A promise delivered
Youβll remember that Alex Salmond told his party conference at the weekend that Scotland, with oil included, would be the third wealthiest nation in Europe.
Youβll remember further that he based this assertion on what he said were official Scottish Government figures. Along with others, I sought sight of these figures. Rather persistently, in my case.
They have been published today. They assert that, sans oil, Scotland is joint 10th in the European wealth league, measured via GDP per capita. (Thatβs alongside Germany and Finland.) Bottom three, for comparison, are Latvia, Bulgaria and Romania.
In that table, the UK as a whole, including North Sea output, is placed seventh, behind Luxembourg, Ireland, the Netherlands, Austria, Denmark and Belgium.
Assume that 75% or 90% of the oil is in Scottish hands, and the position changes. On either oil scenario, Scotland is ranked third, behind super-wealthy Luxembourg and the Celtic Tiger of Ireland.
For guidance, the figures used are from 2005. As in the GERS exercise, which seeks to measure the financial position of Scotland vis a vis the UK, there are caveats attached.
In publishing GERS, Andrew Goudie, the Chief Economic Adviser to the Scottish Government, previously stressed that it told us nothing about the position which might actually emerge under independence.
On this occasion, he says that he is setting out a βpossible variation in accounting practiceβ: that is, transferring oil revenues to the Scottish account.
He adds: βIt does not make any further assumptions and does not model any wider effects which might be concomitant with the transfer of a share of North Sea output to Scotland.β
These wider effects might increase or decrease Scotlandβs wealth.
That aside, expect the first minister, quite understandably, to make much more use of this data (alongside todayβs intriguing analysis of spending relativities in The Herald).
Expect the opposition parties, now that they at last have sight of the calculations, to scrutinise them carefully.
So, a promise, eventually, delivered. Well done. Now about those 1,000 extra police officersβ¦
I'm 
Comments
Any chance you can put a link to this report, so that we can all have a look?
Finally, data that shows, one way or another, Scotland IS A VIABLE NATION in anyones terms. Add in the oil (lets say we even get 10% of that) and weΒ΄d still be doing damn well for ourselves compared to most other nations, including the disUK.
Surely, we are not going to keep getting the same old Unionist "we cannae dae it" mantra after this? Surely, in fact, its not IF we can be viable as an Independent Nation, but HOW MUCH BETTER OFF we would be.
Wake up fellow countrymen, its time to bring Scotland in line with the rest of the nations of the world.
Independence, now!
As pointed out, "wealth" is measured by GDP against population. The only reason that an independent Scotland (with or without the oil) would get ranked so highly is because of its very small population. It has at least two million less people than Greater London. This position in the "wealth league tables" may sound good news for the Nationalists pushing for independence, but as always in life there is a flip side. The tiny population of an independent Scotland would mean that it would be dwarfed in every aspect of European political debate where votes are weighted. What price independence if you find yourself pushed around by every other country in Europe through the offices of the EU? Frying pan and fire spring to mind.
Brian
Can you put your investigative hat on and get me an answer that is bothering me. (I have also asked the question in the Heralds article)
If someone works in Scotland for an English based company (Tesco and Asda spring to mind as they have so many employees) does the tax and national insurance they pay count as taxation raised in England or Scotland? If it is counted as English taxes it could make a big difference to these figures.
I think the Whiskey duty comes under English revenue if the company eg Deagio has its head office in England. Is this the case?
This is fantastic news! I look forward to a much more positive Holyrood election next time around, none of the previous negative campaigning from the Unionist parties... this clearly makes the case for more powers to the point of fiscal autonomy... will there be many retractions from the London based media?
Oooh! Must've hurt to write that one Brian. . . .
I have gone from sitting on the fence re independence to having one leg well and truly swinging in favour of it. As a first time SNP voter I am nothing but impressed by Alex Salmond and his Government.
"Scotland, with oil included, would be the third wealthiest nation in Scotland"
really?
"Youβll remember that Alex Salmond told his party conference at the weekend that Scotland, with oil included, would be the third wealthiest nation in Scotland."
Who are the first two wealthiest nations in Scotland? :)
Imagine the possibilities that could acrue to Scotland from receiving the real value of not only oil, but fisheries, power generation and sales of fresh water?
Scotland's natural resources are just as important to her economy as is the London financial markets and South East of England.
The difference is that Scotland cannot control her assets nor can she benefit from them. Would any of us accept that scenario for ourselves? Would the other members of the UK accept it if the roles were reversed?
Instead of bigotry and bias, is it not time for all of the UK to have a clear look at the real figures and then choose the best path for each of us?
Well, as my wee Granny used to say - ye can only hide the very obvious for so long. Perhaps we should make much of these figures - out them - investigate them - discuss them in a rational manner...
...or do the Scottish Unionists simply fuddle such Scotland specific meanderings even more?? What a shameful situation to bear witness too. God alone knows what's a-brewing in 'Club cannae' as Nicol, Wendy and Annabel dig up even more tosh about how we'd simply not be able to progress as a nation - or worse - that we're DEFINITELY better off making the most of life through 'subsidies' [see 'Campaign for an English Parliament!] from London and the South-East.
Beggars belief.
Interesting too, in reading the reaction of English parliamentarians at
Whereas I fully support an English parliament, much of these people assume a general Scottish conspiracy - where the First Minister and Mr.Brown are in fact in cahoots. The whole Herald report is not to be trusted, though I've yet to understand why. Follow the blog long enough, and even Mr.Cameron is part of the extended Scottish Raj.
