Separate Scotland ‘will lose defence contracts’
Philip Hammonds remarks raised fresh fears. Picture: Anthony Devlin/PA Wire
SCOTLAND could lose defence contracts worth billions of pounds and thousands of jobs if it becomes independent, the UK government has warned.
In his first defence questions at Westminster, new Defence Secretary Philip Hammond gave the first clear statement from a UK government minister that an independent Scotland would lose out on contracts that underpin the shipbuilding industry in Fife and on the Clyde.
His response to a question from Scottish Labour MP Thomas Docherty fuelled fears Scotland would be treated like other foreign countries if it were to break away.
However, the SNP accused Mr Hammond of “scaremongering”.
Mr Docherty, whose Fife constituency includes Rosyth, where two new aircraft carriers are being built, asked Mr Hammond: “Will you confirm that if there was a separate Scotland, the Ministry of Defence would have to look again at the long-term refitting options for our aircraft carriers?”
The Defence Secretary replied: “It is unlikely HM Forces would wish to use facilities in a fully independent Scotland in the way they would wish to use facilities within the United Kingdom.”
That response heaps further pressure on the Scottish Government over its plans for an independence referendum.
Last week, an independent report suggested that, if Scotland were to separate from the UK, it would struggle to join the European Union and, if it were allowed in, would be forced to join the euro and pay £8 billion towards the eurozone’s stability fund.
The report also said contributions to the EU would almost double per head in Scotland because it would probably lose the UK rebate won by former PM Margaret Thatcher.
Constitutional law expert Professor Adam Tomkins, of Glasgow University, then warned it would be illegal for the Scottish Government to call a referendum or even for SNP ministers to ask civil servants to help them prepare for one.
The Defence Secretary’s comments yesterday increased fears over the impact of independence on Scotland’s economy.
EU rules allow member states to give preference with defence contracts to domestic firms, instead of being forced to go to open tender across Europe.
This has underpinned about 9,000 shipbuilding jobs at the Rosyth base run by Babcock and in the Govan and Scotstoun yards on the Clyde run by BAe Systems, with contracts for the carriers and Type 23 frigates.
With five English shipyards also seeking extra business, there had been concerns they would be preferred by the MoD should Scotland break away.
Rosyth is expected to have the contract to refit and maintain the new Queen Elizabeth-type carriers, even though some analysts believe Brest in France is cheaper, and there has been a campaign to award the contract to the yard in Portsmouth where the ships will be based.
Mr Hammond took advice from defence equipment minister Peter Luff before answering Mr Docherty’s question. The response was the first time the UK government has laid down a clear marker over its likely relationship with an independent Scotland.
Afterwards, Mr Docherty said: “The Secretary of State has confirmed what the trade unions and my colleagues have long feared, which is that a separate Scotland would lose thousands of highly skilled engineering jobs and billions of pounds of work.
“The SNP now need to give us information on what they would create in terms of a Scottish navy to replace the contracts lost by separating from the United Kingdom. Otherwise, they will be killing off the shipbuilding industry.”
Mr Hammond’s comments appear to counter SNP assertions that the UK might continue to use military facilities in an independent Scotland, including bases.
The coalition is coming under pressure from parts of England to increase the military presence there, and the decision by Mr Hammond’s predecessor, Liam Fox, to almost double the size of the army in Scotland at the expense of English bases has upset some Tory back-benchers.
The Nationalists dismissed Mr Hammond’s comment as “just more anti-Scottish scaremongering from the Tories without a stitch of evidence”, arguing that the greatest loss of defence jobs had been caused by Westminster.
The party’s Westminster leader and defence spokesman Angus Robertson said: “The irony is that Westminster has presided over a £5.6 billion defence underspend and 10,500 defence job losses in Scotland over the last decade.
“It is not the London government that makes the yards successful – it is the second-to-none Scottish skills base and technical expertise that brings orders to the yards, and that will continue under independence. In reality, and in all circumstances, Scottish yards will secure orders on the basis of their skills and formidable record of delivery.”
