Recent
triumphalism from separatists claiming to be winning the argument is
frustrating to people actually trying to think through the problems
of independence. Rational discussion has not even begun. To date the
so-called debate has been an emotional pantomime in which every
claimed disadvantage is met by cries of "Oh no it isn't!"
and little else.
To
stress the risk of losing what we already have is not negativism. We
have obtained certain advantages through the union. It is for
separatists to explain either why we shall not be putting these
advantages at risk or why it is worth it. Yet all we hear is flat
denial of troubling claims such as those made by:
1.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury
and the economic spokesman of the Labour party, who say that there
will be no sterling currency union because it isn't in the UK's
interest;
2.
The Governor of the Bank of England who says that a sterling zone
would require some ceding of national sovereignty in order to avoid
the sort of financial instability that has hurt the Eurozone;
3.
The Prime Minister of Spain and the President of the EU Commission
who say that Scotland will not be an automatic member of the EU and
will have to apply;
4.
Economists who suggest that a refusal by Scotland to accept its share
of the National Debt would lead to downgrading of our credit rating
and a rise in our interest and mortgage rates;
5.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies which says that oil revenues have
been overestimated and Scotland cannot afford even current levels of
public spending;
6.
Financial institutions which have indicated that they may have to
move south because regulations require their headquarters to be in
the same jurisdiction as their largest market;
7.
The Defence Secretary who says there is no guarantee that future UK
contracts for warships etc. will be placed with a foreign country;
8.
The former Secretary General of NATO who doubts that Scotland will be
enthusiastically welcomed into the organisation whilst evicting
Trident, an important part of NATO's defence strategy;
9.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Scotland which has warned
of major uncertainties for pensions after independence;
10.
The Home Secretary who says there will have to be border controls and
passport checks because continued free travel is incompatible with
Scotland encouraging immigration whilst the UK discourages it.
These
are just ten examples of warnings to which the standard response has
been denial and accusations of bluff or bullying but not facts.
Let
evidence now be brought forward. Let us hear detailed reasons why all
these well-informed people are wrong. Until such time we may
reasonably doubt that a rational, unemotional argument for
independence has even been made, let alone won.
