Blog

One of the most important controversies generated by the Scottish independence debate relates to the continuation (or not) of the present sterling zone between Scotland and the rest of the UK (rUK), in the event of a move to a dissolution of the union. There has been some heated TV discussion on this matter, but this has insufficiently focused on the public choice/economics-of-politics aspects of the controversy. This note tries to rectify that deficiency.

Mr Salmond says that his preferred (‘Plan A’) strategy would be to dissolve the current constitutional/political and fiscal union between the newly independent Scotland and the rest of the UK (rUK), but to maintain the current (and long-standing) sterling-zone arrangements between them. Under such a dispensation Scotland and the rUK would continue to enjoy the pound as a currency, but also – and far more importantly – the back-up of the Bank of England (BoE) as the ‘underpinning’ (e.g. as lender of the last resort) of Scottish-based banks/financial institutions.

However, the other three main Parties in the UK Parliament (the SNP has 6 MPs there) have said that, in the event of a dissolution of the union, they would reject this plan for the sterling zone, on the grounds – amongst others – that the present euro zone’s political/economic problems counsel strongly against the attempt to combine supranational monetary union with the prosecution of separate and autonomous fiscal policies, conducted at the nation-state level.

On this matter, however, Mr Salmond has recently received support from the Nobel-Laureate in Economics, Sir James Mirrlees. The latter accepts that the euro zone has gone badly wrong – but thinks that a sterling zone would be a different matter, because Scotland and the rUK are ‘more interwoven’ than is typical of the euro zone economies. Sir James’s analysis, however, does not really address the more fundamental politico-economic worry – exemplified by the euro zone experience over the last decade -- about how to combine a supra-national monetary/financial system with the operation of separate, autonomous and sovereign national political/fiscal systems.

Additionally, Mr Salmond argues that the other three major parties in the current British Parliament are ‘bluffing’ about their (joint) rejection of his plan. He argues that, following a ‘Yes’ vote, these other parties would accept his proposals. This ‘bluffing’ diagnosis has been seconded by another Nobel-Laureate economist, Joseph Stiglitz: ‘for the most part, these are bluffs’ he asserts, because it would be in the interests of Scotland and the rUK to settle this matter to their joint interest (but why on the precise Plan A terms he does not explain).

But what if dissolution of the union occurs, and the other Westminster parties are not bluffing – and they retain their non-acceptance of a currency union without continued political/fiscal union? In this event, Mr Salmond says, it would be necessary for Scotland to threaten default on its portion of the (previous UK) national debt, unless the rUK acceded to his plan. This ‘debt repudiation prospect’ might raise the rUK National Debt/GDP to near (or over) the politically sensitive level of 100 per cent (and also, by implication, the rUK tax burden).

Mr Salmond assumes that this salutory prospect would bring ‘Westminster’ to heel, so to speak, resulting in its acquiescence to his preferred plan. On this point he has again been supported by Mirrlees and Stiglitz in recent statements. The first suggests that if denied Plan A, then Scotland should threaten to ‘walk away’ from its share of UK debt, leaving the rUK to pick up the tab; Stiglitz terms this a ‘legitimate position’. Whilst it is common to hear some exaggerated economic policy talk from political figures, it is somewhat worrying to see eminent international economists – Nobel Laureates in this case – seeking to give credence to such highly speculative contentions.

There would be good reasons for the electorate/taxpayers of the rUK, post-DoU, to be very reluctant to accede to Mr Salmond’s Plan A demands, as this could be economically risky. Presently, the ratio of the total assets (loans and investments) of British banks to British GDP is about 500 per cent - a magnitude that many commentators find too big and risky for the health of the economy. On the 2013 figures, however, the ratio of Scottish bank loans and investments to Scottish GDP was (an astronomical) 1250 per cent. Mr Salmond’s Plan A, however, assumes that BoE lender-of-last resort (etc.) facilities - underpinned by the rUK taxpayer – would continue to be offered to this newly-independent financial system and a fiscally-autonomous (and perhaps spendthrift) Scottish government.

Moreover, it could be electorally difficult in the May 2015 General Election for any rUK Party to accede to Mr Salmond’s Plan A. It would take only one party to reject these demands to put pressure on the others to follow suit. Other components of the independence plans – for example, the demand to move Britain’s nuclear deterrence force – likewise involve considerable potential costs for rUK taxpayers; so electoral resistance to Scottish demands in the rUK would seem very likely. And if Mr Salmond were to go ahead with his ‘debt repudiation’ tactic, the consensus of financial opinion is that this could prove very expensive to both the new Scottish government and to Scottish banks, in terms of high interest charges.