He added: “With independence, Scotland will dump the expensive and obscene Trident nuclear weapons and invest in professional, conventional forces. It is clear that, far from Scotland benefiting from a defence dividend with the Union, we have in fact been victim of a defence downturn.”
Neither Babcock nor BAe Systems wished to respond to Mr Hammond’s comments, while union leaders, who have in the past expressed grave concerns about the effect of independence, were unavailable.
In his own question in the Commons yesterday, Mr Robertson said plans to replace the RAF with the army at the Kinloss base in his constituency would lead to fewer personnel there and asked whether an economic impact assessment had been carried out.
Last week, the MoD announced the arrival of 930 army air support engineers at the base two years earlier than expected, with the numbers likely to rise to 1,200 by 2015.
Armed forces minister Nick Harvey said: “I acknowledge that the number of personnel will be slightly smaller than that which has been there in the past, but the fact of the matter is that it is military considerations that have dictated what we have decided, and I hope that the honourable gentleman and his constituents will welcome the army into their community and will be grateful for the contribution they do make to the economy.”
Later, Mr Robertson said: “It is extraordinary that no economic assessment appears to have been made by ministers. The Moray economy is the most defence dependent in the country and has suffered terribly through the closure announcement of Kinloss as an RAF base.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 360 comments to this article
Page 1 of 24
Vote 'NO'
Friday, November 18, 2011 at 07:07 PMRostrum would close as there would be little or no work, unless Fsheries protection vessels count. I can understand why Separatists argue the opposite, of course. They do so because the truth coming out would devastate their cause.
deliverus
Friday, November 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM356Virgil---I will wish you Bon Voyage and hope your future ventures are successful.------ Scotland also has a big stick but unfortunately for the time being we can not get both hands on it.Only time will tell if we can manage to grab our chance but for now goodbye.
Hearts Upwards
Friday, November 18, 2011 at 08:27 AMPossession is nine tenths of the law. Presently the aircraft carriers are Scotlands. Seriously though , the current defence contracts are for UK. That means they are Scotlands too. Post-independence Scotland would have its own defence contracts . Ships will be built to police our waters at the very least. Rosyth wont be a UK port now will it? no really it wont.!! Do you understand that??
Virgil
Friday, November 18, 2011 at 05:35 AMdeliverus; .. my recent post adds more error, pieline should read pipeline; although with the US 14% unemployment rate and rising, we may very well have to run a pieline. I never use a Spell Check and rely on grey cells, but I guess maybe I'm beginning to show age. I hope not! By the way, I am flying off to Brazil tomorrow so this is probably the last episode in this amusing conversation. Good-bye!
Virgil
Friday, November 18, 2011 at 05:23 AM355 .. deliverus; ...does not Nationalism, Communism or "any" other ism include Unionism? In the business of Wealth Management I would not spread my portfolio on any venture in Scotland at this time! China, Brazil and India are the emerging economies and it to them my travel leads.On a visit to China last March I met with the Preident of Shanghai's Board of Trade who stated that China would decrease its export, to the US, of some manufactured goods by 5% and stimulate its GDP by an equal amount. I note from today's International bulletins that this assumption now bears integrety and is close to fruition. With China holding $1.7 trillion in US Bonds and the stalemate in US Government coupled with the threat of the US Economy about to go into a tailspin, a very smart move. Another discouraging message was given to the US today. This one from Canada's PM who (like all of us on this continent) frustrated with the US Congress and the State of Nebraska's flip flop on the CanadaUS Pipeline,has threatened to withdraw from the project and re-route the line from the Oilsands at Fort McMurray in Alberta to Prince Rupert BC for the overseas tanker route, something that China keeps requesting in the Asian Rim Trade Talks. This threat also has the support of most Canadians who are opposed to the pieline for environmental reassons Did you know that Canada is the biggest supplier of oil to the US as well as being its largest trading partner, and our Banking system is regulated and the safest in the world. We hold a big stick in both hands.
