Slashdot Mirror


Scotland's Independence Vote Could Shake Up Industry

dcblogs writes: Scotland is not a major high-tech employment center, but it has good universities and entrepreneurial energy. About 70,000 people work in tech out of a total workforce of about 2.5 million, or about 3%. By contrast, financial services accounts for about 15% of employment in Scotland. But passions are high. "Honest, I've never been so scared in my life," said Euan Mackenzie about the prospect of separating from the U.K. He runs a 16-employee start-up, 1partCarbon, in Edinburgh, a platform that builds medical systems. "For tech start-ups, funding will be tougher to find and more expensive, there will be no local banks, access to EU markets and the freedom of movement will be curtailed," said Mackenzie. "As someone who enjoys risk and new opportunities, my company will remain in Scotland and make the best of whichever side prevails on Thursday, but the effect of independence on tech start-ups and the whole Scottish economy will be cataclysmic," he said.

8 of 494 comments (clear)

  1. This isn't scaremongering. by jez9999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A lot of "yes" campaigners seem to have been sold on the idea that any warning of economic doom upon a "yes" vote is scaremongering, bullying, or "undermining the Scottish democratic process." Bullshit. Many intelligent people looking at this from a rational perspective have concluded that the "sweet spot" for Scotland is staying in the union and having devo-max; basically getting it both ways, with lots of self-government combined with a net financial income from the rest of the UK, as well as obviously ease of trade.

    However, the pro-independence SNP are 100% blinkered on independence, at any cost. They will therefore paint warnings like this as lies designed purely to scupper their frankly loony picture of a prosperous independent Scotland, and a lot of Scots buy into it. Shame, really.

    Americans might look on with bemusement; I can understand that. I guess it's a bit like Florida choosing to break away from the US, having a pro-Florida political party endlessly demonizing "them" (the rest of the US) as causing pretty much every economic and political woe Florida has going for it. As an English guy, I think this whole situation really sucks. If the UK breaks up, the whole of Britain will be worse off for it, but I suspect Scotland will take the bigger brunt of the pain. And given that it will have made the decision, it will deserve to.

    1. Re:This isn't scaremongering. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As a fellow European (Belgium, not UK) it's funny to see the arguments being used by the "better together" campaign. They are all typically the same arguments used by the rest of Europe for increased European integration, which the same UK people are typically opposed to. I've heard people say "access to the larger common market within the UK is crucial for Scottish businesses" - with those same people asking for all kinds of exemptions on the European common market.

      Your example of "Florida trying to break away from the US" is an interesting one. To me, it feels more like North Dakota splitting from South Dakota while staying within the US, which a lot of people would consider mostly a non-issue. If Scotland chooses to go for a future as an "independent state within Europe", I would imagine them functioning somewhat similar to Ireland, which is not functioning too bad as far as I know.

    2. Re:This isn't scaremongering. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Thatcher destroyed manufacturing and industry in the whole of the UK. The north of England and Wales were trashed just as badly. She did that to Scotland, as well as the Poll Tax which caused riots. All the stuff she privatised has gone to shit - energy companies, the railways, British Telecom... Now they see Cameron privatising Royal Mail and the NHS too.

      Her policies failed utterly and lead to the global financial crash a few years back. In the end she was such a liability her own party had to get rid of her. Scotland would do well to get away from her legacy.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:This isn't scaremongering. by Miamicanes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We do have something similar, although it is called Texas.

      Not quite. The treaty under which Texas-the-Lone-Star-Republic joined the USA gave it the right to secede at will... and it did.

      After declaring independence, Texas proceeded to join the Confederate States of America, actively participated in warfare against the USA, and was conquered along with the rest of the CSA by Union troops & annexed by the USA as a vanquished military district.

      Had Texas remained neutral & kept out of the war, it could have legitimately asked to rejoin the USA after (or during) the Civil war under freely-negotiated terms. As a conquered enemy land, Texas was in no position to negotiate anything.

  2. Re:at least the nuclear weapons will be gone by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You seem to have misunderstood. Most of Europe's non-nuclear states are protected - de factor if not by treaty - by the European nations that are armed. Scotland would be an unremarkable addition to that list.

    Part of being a nuclear power in a geographically close-knit federation is that your umbrella will cover people other than your allies. That's just the lay of the land.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  3. Take the long view by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Charlie Stross recently posted a very good take on this: This is a permanent change. Whatever happens during the first few years is basically irrelevant, compared to the long-term results. Did Norway separating from Sweden cause short-term economic upheaval? Does that matter at all a century later?

    This is a long-term change, not a short.term one. Any voter should consider the probable situation twenty or fourty years from now, not whatever happens in a year or two.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  4. Re:at least the nuclear weapons will be gone by jeremyp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The UK's nuclear submarines are based in Scotland.

    All of the jobs at the naval base in Faslane will be gone along with the nuclear weapons. A future Scottish government might, therefore, decide to allow the UK to continue to keep its submarines there.

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  5. Re:This is bullshit from start to finish by Bruce66423 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "There are and will continue to be plenty of banks in Scotland."

    In order for banks to lend, they must have deposits. Given the risk of holding money north of the border, a 'Yes' vote will generate a stampede of cash south on Friday. There may be banks, but they won't have any money to lend

    "There is and will continue to be freedom of movement".

    Really? If Scotland has left the EU, then it will be necessary to impose border controls

    "There is and will continue to be access to European markets."

    Only if you get to renegotiate membership of the EU. Good luck with that until you've agreed to pay your share of the UK's debts, and then only if you are nice to the Spanish

    "Scotland has and will continue to use The Pound, and there is nothing the UK government will be able to do to stop them."

    Sterlingisation will result in substantially higher interest rates for all bank loans as the risk of holding money in a country without a lender of last resort is significant.

    "Prices are will remain competitive; arbitrage and competitive pressures will prevent large price rises."

    This, at least, is accurate because you admit there will be price rises. If you are very lucky there won't be a toll on the M6 north of Carlise and the A1 north of Berwick, but it would certainly be rational for us to impose one to pay for the cost of maintaining roads to enable good to travel to and from Scotland.

    "Russia will NOT invade Scotland... FFS! Why do I have to comment on this kind of purile shit?"

    Given Putin's ambition and Scotland's oil, an attempt seems like an entertaining prospect. Not a visible invasion at first of course; Scottish socialists would start rioting as a result of the economic chaos following Scotland's ejection from the EU and then invite Russian peacekeepers to restore order. A referendum would be organised for Scotland to join the Russian Federation.

    Of course that's not likely - but the idea that Scotland should become freeloaders like many other European countries, dependent on Uncle Sam to protect them from a bear that is demonstrably on the prowl is disappointing.