Scotland’s gamble is staying in the union: By Ralph Topping [Ex chief executive of UK-listed bookmaker William Hill] Scots are a people of strong views, especially on the question of our country’s future. I have thought hard about whether to make my own opinions publicly known. A number of business leaders have spoken out against Scottish independence. One executive in the defence industry has told this newspaper that UK officials in Westminster are making “deft use of the dark arts” to encourage business figures to lend support to the unionist cause. Yet many in business favour an independent Scotland. I am one of them. Our voices, too, should be heard. The British economy is chronically unbalanced – tilted towards the southeast of England, and with too much emphasis on the financial sector to the detriment of manufacturing. An independent Scotland will remedy this structural weakness by providing a hefty counterweight. We must manufacture quality goods for export in sectors where we have a competitive advantage. A Yes vote is the first step towards setting Scotland on a sustainable economic path. We will not be cutting ourselves off from the rest of Britain. Much will remain: the social union of family ties and friendship; the currency union; the defence umbrella of Nato; the single European market; even sporting unions, such as the British and Irish Lions, one of rugby union’s most enduring names. All of this is in our mutual interest. But while we treasure what we have in common, Scotland must also be allowed to pursue its interests and compete in global markets on its own terms. I have spent the past six years as chief executive of a company whose 17,000 employees work in Scotland, elsewhere in the UK and throughout the world. Businesses are accustomed to dealing with different tax systems and employment regulations in the countries in which they operate. This rarely causes real difficulties. And they know that national governments tend to collaborate where there is a mutual economic interest – indeed, they expect nothing less. George Osborne has said there would be no currency union between Britain and an independent Scotland. Here is a Conservative chancellor of the exchequer nailing his colours to a policy that makes no business sense. This perversity will not last. Companies based outside Scotland that operate north of the border will not want to incur the cost of trading in a new currency. Westminster’s bluff will soon be called. And there is a bigger point. Our countries’ economic fortunes will remain intertwined. The government in London will have a huge interest in a strong Scottish economy, which will be the second-largest national export market for the rest of the UK. Both London and Edinburgh will want the economies of both countries to prosper. Erecting political barriers that prevent this, as the coalition proposes, would be an act of pure spite. It will not happen. The demands of markets will prevail. An independent Scotland will pool sovereignty on monetary policy but take control of fiscal policy. There is nothing about sharing a currency that will restrict an independent Scotland’s ability to attract jobs and investment with a competitive tax regime. I disagree with those who suggest that companies, including banks owned by the British state, will take jobs and investment elsewhere. A fiscally autonomous parliament will entice companies to make Scotland their home. With these levers in the hands of those who care most – the people who live and work here – our nation will thrive. A Yes vote offers the security that comes with knowing you are in control of the rudder, whether the waters are choppy or calm. The real threat to jobs, capital flows and investment comes not from Scottish independence but from the very real possibility of a British exit from the European single market. Scots are uncomfortable with backward-looking isolationism. We have a long and proud history as innovative and outward-looking contributors to the world. We should take our place as an equal member of the international community. Our choice is between two futures, both involving uncertainty. A Yes vote will give us the power to manage change. A No vote would hitch our wagon to Westminster’s erratic locomotive – a dangerous gamble indeed. The writer is outgoing chief executive of UK-listed bookmaker William Hill. He is writing in a personal capacity m.ft/cms/s/0/05fd0768-1bcd-11e4-9db1-00144feabdc0.html
Posted on: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 12:10:52 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015