For 307 years, Scotland has found company in the United Kingdom. But, over the years, Scottish separatists started calling for independence. Next Thursday, the people will decide whether to go it alone or remain in the Union. If they choose independence, they stand to lose a lot, writes OLUKOREDE YISHAU
Alex Salmond, a Scottish nationalist, has a dream. It is a that of passion for which he appears ready to use any arsenal at his disposal to make a reality. But, like many dreams which do not come to fruition, Salmond’s may hit a brick wall.
His dream is shared by many others. Earlier in the week, an opinion poll showed that Salmond and his likes stood a good chance of seeing their dream of an independent Scotland realised in their lifetime. This development saw the Pound Sterling falling, as a result of what analysts called “nervousness”. The realisation of this dream means Scotland’s divorce from its union with countries, such as Wales, England and North Ireland, which form the United Kingdom.
But, as at the time of going to press, it did not look like Salmond’s dream will come to reality next Thursday when Scotland is expected to hold a referendum to decide whether to remain with the UK or be independent. A new poll has shown that more people have backed out of the idea of an independent Scotland. The latest poll saw the Pound recovering from the initial fall. There are also new developments, which have shown that an independent Scotland has much to lose. The poll found 53 per cent of Scots would say No in next week’s referendum on independence. The survey put the Yes camp on 47 per cent. The poll suggests that young Scots are not keen on independence – just 32 per cent of 16 to 24-year-olds said they would vote Yes.
Oil to the rescue?
Now, the music has changed and the dance steps have assumed a frightening and scary dimension.
The major kernel upon which the likes of Salmon are pushing the independent Scotland project is that it has enough oil to turn out like Norway. But, people who should know have said Salmon and others are turning facts on their heads.
Sir Ian Wood, who is regarded as the greatest authority on Scottish oil, said Salmon should not be taken serious. He has a supporter in the chief executives of British Petroleum and Shell. Wood, founder of Scotland’s oil services firm Wood Group, accused the Salmon and those in his camp of misleading voters with “highly inaccurate forecasts, false promises and misleading information”.
British Petroleum’s Bob Dudley and Shell’s Ben van Beurden said Salmon lied by claiming North Sea oil, if augmented by unexploited opportunities using relatively new techniques, could turn Scotland into the next Norway, which has become rich on its oil and gas revenues, and has built up investment funds of more than £460billion.
Wood, Dudley and Beurden said an independent Scottish economy based on North Sea oil riches is a dream that cannot become a reality.
BP said: “BP believes that the future prospects for the North Sea are best served by maintaining the existing capacity and integrity of the United Kingdom.
“As a major investor in Scotland – now and into the future – BP believes that the future prospects for the North Sea are best served by maintaining the existing capacity and integrity of the United Kingdom.”
The chief executive of Standard Life, David Nish, said: “Standard Life has a long history in Scotland – a heritage of which we are very proud and we hope that this continues, but our responsibility is to protect the interests of our customers, our shareholders, our people and other stakeholders in our business.”
A Daily Mail report paints a picture which shows that the North Sea oil is not as presented by Salmond.
The report reads: “The independent Office for Budget Responsibility shows oil revenues falling from £6.1billion in 2012-13 to just £3.5billion in 2018-19. Production is in steep decline having fallen by 7.8 per cent a year since it reached its peak 15 years ago in 1999.
“Recent tax incentives introduced by Chancellor George Osborne have encouraged new investment and slowed the decline a little.
“Nevertheless, the loss of oil production and revenues has been a calamitous blow to the UK’s gross domestic product, its balance of payments with the rest of the world and the public finances as a whole.”
Wood argued that the so-called N-56 report, which claims there could be another 21million barrels of oil in unconventional shale reserves, “is an insult to the Scottish people”.
More blame came for the separatists on Thursday. The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) announced it will move from Edinburgh to London, if voters chose independence. This increases to three the number of banking giants that have indicated they will move to England if voters see sense in the separatists’ agenda. It also emerged that shoppers in Scotland are likely to face higher prices in an independent country.
RBS, which has been based in Scotland since its formation in 1727, said: “It would be necessary to re-domicile the bank’s holding company if next Thursday’s referendum ends the 307-year Union.”
The Lloyds Banking Group, which includes Halifax and Bank of Scotland with 16,000 members of staff in Scotland, may seek emergency Westminster legislation to help speed through a move to England.
Clydesdale, which is Scotland’s third bank, was also reported to be preparing to leave. Edinburgh-based Standard Life said it would partially move to England, putting up to 5,000 finance jobs at risk.
But Salmond, who is the First Minister, described reports of banks leaving Scotland as “nonsense” and “scaremongering”. Whatever he thinks, Bank of England Governor Mark Carney added to separatists’ injuries by warning that Edinburgh would have to set aside around £130 billion to guarantee savers’ deposits. Speaking before the Treasury Select Committee, Carney said the size of banking reserves was a key factor in determining a nation’s credibility.
The campaign to keep the union saw Prime Minister David Cameron making an emergency visit to Edinburgh. The leaders of the two other leading parties have also intervened. Salmond mocked the interventions by the three party leaders, declaring that “Team Scotland” would triumph over “Team Westminster”.
In Edinburg, Cameron told voters a ‘Yes’ vote could stall Britain’s economic recovery – which is rated the strongest in the Western world. At a point in his speech, he nearly gave in to emotions. But, he composed himself before the tears rolled down his eyes. He was speaking about the ‘heartbreak’ he would feel if Scotland voted to break up the UK. He pleaded with voters not to use the poll to give the “effing Tories” a kick.
Irreversible decision
During a question-and-answer session at the Edinburgh headquarters of Scottish Widows, Cameron said that voters should understand that their decision will be irreversible.
He said: “I hope (what) will really come across in the remaining part of this campaign is the scale of the decision that Scottish people will be taking in eight days’ time. Sometimes because it is an election people can think it is like a general election.
“You make a decision and five years later you can make another decision – if you are fed up with the effing Tories give them a kick and then maybe we will think again.
“This is totally different decision to a general election. This is a decision about not the next five years. It is a decision about the next century.
“Sometimes people say to me why do you feel so strongly about it? After all coming to Scotland, here you are a Tory leader with one MP. Wouldn’t your life be easier, wouldn’t you be able to get a majority more easily if Scotland were to separate itself from the UK?
“My answer to that is that I care far more about my country than I do about my party. I care hugely about this extraordinary country, this United Kingdom that we have built together. I would be heartbroken if this family of nations we have put together – and we have done such amazing things – was torn apart.”
Cameron warned that UK would not form a currency union with independent Scotland, adding that in case Scotland decides to use the Pound without UK’s blessing, it would find itself in Panama’s shoes. He also added that the intending country could run out of money.
He said: “Financial institutions would move very rapidly from Scotland into other parts of the UK. Panama found that because you are not responsible for your currency, you can run out of it. So the short answer to Scotland being separate from the UK and using someone else’s currency is that your financial institutions could leave and you could run out of money.”
Leader of the opposition Labour Party Ed Miliband toed Cameron’s path. He told Labour voters and activists in Cumbernauld: “The values of the Scottish people have shone through in this referendum campaign, whatever side that they’re on, the values of justice, of fairness and equality.
“The questions for you are: how to achieve those values. I say that the best way to achieve those values is together not apart. I say: don’t choose an irreversible separation; choose to stay together, on the basis of those values. Solidarity, social justice; together, not alone. From the head, from the heart, from the soul, vote no in this referendum and let’s change Britain together.”
Miliband stayed in Scotland throughout the week to campaign against separation. Whether his campaign against separation and his stay would work is to be decided by Thursday. Let’s wait …