deliverus
Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 08:08 PM354Virgil------My post was not, intended in any way to be patronising but was a genuine attempt to be conciliatory. Your definition of patronising seems only to apply to posts in reply to yours not the content of your own.However your latest post does require rebuttal as your inference that "at the present time any investment in Scotland could be precarious" does not seem to be borne out by the facts as several major companies have each announced a fairly sizable investment in Scotland very recently. I would have thought that Mr. Osborne`s £2 billion tax hike on the oil companies would perhaps have made companies reflect more than the prospect of Scottish independence. Scotland is at the moment being well managed under very difficult circumstances.----- As you say business does not like unknown or unsettled conditions but they will always take a pragmatic view and will deal with each situation as it arises. Some may even spot opportunities. Once conditions are settled the difference between a Scottish Government attempting to attract investment will always be more focused than Westminster and will make decisions and policy more appropriate than a government which has to keep many more divergent self interest groups on side.The world is not perfect and neither you, I or Angela Merkel will ever make it so. Therefore I will fight my corner for what I believe in and you can fight your corner but at the end of the day it is the ballot box which will have the final say. By the way you missed out an --ism Unionism.----I wonder if dear old Sigmund would have something to say about that?
Virgil
Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 06:36 PM353 deliverus, rather than patronize me, please take time to read comprehensively my initial post. There you will find that I made no comparison between Scotland and Quebec, I offered empirical data on a parallel, not similar, discourse. The empirical matter is that twenty seven major companies moved there Financial Operaations from Montreal to Toronto and have never returned. This was at a total loss of over thirty thousand jobs.from one City, not one Province! As students of Eco. 101 learn quickly, it matters not thatit be Scotland, Quebec or the backof the moon, and again it matters not if systems there be Nationalist, Communist or any other "isn", if the country is in a state of uncertain transition it threatens the stability of the Market. Surely this elementary concept cannot escape you! It is the "Capitalism" of the West which has caused the development of the "Communism or State Capitalism" of the East. Nationalism and parochialism and again, any other ism, do not manufacture automobiles and dishwashers,Industrial stability does all of that and at the present time any investment in Scotland could be precarious. World economics and compliance with world business leaders at significant levels has been my life in and out of truculent times.
deliverus
Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 01:01 PM352Virgil ----I am still perplexed as to why you felt the need in your initial post to compare the situation in Quebec with that of Scotland and your latest in depth explanation does not remove my curiosity. I will leave it at that. However I will apologise for doubting your authenticity. Your use of North American words and phrases did make me believe you were not all you seemed to be. As I can see from your advanced years I have still time to catch up on the countries visited battle. I wish you good health and many more years of active participation in the life you so obviously enjoy. Your warnings about the possible consequences of independence I can not accept but there is still plenty of time for you to change your ways.
Virgil
Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 11:00 AM351 deliverus; It is obvious that you still lack reading comprehension, go back to my posts! The referendum and the Meech Lake Accord set the stage for the Quebec dispute. This was not a vote for Independence, it was a vote on Seperation and language has never been the issue. For your information, New Brnswick is the only "official" bi-lingual and bi-cultural Province under the Canadian Constitution. Quebec already has its own Laws under the French Civil system and also its own Pension Plan (QPP) while the rest of the country has the Canadian Pension Plan (CPP). Quebec does not want to leave Canada, it seeks exemption from the Canadian Constitution after its repatriation from the British North America Act, the archaic document which once held Canada to Dominion status. Canada is much more complex than Scotland. Here there is a Federal Government , Ten Provincial Governments and One Territorial Government. With the exception of Quebec all have the CPP, but including Quebec all have their own Labour Laws and their own Health Care Plans. A person travelling from British Columbia to Ontario must buy extra Travel Insurance (same as travelling to the UK) Scotland does not have that division with the rest of the country. Now for the rest of your comments, I don't intend to continue with childish bantr over the number of countries we have visited but I will say the your twenty-seven is not even close. I am indeed enjoying a sort of retirement although I am still a Senior member in a family business which has recently expanded to Brazil, I was educated at Glasgow University (where I met my Canadian wife) after WW2 in which I served with distinction in the Royal Navy form 1942 -1946. I took my Phd. at McGill in Montreal and took tenure at UBC where I taught Economics ad Political Science and where I still hold Emeritus status. I am now eighty-eight years old and score my age on the Golf course and I sail a 27ft yawl and when my son accompanies me I fly a great little (not so little seats four) Float plane Good health, good life and have eaten lots and lots of hot dinners. Good night!
