Thanks but no thanks

Up until now, I’ve chosen not to broadcast my views on Scottish independence publicly, but I feel now is the time to try and explain why I’ll be proudly voting No on September 18^th.

I’ve heard many arguments from both sides of the debate and these have ranged from being extremely well thought out to ridiculously short sighted. The most common reason for a ‘Yes’ vote seems to be that Scottish people are sick of being controlled by a government they did not vote for. While I understand that on the face of it, this appears to be true (after all, the Conservative party won only 1 seat in the 2010 general election in Scotland), it’s not quite as true as you might perceive. Almost 17% of the Scottish population voted Tory in 2010: only 3% less than voted for SNP. It’s not fair, or factually correct to say that we’re controlled by a government that nobody voted for. While I cannot deny that David Cameron’s appeal does not stretch to many parts of Scotland, our system of voting does a good job of disguising the fact that almost of 1 in 5 of us are Tories at the ballot box!

But this referendum isn’t really about political parties (or at least, it shouldn’t be.) Which party you’re going to vote for in next May’s general election really should place no bearing on which box you cross on the ballot paper later this month. It’s about what is best for Scotland (and what’s best for you, as a Scot.) And not what’s best for Scotland next year, or in 4 years, but for an infinite number of years to come: long after David Cameron has fled No. 10.

I don’t feel that I’m qualified to talk about the economic implications of an independent Scotland. I’m not an economist. But I’m also not stupid, and I know that Alastair Darling stating that we can keep the pound doesn’t solve the problems that a currency union will inevitably bring. To sustain a working currency union, we’d have to reach agreement with the UK Government regarding regulation and fiscal policy and this would result in a lack of control for Scotland (which surely defeats the purpose of an independent Scotland?) Independence is just another financial crash waiting to happen. You only have to look at the Eurozone crisis to see that a currency union without a fiscal or banking union is a seriously bad idea.

I’ve read a lot of scaremongering over the last few days saying that if we vote No, our NHS is going to be privatised. Please don’t be fooled into believing this nonsense. Anyone who knows even the basics about Scottish politics should know that our health system is completely devolved. A UK government couldn’t even privatise it if they wanted to. These powers were given to the Scottish government way back in 1999, meaning we have a considerably different NHS to the rest of the UK. The only way that the ‘cradle to the grave’ principle that the NHS is founded upon could change, would be if Scotland wanted it to. (Not to point the finger, but did anyone else read that the health service in Glasgow has recently awarded a major contract to Weight Watchers – a private company?)

I know a lot of people are not satisfied with the way the country is being run at the moment and think that money is being spent in the wrong places. I have seen many Yes voters argue that we pay in more per head of the population in tax than the rest of the UK. I don’t know if this is true or not, but even if it is, do you honestly believe an independent Scotland will create a more equal society? We will always have to pay for services we don’t use. Think of the services that your local council provides and then tell me if you think your council tax is worth it. Some people will always have to fund other people’s lifestyles and living in a Scottish Utopia will not change that. The fact is, we live in a country where welfare spending is 6% higher than the rest of the UK and this won’t change. The annual benefits bill in Scotland is actually twice what we bring in each year from North Sea oil and gas. And when it comes to oil, isn’t it foolish that we are relying on a declining and finite resource to fund our country’s spending? Many of the North Sea rigs are already at the end of their life and if we can’t fund public spending this way, there really is only one other option – tax rises.

No one knows what the Scottish rates of tax would be were Scotland to become independent. Apparently Yes voters will be happy to pay an increased rate of tax in order to bring about a fairer society, but I’m not sure how true this is. I admit, the Yes campaign have not announced plans to raise taxes (why would they?), but we would need to fill the black hole in the finances somehow. Scandinavian countries that the SNP are aspiring to mimic have some of the highest rates of tax in the EU. A study last year by KPMG (who I trust, since they pay my wages) showed that Sweden paid the highest rate of tax at 56.6% followed by Denmark at 55.5%. The UK’s highest rate of tax (45%) ranked in 11^th place. The Yes campaign really needs to be straight about how an independent Scotland would be funded.

There are so many topics that I haven’t even touched upon (unreliability of the Scottish banking system, the potential ill effects on property prices, the relocation of Scottish business, the brain drain that will come from graduates leaving to work across the border), but I will stop here in the hope that if you are an undecided voter, you will make the effort to research each of these areas anyway. Don’t make this about personalities. I actively campaigned against Jim Murphy in the run-up to the 2010 General Election, but I’m with him all the way when it comes to staying part of the UK because I love Scotland, and I just can’t take the huge risks that an independent Scotland will mean taking. I’ve heard a few people say ‘I’ve had to take risks before and they’ve always paid off,’ but this is very different. We’re not talking about a new job or relationship here, you can’t possibly compare. This will be forever. Do your own research and ask what is truly best for Scotland, and what is best for you and your family.