The essay by Jim McColl, chairman of Clyde Blowers is broadly supportive of independence and sets out the business or economic case for it:
"...we should be saying and doing what is required to grow our economy sustainably. We need the power to encourage investment and capital formation, to deliver competitive advantage for Scottish business and incentivise innovation through our tax system so we can create and retain wealth, grow and reward employment and sustainably expand the economy.
We need the ability to bring together skills and education with welfare and employment so we can create new opportunities for young Scots and deliver a system that is fairer and effective.
Let’s not forget what we have as a nation: 25 per cent of the EU’s offshore tidal and wind energy potential, which will be worth billions every year: oil and gas reserves in the North Sea with a wholesale value well in excess of £1 trillion and, for our size, the strongest university research base in the world. Of course, the arguments for financial control go well beyond oil and gas. We have a strong international brand and distinctive and growing industries in many sectors. Perhaps most importantly, we have the resource of our talented, caring and determined people.
These strengths point to the fundamental problem. We have a government responsible for economic policy whose focus is not growth in Scotland but rather London and the South-East of England. That tells me Scotland is a nation in desperate need of a well-planned and thought through management buy-out."
But he also addresses the broader arguments:
"Independence, however, is about much more than the financial numbers. It is about the power to choose a better Scotland. It is about building on what we have so we can deliver even more for the country in which we all have a stake. "Powerful stuff and all the more so for the rarity of reports of business support for a "yes" vote. This is not, of course, editorial but at least the paper carries the article. On the other hand, it can't help itself. Eddie Barnes has the inevitable sly little digs. Firstly, apparently:
"the idea of a buy-out was picked apart by other leading business figures in Scotland last night."
Right: "leading business" "figures" (plural) and "picked apart". Who are (plural) these (plural) figures (plural)? They (plural) in fact turns (singular) out to be Director of CBI (Scotland), Iain McMillan. Singular.
And the CBI (Scotland)? You certainly hear from Iain McMillan a lot, don't you? A recent analysis explained:
"CBI Scotland's membership is, at most, 90. That's not a typo, it's 90 - nine zero....[Of those] 3 are universities, 1 is the commercial arm of a university, 9 are quangoes or publically owned companies (TIE and SECC are the companies), 8 are trade bodies, 1 is a BID district, 6 are branches or subsidiaries of other companies, and only 62 are Scottish companies."A good number are large firms of lawyers too. There may be a bit of practice development going on there. Further, of course:
" ...directors and owners of some of these companies are SNP supporters or have already expressed their appreciation of the work that has been done by the SNP Scottish Government."Lets be generous though and give them 100 members. As an aside, the Federation of Small Businesses in Scotland has around 20,000 members and you don't seem to hear as much from them, at least not in the pages of the Scotsman. But again, fair enough. Let's say that Mr. McMillan's forensic disection of Mr. McColl's case was made with the full blessing of his tiny membership. Let's read his devastating critique:
"Some management buy-outs are successful. Others are not."There you have it: a really pretty nice summary of the essence of the "no" campaign. No point even imagining anything better than you have already because achieving it might be difficult. Better not to try.
No comments:
Post a Comment