deliverus
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 11:14 PM350Virgil-----Your arrogance is only exceeded by your lack of argument in the present debate about Scottish independence.Your initial intervention was a treatise on the position Quebec allegedly found itself in after a failed independence referendum. Attempting I presume to warn Scots that this is the sort of fate we might find ourselves in if, and there is the rub, we should win independence.Quebec did not win independence and if I remember correctly they were subject to a barrage of abuse by the English speaking majority.Quebec was different in many respects from the position we find ourselves here in Scotland in that a majority of the people of Quebec spoke a different language and many of the French speaking majority had serious cultural difference from the rest of Canada.The argument here in Scotland is not whether we are different but can we do things differently to the benefit of the Scottish people. We have many professors who have given their opinion on matters pertinent to this debate and like economists I have yet to come across a one handed professor. Enjoy your semi retirement.By the way I have visited more countries of the world on business than you have had (hot Dinners is maybe an exaggeration) but I think the latest count is 27 so I have done the "math" I`m certain that any paper you wish to present to the Scottish Government will be treated with the respect that your obvious bias merits.
Virgil
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 10:47 AMdeliverus: oh my. your latest post now indicates that you are ready to Castle; or at least crawl into some dark corner whereupon literacy is blind and will offer you immunity for your hopeless endeavour. It is obvious to me that your fortes' are not reading comprehension, geographical logistiics or even any knowledge of Scotland's political scene. To translate for you, please re-read my posts and if you find some difficulty with the text ask any schoolboy for assistance. He will point out that my observations are not from "afar" but as a Scottish resident with International connection.and that there is an eight hour time difference between the Pacific Northwest and any place in Scotland. For example time as I write is 2:43 am Wednesday (Vancouver Island) and you should be having morning coffee as it is now 10:44am Wednesday in Scotland. As a Professor Emeritus I can offer you tuition, free of charge, on all worldly matters. Now I am off to bed!
FB-Rank
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 08:31 AMComplete boll0cks because the assumption is that Scotland will be 'kicked' out which it wouldn't be. No more than England would. They are also looking at our electoral system because it delivered a party to government which the unionists didn't intend.So much for democracy. Now what are our boys fighting for in war zones? Ah yes, to put an end to terrorism and to bring democracy to these places. This is state sponsored terrorism and anti-democracy at its very unionist best with this unionist paper only too keen to report this nonsense ans scaremongering. Shame on these reporters. I can't wait for an independent Scotland. I was out leafletting last night and it felt good. The first thing we will do in an independent nation is sort out the terrible reporting quality in Scotland. Set a standard of reporting which no media organisation should fall below. The Scotsman's days are numbered and the writing is on the wall.
Anagach
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 08:18 AM344 Billy Boy Who cares about where we live or how. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well its important how we live, especially taking your analogy, when its inside an abusive marriage.
Anagach
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 08:01 AM346 Guybrush @ Scotindy A couple of patrol boats won't employ many people and not for very long either. Delusions of grandeur, my dear, delusions of grandeur. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe. But Defense spending in Scotland is around 6% of the MOD's budget, the contribution from Scotland is 9-10%. It doesn't take much arithmetic to see that Scotland spending its own defense contribution in Scotland would provide more. And those figures were before the RAF pulled out en-masse.
Guybrush
Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 05:31 AM@ Scotindy A couple of patrol boats won't employ many people and not for very long either. Delusions of grandeur, my dear, delusions of grandeur.
Page 1 of 24
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.