You Read it Here First

This is shamelessly self-congratulatory - but it's been an interesting week and I feel my Blogging activities have been somewhat vindicated.

1. Business for Scotland

On June 17th I blogged at length about the reality of this group, highlighting that they were a thinly disguised SNP construct with few significant employers and no businesses who trade with rUK   > Who do Business for Scotland Represent.

On August 31st Andrew Gilligan used my blog (supplemented with his own research and an interview with me) to publish this excellent piece in the Sunday Telegraph

2. Dunleavy & Start-up Costs

On June 25th I wrote an angry blog.  Our First Minister and the Yes campaign were claiming one-off costs of independence would be £200 - 250m and rubbishing treasury estimates of £1.5 - 2.7bn.  Alex Salmond went as far as demanding a retraction of HM Treasury's "highly misleading briefing".   Citing a report commissioned by the Sunday Post the First Minister wrote: "Professor Dunleavy’s report this weekend has vindicated the Scottish Government’s position and demolished that of the UK Government".

I analysed Dunleavy's report and concluded "no matter how hard you try you can't disguise the fact that the true cost will be significantly more than £1bn and in fact look to be closer to the Treasury estimates than Alex Salmond's" > Dunleavy & The Costs of Independence

On August 31st the Sunday Times published specially commissioned work by the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) which concluded: "The set up costs for an independent Scotland would run to nearly £2.5bn"

3. Independence threat to jobs in companies who rely on Trade with rUK

On May 18th I wrote at length (> Independence and Scotland's Trade with rUK) about the fact that businesses who trade with rUK would be damaged by independence and jobs would inevitably leave an independent Scotland as a result.  I concluded: "This is not a marginal issue, the businesses I can speak for are not unusual.  This is not about making threats or protecting the interests of a few rich shareholders [..]  there are wider implications for employment and the economic success of an independent Scotland that I feel should be understood by anyone wishing to make an informed decision as to how to cast their vote on September 18th".

On August 13th the Scotsman reported: "Around one in ten Scottish jobs depend on trade with the UK and would be “in danger” after a referendum Yes vote,according to Treasury analysis."

4. Misleading Conclusions from GDP/Capita Data

On May 20th I wrote about the ridiculousness of concluding that Scotland is a wealthy country based purely on the single GDP/Capita measure (> Look at our GDP/Capita; Look at Ireland).  I pointed out that Ireland has an even higher GDP capita but is in no meaningful way a "more wealthy" country and suggested GNP as one of the measures that should be considered (as it measures the wealth that falls to the citizens of a country as opposed to that owned by overseas companies)

On May 29th the Guardian published an article (New doubt cast over Alex Salmond's claims of Scottish wealth) which drew attention to the issue of foreign ownership of production, highlighting GNI / GNP measures and observing: "Alex Salmond’s claim that Scotland is one of the richest countries in the developed world has been challenged [..] it is a middle-ranking economy with high levels of foreign ownership. The domination of non-Scottish firms, particularly in key industries such as North Sea oil, financial services and banking, whisky and salmon, means a significant amount of Scotland’s wealth is exported to the rest of the UK and overseas"

5. Scotland and the EU

On May 16th I wrote about the realities of the negotiation hurdles that Scotland would face to remain within the EU (Independent Scotland & The EU).

On August 29th Professor Adam Tomkins published this definitive article on the subject (Scotland and the EU).  He makes his case with far more logical rigour and authority than I do - but I would venture his conclusions are wholly consistent with my own.

6. The "£8bn Better Off" Claim

On August 12th - responding to our First Minister Alex Salmond's claim in the first Live TV debate that an independent Scotland would have been "£8bn better off" over the last 5 years I cried foul and wrote this blog > The £8bn Misdirection.  When it was defended by Business for Scotland and I saw they were using the same claim I followed up with this blog (August 16th) to try and simplify the point > £8bn Better Off.

On September 2nd I appeared on John Beattie's Radio Scotland Lunchtime show where I was able to clarify the issue for a wider audience.  Business for Scotland sent along a representative to try and defend it - listen for yourselves and decide if he succeeded*

Listen from 35:30 in > John Beattie Show

*He didn't

****************

I reckon that's not a bad track record.