Jingle bells ,jingle bells , jingle all the way .,
Group of Scottish financiers emerge to back independence
* Warn staying with the UK could threaten EU membership
* Poll shows more Scots think row over the pound is "bluff"
By Belinda Goldsmith
LONDON, March 27 (Reuters) - A group of Scottish financiers came out in support of independence on Thursday to counter a flood of warnings over Scotland going it alone, cautioning that staying within the United Kingdom could mean losing European Union membership.
George Mathewson, former head of the Royal Bank of Scotland and chairman of Toscafund, and five other current and former Scottish financial players raised the possible risks of remaining in the United Kingdom in a letter to a newspaper.
Their positive view of a solo Scotland comes after a string of banks and financial services companies raised concerns over a vote for independence at a referendum on Sept. 18, citing uncertainty over the currency, regulation and EU membership.
Mathewson, a longstanding supporter of independence who has criticised the UK government for using "fear" tactics to sway voters, and his co-signatories said not enough consideration had been given to the risks of a No vote, such as EU membership.
British Prime Minister David Cameron, faced with eurosceptic factions in his Conservative party and voters defecting to the anti-EU UK Independence Party (UKIP), has promised to hold a referendum on whether Britain should stay in the EU by the end of 2017.
"In the case of Scotland after a No vote, there is no clear plan for or certainty around taxation, regulation or the wider business operating environment, and no guarantee of continued EU membership," the financiers wrote in the letter to the Financial Times, stressing these views were personal.
"There are certainly opportunities to attract more jobs and investment to Scotland with the powers of independence and significant opportunities in an independent Scotland for financial services."
Other signatories were Angus Tulloch of fund manager First State, James Scott, a former director of industry group Scottish Financial Enterprise, Frank McKirgan, founder of MLI Partners, David Simpson, a former economic adviser at Standard Life , and Jim Spowart, founder of Standard Life Bank.
Tulloch declined to comment beyond the contents of the letter, saying it was "personal".
Scotland's future in the EU has become a major issue in the independence debate, with questions raised over whether the 28-member bloc would allow Scotland to join and in time between a Yes vote in September and going independent in March 2016.
The support for ending Scotland's 307-year tie to England follows a string of companies warning about the potential impact of Scottish independence on the financial sector that accounts for 12.5 percent of Scottish GDP and up to 150,000 jobs.
Sorry , mate , just joking . .... To some extent I'd have to agree with graftman , corruption is still corruption , just because their black is a bit blacker than our's .doesn't really make us whiter .
It can seem that way but I would say it's on the contrary, the governments are much more corruptible in other countries, investors don't have the same trust in them as over here. This is primarily the reason why investors are pulling out of India causing the rupee to tumble, lack of confidence in the system.
I think you also need to consider the base motivation behind making a statement like ‘if we are penalised, infrastructure investment will have to suffer’. It isn’t a credible threat; it’s just an attempt to save face. The energy companies would say that purely because they need to offer some kind of robust response that casts doubt on political decision making, even if it isn’t really grounded in truth. This kind of statement is in the same class as ‘If bank bonuses are restricted, all the talent will leave’. It is part of the cut and thrust of political discourse. As you know, you and I don’t share your degree of scepticism about these things; I tend to view a statement like that simply the predictable response to being held to account, and nothing more. Even if you think about the substance of the statement, it isn’t feasible for an energy company in Britain to decide to deliberately withhold investment because if there were issues with supply resulting from a company making good on such a threat, customers would leave and go to one of the other suppliers, and shareholders would revolt. More broadly, the government would be obliged and probably pressured politically to make sure that none of the ‘big six’ could neglect infrastructure to the degree implied by the statement because the blame out would inevitably come back to the weakness of the government itself.
Of course there will always be corruption. You try living in India, Brazil, Russia or even China, takes corruption to a whole new level. Despite all the goings on people trust our system a lot more relative to other countries hence our FDI.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.