Could Europe’s only working monetary union be about to split?

It’s impossible to quantify, but some economists think that investment in Scotland has already been damaged

Membership of the EU is not a gimme for Scotland. So, whether they vote Yes or No to independence, they might well be an ex-EU member by 2017, given the other referendum, on UK EU membership, that could be taking place around then
Membership of the EU is not a gimme for Scotland. So, whether they vote Yes or No to independence, they might well be an ex-EU member by 2017, given the other referendum, on UK EU membership, that could be taking place around then

It has only been a week-and-a-half since the Scottish independence debate exploded into life - or at least into our consciousness. Saturation media coverage since the first intimations of a Yes vote has focused attention on the possible break-up of the only contemporary example of a successful European monetary union. A remarkable aspect of the outpouring of commentary, analysis and debate has been the monolithic view of the British: in love letters, begging letters, poems, songs, threats and promises it has been almost impossible to find anyone willing to say a happy goodbye to Scotland. Foreign commentary, including plenty emanating from this island, has found it hard to resist the temptation to stick one on the English.

Parallels with Canada have been obvious. A process that culminated in a narrow decision by Quebec to stay within the Federation had its own long-lasting economic consequences, not least in the orderly evacuation of Montreal by Canada's financial industry. The banks' move to Toronto was not reversed, or even really slowed down, when it became apparent that Quebec would stay part of Canada. Once that decision had been taken, things went (relatively) quiet; there was no political earthquake but key businesses found that not worrying about Quebec nationalism is a very congenial state of affairs. It's impossible to quantify, but some economists think that investment in Scotland has already been damaged.

Just about everybody has joined the debate; politicians across the spectrum have displayed a rare degree of unity, one usually only seen during war time. There isn’t really a hard left or right in British politics any more, just centre-left to centre-right. Uniquely, that soggy middle is of one unionist voice.

Prominent public figures who are supposed to stay neutral have nonetheless issued dire warnings about the consequences of independence. Leader of this particular pack is Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, who has echoed the words of every political leader at Westminster and stated in bold terms that a currency union is out of the question. Scotland can use sterling if it likes, but it won't get a lender of last resort or any of the other perks usually associated with having your own currency. A bit like the euro then.

READ MORE

Although officials hastened to 'clarify' his remarks, the new president of the European Commission has joined the fray, suggesting that the EU won't be admitting any new members for at least the next five years. That's a reminder that keeping the lid on Europe's multiple nationalist nasties is really the point of the EU. It has been suggested that nationalists from Russia to Catalonia are salivating over what comes next. Membership of the EU is not a gimme for Scotland. So, whether they vote Yes or No to independence, they might well be an ex-EU member by 2017, given the other referendum, on UK EU membership, that could be taking place around then.

The constitution-writers in Brussels mention ‘ever closer union’ at every available opportunity: Yes or no, the UK is either a fast or slowly disintegrating union. It will either be independence or ‘Devo-max’ for Scotland. The English (and Welsh and Northern Irish) will be left, either way, with next to zero say in affairs north of the border, but Scottish (mostly Labour) MPs in Westminster will retain a disproportionate level of control over English taxes. That is usually a recipe for revolution of one kind or another.

Threats and counter-threats have been flying around. And with each salvo comes a realisation that things are more complicated than first realised. Alex Salmond blusters about not taking his share of UK debts if he doesn't get his way, but has to contend with the fact that the UK will have a veto over whether or not Scotland is admitted into the EU. Scotland can't keep sterling and join the EU: the sterling opt-out applies to the UK only. Scotland would have to adopt the euro in any attempt to re-join the EU. One of the few things that unites Scottish nationalists and every other citizen of the UK is a detestation of the euro, a steadfast belief that the euro experiment has been an unmitigated disaster.

Welsh politicians of every hue would be well advised to tout for inward investment with a single promise: we won’t be having our own referendum, ever. Simple, but, I suspect, very effective marketing. And it’s a trick that can be used over and over again, whichever way Scotland decides.

Just how much the Union costs the English taxpayer is now out in the open - and will be recalculated year after year, particularly as North Sea oil output continues its inexorable decline. The super rich inhabitants of London now know that Labour's 'Mansion Tax' simply can't happen without Scottish Labour MPs in Westminster. Everything now gets seen through a new prism.

Chris Johns

Chris Johns

Chris Johns, a contributor to The Irish Times, writes about finance and the economy