Referendum outcome is ambiguity

Major international investors and multinational companies will be considering future options beyond confinement in a marginal, off-shore state. We have enhanced understanding of independent Scotland’s international standing: exposed, volatile and politically naïve. Such intelligence should determine the outcome of the referendum vote. Alarmingly, it shapes our anticipation of Scotland after the current campaigns. Independent Scotland has all the major stakeholders running scared – not of its strength, but of its weakness. The greater danger lies now in the pre-emptive actions of major economic players and stakeholders. Scotland may find it difficult to hang on to those dimensions and advantages it has currently. Once gone, will institutions ever return; will their planning wait for the referendum outcome; and what is the mindset of those institutions which, previously, might have come and invested, but will now think twice? Even when the outcome is No, the business conclusion will be never to be in this exposed position again, even if given the devo-max booster. The longstanding forecast of the referendum outcome is ambiguity, the worst of electoral worlds. While Scotland will remain in the Union, the questions over its vigour will have been raised because the Yes vote is likely to settle as a significant minority. A Yes vote, though disastrous, would be clear. Scotland would be impoverished relatively, but would be getting on with it. The Nationalists could fall back on emotion, and their invention of a nation. But a No vote, on a 60-40 basis, has all the elements to sap self-confidence and to fix doubt in the minds of business and the international community. Scotland will need to come to terms with itself and its No vote: much more difficult will be to deal with the aftermath. (Prof) Bill Wardle Southbrae Drive Glasgow Following Standard Life’s announcement that it may move its operations outside Scotland in the event of independence, perhaps pro-unionists should show their appreciation by investing in the company. Other companies that have been reluctant to express similar views might then feel it worth their while to do so. Tim Jackson Whim Road Gullane, East Lothian We have been told, repeatedly, by the pro-independence lobby that, after independence, Scotland will become a more attractive place to do business. Why then do we not hear of any named companies that will only move here if we get independence? Andrew Black Lady Place Livingston Standard Life has raised its head above the parapet and indicated that it will leave a separated Scotland. Who can blame it? It must think of its employees and the future of the company and in Salmond’s Scotland there would be no Bank of England safety net and the currency question raises uncertainty stratospherically. Can there be any doubt, even in the mind of the most stalwart Nationalist, that a host of major companies and banks will follow that lead? If we add to this the certain haemorrhage of UK defence jobs and bases that will follow separation, one begins to wonder seriously about the future employment chances of our children and grandchildren. Alexander McKay New Cut Rigg Edinburgh Obviously, now is the time for all Scottish investors to withdraw their funds from Standard Life and transfer them to a company which believes in Scotland’s future. Andrew McCabe Ravelston Dykes Road Edinburgh