DAVID Mundell is certain he would prefer a no-deal Brexit to the demise of the United Kingdom. And while we always knew of the Scottish Secretary’s opposition to independence, today, it seems, we can be in no doubt as to how strong that opposition is.
Over the past six months or so, a series of independent expert reports and statements have set out the dire consequences of the UK quitting the European Union without any agreement over what form the future relationship should take.
READ MORE: Mundell sticks by claims independence would be worse for Scotland than a no-deal Brexit
First, of course, there would be the impact on the economy, jobs and consumers. Crashing out without a deal would mean the UK and the EU would have to trade under World Trade Organisation rules. That would lead to tariffs being imposed on goods being imported and exported between the two.
According to Scottish Government analysis published in January, a no-deal Brexit will slow down the economy by about £12.7 billion a year by 2030, equivalent to a reduction of 8.5% in GDP or £2263 a year per person.
Those figures were broadly confirmed by the UK Government’s own analysis, leaked a few weeks later, which predicted Scotland’s economy would grow 9% more slowly than if it stayed in the EU.
An earlier study by the Fraser of Allander Institute at Strathclyde University forecast that 80,000 jobs would go in Scotland over the next decade if the UK tumbled over the Brexit cliff edge.
Consultants Oliver Wyman were also deeply pessimistic, forecasting that price rises resulting from a no-deal exit could cost UK households £1000 a year, with the impact disproportionately felt by poorer households. But food price hikes mighty be the least of the UK’s problems.
An analysis by civil servants in June warned of major supply problems. The contingency preparations leaked last month predicted the UK would be hit with shortages of medicine, fuel and food within a fortnight if it left without a deal.
The doomsday scenario drawn up by Whitehall officials forecast that the port of Dover, above, could collapse “on day one”, supermarkets in Cornwall and Scotland would run out of food within a couple of days, hospitals would run out of medicines within two weeks and fuel supplies would run out by the end of the first week.
On top of job losses and shortages of basic essentials, there is also the impact on security to consider. A report by the House of Lords European Union Committee warned a no-deal departure “would bring UK-EU cooperation on matters vital to the national interest – such as counter-terrorism, police, justice and security matters, nuclear safeguards, data exchange and aviation – to a sudden halt”.
The Lords analysis also said crashing out would place in jeopardy the status of about 1.3 million UK nationals in the EU, and 2.9m EU nationals in the UK.
It raised major concerns, too, about the Irish border, warning a no-deal outcome would bring customs posts back the volatile communities on the dividing line between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic.
Drew Harris, deputy chief constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland, told the Commons’ Brexit Committee last December that this would provide a target and a rallying call for the IRA, sparking a recruitment drive for dissident terror groups.
But for David Mundell all these scenarios are still preferable to Scotland becoming independent.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel