SELECT COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AFFAIRS - Parliament

Professor Gavin McCrone—Oral evidence (QQ 117–187)
substitute “National” for “Regional”, I think we might actually be covering some of the
ground we hope to cover today. But since then you have had a very distinguished career in
academic and public service occupations, and I think you are an admirable witness to also set
the scene for us.
I know that you have been publishing a series of articles, which we have all seen, in The
Scotsman recently on this issue. The title of the one that you published in February was
“Greek Lessons for a Scottish Government”.
Professor McCrone: Yes.
The Chairman: I note that you concluded, after covering some of the issues, “There is a
lot to be considered and explained before we vote in the referendum”. That is exactly the
position that this Committee took when we decided to undertake this inquiry, because we
feel that there is a great deal that has not been properly explored right across the economic
front. We are not interested in the constitutional implications, and we are certainly not
taking sides on the issue of the referendum, but on the economic front we feel, both for
Scotland and for the rest of the United Kingdom, there are so many issues that we wish to
explore and we hope to cover some of them with you today.
Would you like to make a statement or shall we go straight into questions?
Professor McCrone: I think go straight into questions. The only thing I would say is that
although that article was entitled “Greek Lessons for a Scottish Government”, The Scotsman
always choose their own titles, so that was not the one it was published under.
Q118 The Chairman: Which is a pity, because it was a provocative title. Could I then
start by asking a question? If Scotland becomes independent from the rest of the UK—and
we are talking about that at this stage and not devo max—some of the UK’s stocks of assets
and liabilities would have to be divided. Which assets and liabilities would you feel are the
most important to consider from an economic perspective, both for Scotland and the rest of
the United Kingdom, and what would be your guiding principles in making such a division?
Professor McCrone: I think the most obvious ones are North Sea oil and the national debt.
There are also the defence installations—that is a minefield, I think—and there are public
pensions and a variety of other things, but North Sea oil and the national debt are the two
big ones. The Scottish Government take the view that the North Sea oil would be divided
according to what geographical area it was in, and on that basis Scotland would have about
90% of the North Sea oil. There would be a dividing line that would go up roughly northeast
from Berwick-upon-Tweed, not a line of latitude but north-east, roughly. That would
put some of the oilfields in the English territory, but the bulk of them would be in the
Scottish territory. I may say, actually, the bulk of them are in Shetland territory.
As for the other things, the national debt I would have thought would have to be split on the
basis of GDP. It could be done on a population basis, but it would not make much difference
because Scotland’s GDP per head is now approximately the national UK average—just under
the UK average. So if you apportioned it that way that would probably be the most sensible
way. However, the Scottish GDP goes up by about 20% if you put North Sea oil into it.
Q119 The Chairman: Just briefly on the question of the Shetlands, which you
mentioned, do you have any view about how that should be included?
Professor McCrone: It was rather interesting that Tavish Scott, in a column in The Scotsman
about a month ago, said that Shetland and Orkney were in a very good bargaining position,
which I think is quite true. I know Shetland very well, and the Shetlanders only regard
207