by moderator

19

Colonialtoff

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 09:21 AM

14 the BOE is not a state bank for Scotland if it is outside the UK. It is actually owned by the UK government hence it's a .org website and reports to Westminster.

• Report Unsuitable

18

abc

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 09:21 AM

The 'Bank of England' we have today is a central bank, not a 'bank' in any meaningful sense of the word, any more than the UK's Treasury has treasure in it. These are just words from Ye Olden Days. The Bank of England is a stautory body whose powers are entirely set out in the Bank of England Acts. It has no power to agree any of the things Mr Swinney talks about. Mr Swinney is talking about an agreement with the UK government to alter the statutes relating to the Bank of England to allow the UK's government's monetary authority to perform certain functions for another country. Mr Kerewan speaks plain English and he writes "He[Mr Swinney] affirms he would keep the pound and negotiate a deal with the rest of the UK (or RUK) for the Bank of England to..." Mr Swinney's contorted language about the Bank of England which airbrushes the UK Government - the one he actually wants a long-term treaty with - out of the picture is unhelpful. The more he does this, the more he convinces me that the agreement he wants from the UK government won't work. Any treaty that starts off with the goverment of the country with no central bank saying who they do and don't want to talk to in the government departments of the country with the currency and the central bank won't work.

• Report Unsuitable

17

Colonialtoff

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 09:10 AM

Scotland owns 8percent of all UK assets? That means the rest of the UK own the other 92 percent of all UK assets. Oil is a UK asset as is the whiskey exports. Does this man seriously think he can say to the 92 percent majority that what is yours is part owned by me and what is mine is mine.

• Report Unsuitable

16

footdee

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 01:46 AM

Graham has new friends-------------------A pro-Union campaign calling itself "Scotland says No!" has recently been launched. In a press release the organisation says: "Following the recent proclamations of Alex Salmond and the SNP, a coalition of pro-Union loyal factions have declared their intent to launch a wide-reaching, professional campaign to safeguard the United Kingdom, called Scotland says NO!" The press release mentions that the campaign will be officially launched in Edinburgh in April, with a march and rally. "Scotland says NO!" is led by former BNP councillor Mike Golding, who resigned as a councillor in Sevenoaks in Kent in 2011 after local residents complained that he had "done nothing". He later left the BNP to found his own right wing extremist party, calling it the Britain First movement.

• Report Unsuitable

15

Handsome Scotsman

Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 01:43 AM

Thats a big ten pound note. Must be inflation.

• Report Unsuitable

Order by:

• Newest first
• |
• Oldest first

Page 1 of 2

• 1
• 2
• Next >
• Show all

Logged in as:

Comment here. Start typing your comment here:

Post comment

Please adhere to our Community guidelines

Your view

Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.