None of the foregoing in any way constitutes a decisive/overwhelming case against Scottish independence. The idea, however, of a post-dissolution currency union that is ‘scot-free’ (i.e. without consequences and costs) looks decidedly ‘optimistic’, to say the least.

An alternative would be to create a new separate currency - but this, of course, would involve set-up costs too. In economic reality there are no ‘free lunches’, and no ‘free’ monetary/financial systems either.

 

Comments (0)

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.

As in all IEA publications, the views expressed in this blog are those of the authors and not those of the Institute (which has no corporate view), its managing trustees, Academic Advisory Council or senior staff.

Previous blog posts

Search

Carlo Stagnaro
1 September 2014
comments

You can’t have your cake and eat it too – even when it comes to energy. Germany has been a champion of the ‘green economy’ for the past decade, but now the time has come to...
Kristian Niemietz
28 August 2014
2 comments

“Labour’s summary of the ideas […] says they “clear the way for a massive shift of resources from the NHS to private companies”. […] [P]rivate companies (Labour...
Jared Meyer
22 August 2014
1 comment

Prime Minister David Cameron’s “all-in” push for developing the UK’s shale gas reserves continues to generate what seems to be strong public backlash. While vocal protesters...
Philip Booth and Kevin Dowd
20 August 2014
comments

Proponents of Bitcoin like to suggest that it will be the money of the future. Critics point to its price volatility, the evidence of a Bitcoin bubble and other problems. Both sides make valid points...
Philip Booth
19 August 2014
3 comments

For the last five years, politicians of all shades have been banging on about how we should adopt this or that aspect of German economic policy. George Osborne argued in 2011: "We want to learn...
Christopher Snowdon
18 August 2014
8 comments

Obesity prevalence has increased sharply in Britain since the 1970s. Many public health campaigners portray Britain’s obesity ‘epidemic’ as being caused by the increased...
Sam Collins
17 August 2014
comments

It is easy to pick up a newspaper, watch television or look on a blog and assume the end is nigh. Between foreign affairs crises, demographic time bombs, debt icebergs and having only hours left to...
Roger Koppl
15 August 2014
2 comments

The recent economic crisis has destroyed some of the supposed ‘certainties’ of economic theory and policy. Both are in question as we try to understand the Great Recession and the long...
Mikko Arevuo
14 August 2014
comments

Randall Holcombe’s new textbook, Advanced Introduction to the Austrian School of Economics, is an important addition to the general Austrian economics literature. The book gives an erudite...
Kristian Niemietz
13 August 2014
6 comments

An unexpected increase in construction (from an extremely low base) has left building materials, especially bricks, in short supply, leading to a sudden surge in prices. Anti-development activists...
Ryan Bourne
12 August 2014
2 comments

It’s that time of year when the City’s offices seem empty. For many families with children, these weeks represent the last opportunity of the year to get away for a well-earned break. Yet...
Martin Ricketts
11 August 2014
3 comments

In the heyday of state interventionism that followed World War II, it fell to a relatively small group of economists to defend the seemingly outdated classical liberal inheritance and develop a...
Philip Booth
8 August 2014
8 comments

To me, reducing poverty matters very much. That is why I believe in a market economy. However, I am entirely uninterested in the issue of inequality. If you take the position that inequality matters...
Jonathan Stanley
7 August 2014
1 comment

Seemingly not a day goes by without a politician rallying voters with promises to improve NHS waiting times. Outside the UK this must be a very odd spectacle. This level of religious zeal for waiting...
Deirdre McCloskey
6 August 2014
comments

Deirdre McCloskey, author of The Bourgeois Era series, speaks to ieaTV about inequality, the amazing growth in the wealth of the working class over the past three hundred years and how wealth and...
Ryan Bourne
5 August 2014
comments

The classical liberal French economist Frédéric Bastiat once said that ‘government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavours to live at the expense of everybody...
Len Shackleton
4 August 2014
comments

For a long time, Germany did not have a national minimum wage – although unions, bargaining at industry level, were able to negotiate minima which held across all firms in specific industries....
Philip Booth
1 August 2014
4 comments

In the last week or two there have been calls for taxes on large supermarkets such as Tesco. Twenty local authorities have asked the government for formal powers to tax retailers and such taxes...
Philip Booth
31 July 2014
4 comments

There is no shortage of concern about the UK’s large balance of payments deficit. Many in the government are trying to solve it by cajoling British companies to export more with lots of new...