And the oil? Mostly Englands. The Maritime border between the nations points due North at 45 degrees - on both coasts - apparently, thereby gifting England most of the waters off Scotland.
Or at least that's the way it once was before dastardly Scottish tinkering. Rather like the cones vet's put on sick dogs.
What lunacy!
And what fascinating political times we live in!
Scots on one side who fight hard to ensure the nation DOES NOT progress - as we blossom through Union, an English on the other side who fight hard in insisting Scotland SHOULD go it alone, as long as the oil stays in England, and the Scottish giro's from the SE stop.
The truth is somewhere in the middle, and like all truths, is quite a simple one.
Scotland can - clearly - go it alone. With her oil thanks. And don't get any ideas about our water either. ;o) Not interested in any curious 'aerial' border discussions. Clouds some way North of Gretna are Scottish.
England should embrace her own parliament outside the joint fudge of Union.
On a handshake please - with a a measure of common sense and some neighbourliness at that...
>well i returned for a visit after
>43 years and noticed england
>is a third world country and
>scotland still to achieve that
>height on the ladder.sad but true.
I think you'll find that with current Oil Prices Mr Salmond's figures are not far off the mark
Oil prices in 2005 were around $50 dollars a barrel
Today's price of $92 dollars a barrel near double any estimates made at that point in time.
Additionally recent survey off North West Scotland are showing promising results, speculators are already looking at land which may be utilised for installation of oil supply bases.
You may or may not be aware that Scotland has just lost a Β£600,000,000 new energy project to the MIddle East as Westminster could not make a decision and dithered uncecessarily, the outcome being that business in the North East of Scotland has lost out on a major project which would have brought millions of pounds to the local economy, and put Scotland at the forefront of Green Energy.
Another case of Westminster not looking after Scotland's interests.
Well done Alex. I had full confidence you were right on this.
And re the 1000 extra policeman - as long as there are 1000 extra on the beat (preferrably on foot)that will do fine for me (and most folk I believe). What we want is visible presence. If the Govt are finding that spending is tighter than they thought it wont worry the average man in the street that the 1000 more on the beat aren't totally new recruits.
Good work Brian! Are the figures online anywhere?
"So, a promise, eventually, delivered. Well done. Now about those 1,000 extra police officersβ¦"
Tomorrow will you be trying to claim that the above is actually a quote from the Labour Party and not your personal view (see Brian's blog passim and previous denials)?
So - this confirms that an Independent Scotland is perfectly financially viable without oil.
But we do have oil, and that at $90 a barrel and rising.
'(alongside todayβs intriguing analysis of spending relativities in The Herald)'
I hope parenthesising the above comment does not confer footnote status, as the Herald article attracted c 400 posts online!
When can we expect a dedicated blog from you on the subject Brian?
As someone who makes regular visits down south I have become concerned that both the red tops and the broadsheets have been headlining with how English taxpayers are subsidising Scotland. They are not quite Kelvin Mackenzie in tone (yet!) but once a bandwagon starts it can be difficult to apply the brakes.
The Tory MP for Sale, Graham Brady, appears to be waging a one-man war against Scotland's funding, again based on half-truths and misinformation, so the Herald article should be cut and pasted and e-mailed to every English media outlet. If we could expend the same energy as the Tartan Army when voting for the 'Jim Baxter Bridge' in the online competition for the new Wembley we might just have an impact.
On a more serious note the situation is now at the stage where something needs to be done, and if this were in a country other than Scotland there would be a Panorama special. Any chance the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ could be true to its charter Brian and inform and educate the viewers in England on this and at least make them aware there is an equal and compelling argument for the defence?
Thanks for letting us know that the findings are now publicly available - can you tell us where please?
Also, given the UK wide impact of the study conducted by the Herald can you please tell me why it is receiving no coverage from the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ?
Are Scots not due an abject apology Brian for all the lies told by unionist politicians and eagerly printed and broadcast by journalists like yourselves over the years.
Scots needed to know 10, no 20, no 30, 40,50 years ago that Scotland could stand up for itself, and has always paid it's way in this world
You and your political kind have delibrately misled several generations of Scots and in doing so stolen their dreams and ambitions given them nothing but poverty of thought and sickness of mind in return.
Malcolm - I take your point about GDP per capita being an inadequate means of measuring wealth however, this is the standard measure - flaws and all - which allows ourselves to measure our performance against our neighbours. Scotland does not have a 'tiny population', unless your consider 5.1 million tiny. In addition, we currently have no influence in the EU, as Westminsterβs refusal to allow Scottish Government ministers to lead talks on fisheries illustrates. 'Tiny' Ireland seems to have done rather well out of the EU for a country with so little implied influence. History contradicts your thesis.
To be honest, who cares?
Scotland would be viable as an independent country, but there would be pluses and minuses, some of which I'm sure we cannot foresee now, if it were to happen.
It all boils down to whether you actually want it? Do you want to change to colour of the national flag? What really matters most to you?
To me the pattern of land ownership matters more, and that won't change if the flag changes colour.
The moral of the recent political story is that Minority government in devolved Scotland is viable. Somebody should have told Donald Dewar at the start, then we wouldn't have got 8 years of insipid, politically correct nonsense.
#3 Malcolm wrote:
"What price independence if you find yourself pushed around by every other country in Europe through the offices of the EU? Frying pan and fire spring to mind."
The SNP has promised an Independent Scotland would have a referendum on its position in the EU. We don't need to play their game and if we do we can negotiate our own position instead of having it done for us at Westminster.
And if Scots knew the way that even a minority interest such as motocycling was being hammered with ridiculous Euro laws we'd take nothing to do with it.
S'mise Donaidh