THE economic situation in Scotland following the Brexit vote will drive the move towards a second independence referendum - given the Conservative Government has “zero plans” and “no exit strategy” - an international expert has declared.
Leading economist Danny Blanchflower, a former Monetary Policy Committee member who is a part-time professor at the University of Stirling, highlighted his belief that Scots like immigration as well as the fact that the country faces population decline.
Mr Blanchflower, , who is also Bruce V Rauner professor of economics at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire in the US, said: “Obviously, I think the issue is that Scotland voted to remain [in the European Union]. It has a declining population. It wants to be part of Europe, and likes immigration, and would presumably like a say in what is going on…The economics, in some way, will drive the move to referendum.”
Mr Blanchflower, who declared the Brexit vote had been “driven a lot by anti-immigration”, added: “When I come to Scotland, I never feel the Scots are anti-immigrant.”
He declined to estimate the probability or possible timing of a second Scottish independence referendum, declaring: “I think it is all up in the air.”
However, he said: “Prospects are higher of a referendum mostly because the May Government apparently has zero plans and no exit strategy…They are not going to be able to negotiate access to the single market without free movement [of people] and they can’t negotiate any trade deals, so they are stumped.”
Referring to Prime Minister Theresa May as “Mayhem”, Mr Blanchflower added: “Also now with elections in France, Germany and Italy and the rise of populist movements, nobody in Europe is going to have time to spend thinking about Mayhem’s problems sorting out an escape route.”
Giving his view on the UK Government’s move towards Brexit, he said: “I think their lack of planning is astonishing. The May Government has absolutely no idea about anything, and it shoots from the lip. It says, ‘We don’t need experts.’.”
Mr Blanchflower declared that financial markets had gone “ballistic” last month when Mrs May, Tory peer William Hague, and Conservative MP Michael Gove had criticised Bank of England Governor Mark Carney.
He added: “Immediately, they had to shut up.”
Drawing parallels between the Brexit vote and Donald Trump’s victory in the US Presidential election, Mr Blanchflower said: “The problem in the UK and US is this populism and idealism is all very well but you have got to have real economic policies.”
He added: “This is the economics of having your hopes raised, and the danger is they are going to get dashed. I think that is what is going on. I think May looks like a deer in the headlights.”
Referring to Secretary of State for International Trade Liam Fox, Mr Blanchflower said: “Fox, every time he opens his mouth, the market laughs.”
Graeme Roy, director of the University of Strathclyde’s Fraser of Allander Institute think-tank, warned that the long-term economic risks from Brexit “are really significant”, highlighting the implications for trade, investment, and labour mobility and supply.
He warned that people must not become complacent, just because the UK economy had in the immediate wake of the Brexit vote held up better than some had expected.
Mr Roy said: “We should not forget that Brexit is much more about the long term. Brexit has not yet happened. It is not about what has happened…It is about what is about to happen, and those are the risks that are really significant. We shouldn’t become complacent, far from it.”
The Federation of Small Businesses voiced concerns over the implications of the Brexit vote for consumer-facing firms.
Colin Borland, head of external affairs for the FSB in Scotland, noted the economic picture had been weak even before the UK electorate’s June 23 vote to leave the EU. He said that, following the Brexit vote, small businesses’ investment intentions appeared to have held up “quite nicely”.
However, he emphasised Brexit had not yet happened and noted the FSB’s surveys were showing the domestic economy was the biggest concern among its members in relation to the performance of their businesses.
And he voiced his belief that the main effect of Brexit on small businesses would be through the overall effect on the economy rather than any specific changes arising from leaving the EU.
Mr Borland noted signs that employees in certain sectors were concerned about Brexit.
He added: “If they are nervous about their future…of course that could have an impact on certain types of businesses. If you are in hospitality, tourism, almost any aspect of retail, you are relying a lot on discretionary consumer spend.”
While declaring he did not think anyone was sufficiently naive to think “every inch of this new territory” following Brexit should have been mapped out, Mr Borland said: “I don’t think it is unreasonable to expect an idea of where we are heading for.”
The Confederation of British Industry in Scotland highlighted the importance of continuing free access to the European single market after Brexit.
CBI Scotland director Hugh Aitken, urging Westminster and Holyrood to work together, said: “On the negotiations, businesses are seeking barrier and tariff-free access to the single market, as well as access to skills and labour from abroad. In the meantime, agreeing transitional arrangements will be vital if businesses are to avoid substantial changes or a cliff edge in regulation.”
Experts predict a sharp slowdown in growth in Scotland and the UK as a whole in 2017, from already below-trend levels this year, as impending Brexit weighs heavily on the economy.
Accountancy firm PwC last week forecast a halving of economic growth in Scotland to just 0.9 per cent next year.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel