Eddie Barnes: The SNP is not going to make the case for independence without a very large dose of economics on the side
THIS time next week, as Scotland prepares to mark Burns Night, Alex Salmond will launch his referendum proposals to the nation. There is no mistaking the romantic symbolism of the date for the Nationalists.
But the choice of 25 January for the Nats’ big day may have some real world significance as well. Also on that day, the Office of National Statistics will provide the latest set of grim growth statistics for the UK. They may just provide the ideal backdrop for the SNP to launch its Big Idea.
Those GDP figures are expected to show that the UK economy has come to an abrupt halt. The respected National Institute of Economic and Social Research estimated last week the exact figure will be 0.1 per cent. It is a measure of the country’s puny expectations that this might be viewed as good news, at least preventing headlines about a fall back into recession. But it is hardly evidence of rude good health. On the high street, retailers are reporting back on a woeful Christmas period, in which they only persuaded people to spend thanks to costly discounts. Britain appears to be heading for a Japanese bout of stagnation – not anything catastrophic like floods, drought and pestilence, but more like endless drizzle.
While the political class in Scotland has spent the last week poring over the minutiae of the referendum and the relative merits of devo-more, devo-plus and devo-max, the reality of the flatlining economy is still the main issue for most voters. The SNP knows this well. And it knows it cannot make the case for independence without aligning it alongside peoples’ real lives. So it has made crystal clear, internally and externally, that the economy has to be the central argument. So the GDP figures, out on Mr Salmond’s big day, may serve the SNP’s purpose. Against the prospect of a flatlining Britain, the First Minister can be expected to conjure up his usual alluring message of how Scotland can, with independence, go its own way and prosper.
For the SNP’s opponents, this is a battleground they appear to fancy. The SNP may want to focus on pound-in-your-pocket arguments. Their opponents will respond by warning that if the SNP get their way, that pound could end up being a euro. The thorny issues of an independent Scotland’s currency and the economic handcuffs the country would still have to wear, independence or not, offer them rich pickings.
But SNP figures claim to be entirely untroubled. People, they say, just see these attacks as the usual noise that goes with the territory whenever the words “Scotland” and “independence” are raised. “If anything the negative attacks serve to undermine voters’ trust in those making them,” claims one senior SNP adviser. That all has a ring of truth. In former times, it was fear of the cost of independence which proved the SNP’s Achilles heel. But, as Britain continues its long march into austerity, it is clear that the old assumptions – like so many others than existed pre-crunch – may no longer apply.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Scottish independence: I don’t want ‘separatism’ says Sir Tom Farmer
- Call for sleaze inquiry into peer’s expenses
- Craig Levein insists Scotland will recover from US thrashing
- Man arrested after woman found dead in subway pool of blood
- Rangers administration: Duff & Phelps ‘hopeful’ that Taxman will agree to CVA
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Monday 28 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 15 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Cloudy
Temperature: 10 C to 16 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 21 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
Ron Greer
Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 04:58 PM14 Which will have their own best interests at heart and will have secured better salaries, expenses and pensions than the vast majority of Joe Public? Aye, of course that's a trick question!
Ron Greer
Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 02:52 PMWould any Unionist care to list and itemise the cash and kind benefits England gets out of the Union--say the top 5 for starters?
Ron Greer
Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 02:50 PM3 Now how mant £trillions of debt is the UK in?
jafurn
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 10:16 PMEdinburgers said at 15 "Cameron ( who I dont like ) has zero reason to want Scotland yet seems to be the only one speaking sense" On the subject of Scotland I would like some evidence as all I have ever heard from Mr Cameron is ridicule and bad jokes. Kon said at 16 "the Conservatives hands down, they are the only party committed to and actually dealing with the deficit" I think I read that the deficit would be somewhere in the region 150 Billion higher by 2015 than it was when the coalition was formed.
mordor
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 09:25 PM#16 Ken Clarke was a very good chancellor which makes me wonder why Osborne is in position....not widely respected in the business world is George- seen as driven by ideology rather than by economics in the same way as Gordon Brown was. Ken Clarke though, highly respected.
