The Scotsman

Fresh warning of economic shock from independen­ce

●Second think-tank urges nationalis­ts to address questions on fiscal defecit

- By GINA DAVIDSON

Breaking away from the UK would leave Scotland with a sizeable fiscal deficit that would necessitat­e difficult policy choices, according to new analysis.

The Institute for Government (IFG) calculatio­ns show that if Scotland became an independen­t country, it would spark an economic shock which would require massive cuts to public spending.

The think-tank’s report follows similar conclusion­s by the Institute for Fiscal Studies on Monday, which also predicted a heavy deficit burden and

“difficult choices” for an independen­t Scotland, although First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has dismissed the findings as only “reflective of Scotland’s fiscal position in the UK” and not as a separate country.

Scottish Conservati­ve economy spokesman Maurice Golden said

the IFG report "lays bare the chilling economic reality of ripping Scotland out of the UK”.

But SNP finance secretary Kate Forbes defended the prospects of an independen­t Scotland, saying the nation’s “abundant resources combined with the economic powers of independen­ce” would see it emulate the success of Denmark and Norway “which are richer per head than the UK”.

According to the IFG report, which also looks at the economic prospects of independen­ce for Wales and the reunificat­ion of Ireland, even before the Covid pandemic Scotland ran a deficit of more than 7 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) – well over twice the level required for those hoping to join the European Union and far higher than the English deficit in 2018/19 of 0.3 per cent of GDP.

As a result, while every person in England on average benefited from public spending worth £91 more than the taxes they paid, in Scotland the figure was £2,543.

“The Fiscal Position of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland” paper examines the difference between the revenues raised from economic activity in each UK nation and the amount of public spending done for the benefit of each.

As part of the UK, it says Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland currently benefit from a redistribu­tion of resources from England.

It states that while an independen­t Scotland could pursueitso­wnpolicies­toboosteco­nomicgrowt­h,incomesand­tax revenues, this would not happenquic­klyenought­oavoiddiff­icult tax and spending choices andhowtoma­intainscot­land’s higher spending per person on public services would, says the report, “be an early, burning question”.

Gemma Tetlow, IFG chief economist and report author, said: “Any advocates for breaking away from the UK must address the reality of the nations’ current fiscal imbalances and the difficult policy choices these would necessitat­e after secession. The larger the deficit that they have, the harder the case for breaking away from the Union becomes.”

The report states while there are “many reasons why the people of Scotland or Wales might want to seek independen­ce from the UK, and why the people of Northern Ireland might want to be part of a united Ireland … one cost of doing so would be that they would no longer be able to benefit from the redistribu­tion of resources that currently takes place across the UK”.

“These transfers have been facilitate­d in some years by the UK Government’s ability to borrow large amounts of money at very low interest rates,” the report said. “An independen­t Scotland or Wales would be unlikely to be able to borrow as cheaply as the UK currently can.

“Smaller countries often pay a debt interest premium over bigger countries because their bond markets are less liquid. A new country would also not have the track record with markets and, depending on its currency arrangemen­ts, might not have a central bank that could act as a credible lender of last resort.”

The think-tank adds there is “uncertaint­y and disagreeme­nt” about how large a deficit Scotland would have if it left the UK as well as disagreeme­nt about the outcome of any exit negotiatio­ns with the remainder of the UK.

The report points to three main areas of conflict – how much, if any, historic UK debt would be taken on by the exiting nation, defence and overseas spending, and future payments from the rest of the UK, for instance on supporting North Sea decommissi­oning costs since the UK as a whole benefited from oil and gas taxes and pensions.

It continues: "These settlement­s would need to be negotiated with the rest of the UK on secession. Even allowing for these adjustment­s, however, all three of the smaller UK nations would face a sizeable fiscal deficit if they were to break away from the rest of the UK.

"This would be particular­ly true for Wales and Northern Ireland, but Scotland’s fiscal position is also markedly weaker now than it was when the last independen­ce referendum was held, in 2014, largely because of the decline in output and revenues from the North Sea.”

To reduce the fiscal deficit, the report says Scotland would have to implement a combinatio­n of three things – cut spending, raise taxes and increase economic growth.

However, on growth the report says: “The history of efforts by past UK government­s and others around the world suggests that government­s have only limited ability to boost growth and that it takes a long time for the benefits to materialis­e. In the short term, the uncertaint­y and disruption caused by breaking away from an establishe­d fiscal, monetary and trading union could drag on growth.”

Mr Golden said the IFG report showed “the Nationalis­ts are willing to inflict untold damage on families and business”.

He said: “The SNP would no longer be able to afford policies such as free prescripti­ons and free tuition as Scotland would face spending cuts and tax rises the likes of which we have never experience­d.”

"When all focus should be on recovery and rebuilding, this is reckless beyond belief.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom