Scotland's per capita GDP is approximately 96% of that of the UK, but that is on the basis of allocating North sea oil and gas to the UK as a whole. Calculating the figures to allocate the majority of oil and gas to Scotland suggests that Scotland would have a higher per capita GDP than England. The case for a higher per capita GDP in an independent England would seem to be doubtful, all other factors being equal.
Certainly the Barnett formula should be looked at but that does not require English independence. In any case, I strongly believe that overall well-being is not determined by the level of public expenditure. If anything, high levels of public expenditure hamper initiative and impede public sector reform.
Then there is the question of how much Scotland contributes to the Exchequer. Scotland contributes a higher proportion of revenues in several key fields, notably VAT on hydrocarbon oils, alcohol (especially whisky), business rates, Crown Estate revenues, petroleum revenue tax and so on. I could do an up-to-date analysis of each of these if I had the time but I believe they are all areas where Scotland is responsible for higher than average revenues.
Would we save any tax by dissolving the Union? If anything it would be a marginal saving, though as I have stated we could save that anyway by reviewing the Barnett formula. We could get much bigger savings by cutting out waste, getting rid of the RDAs, engaging in serious welfare reform or making the health service operate on private sector terms without the excessive layers of management.
(There would be higher savings from leaving the EU, of course, though not nearly as high as some people like to think.)
The bottom line is that if you want to campaign for English independence there will be no 'pot of gold' to offer. It would be better to concentrate on the political arguments in my view.
|