Kon
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 06:57 PM14 jafurn, the Conservatives hands down, they are the only party committed to and actually dealing with the deficit, the snp want to BORROW AND SPEND in a reckless attempt to appease the voters to keep them in power, Cameron HAS DONE nothing to help him stay in power but his actions have been for the benefit of our future. the LAST conservative GOVERNMENT actually handed over a country to Scottish labour THAT WAS DEFICIT FREE WITH A DEBT 3 QUARTERS LESS THAN NOW,
Edinburgers
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 03:50 PM#14 Is that a for real question? out of the 3 groups of sheisters you mention it has to be Cameron and Osborne! only people with the simple economic good of Scotland at heart - Labout want it for votes and the SNP want it for ego. Cameron ( who I dont like ) has zero reason to want Scotland yet seems to be the only one speaking sense. Lets discount the 2 Eds and concentrate on Salmond - he's a serial liar ( Rbs was purely Londons fault - cue official letters to Fred saying "we support you 100%" followed by later letters "we should have LOWER touch regulation" - on RBS alone this amounts to a 187bn hole - to put this into context this is the net benefit of North Sea Oil for 30 years ). I am all for a decent debate - the problem is the worst team is on our ( SNP ) side - he wants to delay for 2 years for NO good reason - let me vote now!!!!!!!!!!
jafurn
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 02:36 PMOn that question of the economics................ Who do you think would have the best interests of Scotland as their main focus................. a) D Cameron and G Osborne b) E Milliband and E Balls C) A Salmond and J Swinney
Maurice the Dolphin
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 02:25 PM"More Nats - Less Cuts" etc.. etc.. etc.. blah.. blah.. blah..
SNP for me
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 12:41 PMElsewhere in this paper, Scotlands economy shows growth over the year of 0.9%?... So thats 9x better than the uk as a whole hahaha... No economic case for separation? Laughable...
Broon Bairn
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 09:05 AMWho better to make the economic case for independence than a former oil economist and visiting professor of economics? Step foward Alex Salmond.... Personally, I don't believe that countries seek independence for purely economic reasons alone, anyway. I think self-respect has a lot to do with it. Mind you, from some of the unionist posts, there are folk out there who don't know the meaning of the phrase..
Family guy
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 08:30 AM9 - It actually makes the Unionist case a sticky one. While an indie campaign can make the figures look like we can be a prosperous country, somehow the Unionists have to make the case we are dependent on Westminster for handouts because we are too wee and too stupid. Of course, that means insulting 5 million people minus Grahamski, Kon, Indie the noo please and Media fur wan. That is why Alastair Darling has already signaled that he won't be heading the Scotch Dependence Campaign along with Kennedy because he knows it's a dead duck already.
Finnzz
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 08:12 AMProving the economic advantages of an independent Scotland is the easy part. Advertising that fact to the Scottish people in time for the referendum in the face of the continuing Unionist falsehoods is probably the hardest part.................................................Interesting survey in another website that rubbishes the claims of the Unionists that investment and business confidence in Scotland is being affected by uncertainty.......................................Quote "In comments to Channel 4, Doug Sawers, managing director of human resources giant Ceridian who are investing £16 million in their Glasgow operation and creating 300 new jobs, said: "Regarding a future Scottish referendum, at this stage, we are not worried. In the event that the country chooses independence, we have faith in the Scottish Government's approach to making Scotland more, not less, competitive. Recent news and speculation has not damaged Scotland's and Glasgow's prospects.".. end quote.
Family guy
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 08:11 AMEddie Barnes - any chance you can give us Scotlands figures instead of UK ones? Whya re you hiding the Scottish figures? Because we're doing nae bad?
douglas-home rule
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 08:06 AMWhat do we know? We know that Scotland has had historically low growth rates while in the Union and that successive Westminster Governments have done nothing to help.
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.