Andrew Wilson: No positive case is being made for Scotland to remain in the UK

In an online debate, hosted by Edinburgh University's Centre on Constitutional Change on Thursday, the focus was on the economic case for and against Scottish independence but also hit on other factors.

John Lloyd, a contributing editor to the Financial Times, set out the points in his book, Should Auld Acquaintance Be Forgot, that presents a critique of Scottish independence, arguing that the ending of financial support from the UK would lead to large-scale cuts in public services.

In his opening remarks, Lloyd accepted that independence is a major possibility due to the 19 successive polls showing majority support. However, he made the point that Scotland going independent in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic would be the "worst possible time" due to a five to 10-year period of instability following a Yes vote.

READ MORE: Shared Prosperity Fund: Tories 'parking their tanks' on devolved areas, minister says

Andrew Wilson, who was an SNP MSP in the first session of the reconvened Scottish Parliament, is now an economist and chair of the Sustainable Growth Commission for Scotland.

Wilson said that stalling the question on self-determination, against the will of the majority of the people, was not a reasonable position.

He added that there was no positive case made for Scotland to stay in the UK and that the problem for the Union argument is that the UK economic trajectory has been one of relative decline.

He pointed to the fact that the UK may be the fifth largest economy in the world but - in terms of wealth per head - it is the 22nd richest in the world, having been first at the turn of the 20th century.

The debate was chaired by former Scottish Labour leader and MSP Kezia Dugdale, who is now director of the John Smith Centre for Public Service, who moved the debate onto Scotland's position as an independent country on the world stage making its own economic decisions.

Lloyd described the long-term position of the leadership of the EU as wanting to construct a "United States of Europe" that would have massive devolution to member states, but require oversight of a new and relatively small one in Scotland.

He continued: “Joining the European Union is not a way out of any kind of problems, whether economic or political. If Scotland has something like the GDP it presently enjoys as being part of the United Kingdom, it would have to be a net contributor to the EU budget. So, the deal will be that you lose the Barnett formula subsidy and you have to give money to the European Union for not much back.

“The European Union was a good idea – I voted Remain and I am sorry that we left – but it is not a panacea. It would be a very tough negotiation with, at the end, a very questionable advantage.”

He added that in order for Scotland to get its economy in line with the EU, it would have to impose some form of austerity.

Wilson responded by making the case that Scotland's economy is independently viable.

He said: "What we're not hearing anywhere - literally no-one is making the case - that says that the future of the United Kingdom, outwith the European Union, is good for Scotland. I haven't heard a single positive Union case.

"There were good ones put in 2014 by many people around Britain's role in the world, but that's been obliterated, not just by Brexit, but the manner of Brexit, the conduct and misconduct of the UK Government with its Trump-lite populism.

"The subsidy that John refers to is not a subsidy to our economy at all. The revenues raised in Scotland pay for the Scottish budget and would pay for pensions and social security. There's undoubtedly residual there but that reflects the inequalities in the UK system.

"The real big challenge to leaders everywhere is how to lead positively out of the worst crisis any of us have endured in peacetime? What is the vision for how we govern ourselves and put the climate crisis right? What is the vision on inequality that is biting and getting worse? 

"Short-termism in politics is what has stifled so many countries. We need to be able to think long and build consent in the population for big inter-generational investment and transformation."

​READ MORE: Meat exporters facing similar Brexit trade barriers to seafood, says Fergus Ewing

Lloyd proposed the concept of "devo max", giving devolved nations more powers, could be presented again as an antidote to independence with many wanting to retain that relationship as part of the UK.

Wilson said this was, at one point, a credible argument, but now we have a Prime Minister that says devolution was a disaster, there is little likelihood he would be keen to enhance devolved powers.

The debate, which mainly focused on the economic arguments on independence, is now available on the Centre on Constitutional Change's YouTube channel.