The Arguments for independence are even worse post Brexit

Well, we have it. The next independence referendum will most likely be held next year, or at some point soon thereafter. This news is not a surprise. The SNP have been in power for 10 years and people are starting, if arguably incredibly slowly, to wise up to their failures in government but also their cynical tactics to hide them. This I believe gives them a narrowing window with which to call and win a referendum, and hence, where we are now.

In addition, the combination of a suitable precondition in the form of Brexit, representing a clear split between rUK and Scotland, and the perfect storm of an absent opposition from anyone but the conservatives provides the best chance Sturgeon will likely ever get to achieve independence. But is this enough?

For one thing, the likely political terrain of Brexit, which this new referendum’s justification is based on, is somewhat dangerous for the SNP. This is because it is not clear that Scottish independence actually stops Scotland leaving Europe at all. Arguably it makes it much worse; both outside of Europe and outside of the UK.

Some argue that this is fine, as Scotland will be allowed to stay, however in 2014 the then EU president Barosso said that any newly independent Scotland would need to reapply for EU membership and would not automatically be able to rejoin.

This then creates three major additional brexit shaped problems for any independent Scotland “seeking an alternate path” to rUK, inside the European Union. The first of these is that they would need to seek agreement from all 27 other members of the European union.

On this issue, in some respects arguably, this is the best time for Scotland to apply for EU membership; many would argue that an antagonistic divorce between rUK and the EU could potentially mean many EU states are more likely to seek to manipulate negotiations with the UK by offering fast track membership, or at least not seek to block Scottish entry. This, however, seems unlikely.

For one thing Spain and Belgium have said in 2014 that they would not just veto a secessionist Scottish fast track membership of the European Union, but they would veto it outright in a bid to discourage other European secessionist movements, including their own. Spain has already said that it still maintains that position.

But this is not the end of the potential problems an independent Scotland would face trying to gain membership to the European Union, as it is not clear if it would even be eligible to apply, let alone be rejected. This is because all new members are expected to join the Euro, and in the process of doing so converge economically in terms of both government deficits and debt to GDP levels.

Specifically this means all EU states and candidate countries are required to have deficits below -3% of GDP. Anything above this will not be considered for candidature and any current member state with one will receive sanctions.

This applies also to government debt levels where EU candidature requires levels to be below 60% of GDP. For both of these criteria any values which exceed these levels will involve an EDP (Execcive defecit/debt procedure) involving a clear program to cut expenditure and raise taxes; so basically austerity.

The problem for Scotland in 2014 was that it was unlikely then, even before the oil price crash, that they would meet such levels; it is even more unrealistic now. As can be seen from the graphs below, oil prices and government taxation and expenditure have all gone in a very negative direction since the last vote, making the economic case for independence even weaker, and as a result EU membership would also be considerably less likely.

According to the institute for fiscal studies (IFS) in 2017, following the collapse and persistence in the low price of oil, the gap between Scotlands tax take and expenditure has reached £15 billion or 9.5% of GDP; the highest in the European Union.

This figure does not mean that Scotland can not be independent or gain membership of the EU eventually, but it does mean the SNP have to be grown up, decent and honest about the process and the sacrifices it involves making.

The government in Scotland would need to essentially cut, or raise in taxes, up to £15 billion from the expenditure of the newly formed Scottish state.

This would be a time a time of massive initial costs to the country anyway, further compounding any initial problems and strain. The costs would therefore need to come from cuts to the NHS, cuts in doctors, teachers, nurses and also increases in various types of taxation.

It is arguable for some that perfect sovereignty might be worth it, much like it was for brexiters, but it needs the SNP to be honest about this. So far their message has always been about how independence will allow Scotland to have its cake and eat it.

Unfortunately this is blatantly not the case and it is dishonest for the SNP to continue to suggest as much. They are not being honest with their electorate about the fact that for them, it is not about a better economic life for their citizens, but about something else more aloof and abstract entirely; ideological nationalism at all costs and sovereignty and self determination before living standards. Sound familiar?

It would however not be surprising, to see the SNP continue telling everyone they can have everything. To be everything to everyone has basically been the SNP way for a decade. We are in a position where even after 10 years of SNP control in Scotland, the problems the country experiences are, according to Nicola Sturgeon, either the fault of a Labour government over 10 years ago, or a UK government which increasingly has less and less legislative control in Scotland.

Their political model rests on loud left wing gesture politcis/rhetoric coupled with noisy national manoeuvres and gestures on independence. The problem is that it is becoming increasingly clear it has been at the expense of actual governance in the style they claim in Scotland.

An example of this failure is with regards to university access for disadvantaged students. In the past Scotland used to be similar to the rest of the UK in terms of the proportion of disadvantaged students going to university, however now this has dramatically changed.

According to UCAS, in 2016 Scottish students from a disadvantaged background are less then half as likely to go to university as those in England. In England 17% attend and 13.9% in Northern Ireland, but only 9% in Scotland. This is also in spite of Scotland popularly maintaining zero tuition fees for Scottish students.

Not only this, but the SNPs cap on university places, a policy required to pay for the maintenance of a no tuition fee policy, means demand for university access has grown by 23% since 2007, according to UCAS, but places have only grown by 9%. This gap and constraint is furthermore compounded by the lower level of bursary access for disadvantaged students in Scotland and has arguably caused the change in the number of qualified students failing to get a place 8,280 in 2007 to 16,645 today.

This problem for the SNP with Education is not limited to universities. According to PISA since 2006 Scotlands schools have continuously declined in the international league tables and are now no longer seen as the international example they used to be. In none of the core categories is Scotland above average in either English, Maths or Science anymore and is now behind all other nations in the UK, including 15pts behind the schools in England.

According to research from Edinburgh university, there has been a 20% drop in the number of candidates gaining a level 3–5 qualification and class sizes have increased for over 150,000 scottish students. Furthermore figures have also shown that three-quarters of S2 pupils from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do not have adequate numeracy skills.

In health the story is similar. Waiting times in 2016 declined from 87.1% being seen on time to 83% of patients starting treatment within 18 weeks; the Scottish governments target is 90% and is therefore increasingly failing Scotland.

Each of these areas are legislative domains to which Scotland has had control for sometime and which the SNP have had control of for up to 10 years. Their rhetoric, which is frequently characterised by anti austerity,pro investment in and protection of public services is therefore proving rather hollow and far from the reality of their governance.

On tax and the living wage the story is similar. In the 2015 election the SNP adopted Labours policy of a 50p progressive top rate of tax and, indeed, now has powers in Holyrood to increase levels of taxation. This policy, sadly, has not only not been introduced but has been voted against when Labour tried to introduce such a proposal. Worse still they actually did the opposite by increasing the tax threshold for higher earners, giving those with the richest incomes a tax cut.

On the living wage the SNP has introduced it in some areas, which deserves credit, however it has also cynically voted against it on numerous occasions for political advantage. On one occasion when extending to Scottish public service workers even claiming EU laws prevented them from doing so, which was embarrassingly contradicted by EU official themselves.

The point of all of this is that it is highly unlikely that the SNP will be honest about the costs independence required, if you agree sovereignty is worth it, and so the Scottish public deserve an honest assessment of what it entails. Based on their actual record in governance and their history, their plan is to clearly continue their policy of “talking left” and walking the bare minimum they can get away with in order to be everything to everyone and promise Scotland it can have its cake and eat it. ..