From the Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City, University of London.

We can’t tell anything useful about Scottish GDP because:

Why might the data be misstated? First, there simply isn’t enough data to reliably estimate Scottish GDP. We have no figures for where sales take place in the UK, for example. VAT returns are an utterly unreliable source for this: a UK company does not submit data separately on sales in Scotland from elsewhere. The same is largely true on spending. So forget Scottish GDP data: we just don’t know what it is.

It’s entirely true that it’s difficult to track sales by location inside a customs union or single market.

But then we don’t measure GDP by sales anyway. We measure by production, consumption or incomes, each of which should be, but won’t because of cheating, the same.

And we can measure place of production, place of consumption and place of the person earning the income.

Which is why ONS uses the income and production approaches to measuring GVA, GVA being the equivalent of GDP in smaller statistical units than that customs union or single market.

Shouldn’t a professor, even one of practice, in international political economy, even at Islington Technical College, know this?

76 comments on “From the Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City, University of London.

  1. It’s pretty basic, isn’t it? My pals at school who did geography O-level knew about the 3 methods of computing GDP…

  2. He’s arguing with Kevin Hague about Scottish economic data.

    He has picked a fight with the wrong guy.

    Regardless of his politics (KH is soft left), I doubt there is anyone who understands these figures more than him. Even the SNP finance team are scared of him.

  3. “the same is largely true on spending. So forget Scottish GDP data: we just don’t know what it is.”

    if he replaced the we with an I.. it would be accurate.

  4. And so a new campaign begins. Murphy realises he hasn’t pissed off nearly enough people in Scotland so marches in, is met a few miles inside the border, surrounded and then routed; flees back to England and safety.

  5. @Rob: trouble is, being shown to be ignorant and wrong by Kevin Hague is actually a badge of honour for many Cybernats. This will actually increase Murph’s standing in their eyes.

  6. Whoops.

    Try again.

    Ritchie supports officially the most antisemitic governing party in Europe? The one that has presided over and encouraged Scotland’s rise to the top of the tables of racist attacks?

    Nahhh…

  7. “the most antisemitic governing party in Europe?” Good God, are they? I’d assumed that the SNP had two advantages over the old Glasgow Labour Party, namely (i) less in awe of Lenin, and (ii) less culturally Irish Roman Catholic.

    Is their anti-semitism of the latter kind, or is it some New Left anti-semitism? Is it truly anti-semitic, or is “anti-semitic” just vulgar abuse directed at anyone who disapproves of some of the actions of the government of Israel?

    Come to think of it, it’s rather sad that one must distinguish anti-semitism from “anti-semitism”.

  8. Sturgeon fully signs up to neoantisemitism too, but I was mainly referring to the near-pogroms involving violent attacks on the Jewish community and their property.

    Scotland currently has the highest recorded rate of violent racist attacks of any European country. Although Swiss and Austrian numbers may not record the truth.

  9. P.S.

    Can’t we refer to them as the British Nationalist Party until they win an independence vote?

  10. It would appear Dave (Why the additional Dave?) could be on to something. My guess is that Scotland’s universities (which are on a par with the KCNA in terms of the purity of socialist doctrine) have a lot of militant Pro palestinian activists who have conflated Anti Israel attitudes into anti semitism. Given the electoral results in Scotland over the past decade their stupidity is self-evident so I have to agree – might be in England’s best interests to start building a new wall…..

  11. GlenDorran

    Maybe he is looking at a post Brexit job in Scotland if it can manage to stay in the EU – easier for him to move there than Ireland?

  12. In a rather brief article in The Guardian today, Larry Elliott looks at Scottish independence and its economy. He says that Norway, another country with a small population and even less economic diversity, is rather wealthy. He seems to entirely miss the point that that was because the oil revenue was invested in wealth fund and that that opportunity has passed.
    But my main point is this: he says Scotland has an ageing population but this can be countered by immigration. If what Davedave says is correct, they won’t want to come. And the reason Scotland’s population is possibly age faster than that of the UK as a whole is because immigrants have not gone to Scotland. That may be more for economic reasons but this won’t encourage them.

  13. @KJP: despite the back-slapping and self-congratulations from many Nats, the social attitudes of Scots are almost identical to the rest of the UK. Attitudes to immigration may be marginally more positive, but as you note immigration levels are lower up here.

    Key point is that immigrants want to go somewhere prosperous and there’s nothing to suggest that an independent Scotland would attract them.

  14. Oh, the other point that will be fun to watch is when the fundamentalist wing of the SNP start agitating for an independent Scotland to be out of the EU. Lots of them don’t want to gain independence just to hand it back to Brussels; it’s a dirty little secret that the current SNP leadership do their best to keep quiet.

    I know one guy in this camp who has been arguing that an independence referendum shouldn’t be held until after Brexit AND after it’s obvious to everyone that the EU is clearly imploding.

  15. Who says its additional?

    And no, while lots of people who hate Jewish people will pretend its just antiZionism, we’re talking about ordinary middle of the road Scots who have been persuaded there’s a Jewish Problem in their midst. Synagogues have been attacked as a direct, overt response to the banking crisis. That’s just old fashioned Nazi antisemitism.

    Antisemites love to try and distract with talk of Zionism, but you’ll notice it’s always them bringing it into the discussion when Judaism is the topic. Don’t play their game. The vast majority of Jewish people aren’t Zionist, the vast majority of Zionists aren’t Jewish (or Israeli).

  16. “Maybe he is looking at a post Brexit job in Scotland if it can manage to stay in the EU – easier for him to move there than Ireland?”

    What’s the Scottish equivalent of a knighthood ?

  17. OH fuck, not again

    *wasn’t it? Can’t expel people on the grounds of skin colour or religion while in the UK or EU.

  18. The second Scottish Referendum is an attempt to disrupt Article 50 going in 31st March.

    What do you think about the mood up there Glen Dorran?

    Two choices occur.

    1-May can just say NO to the SNP . “You had your vote and you lost. You remained in the UK and the UK voted out.”

    2–Ok you can have your second vote.

    But this time we will address one of the Remainiacs chief whines: That no one knew what Brexit meant on 23rd of June.

    Of course they didn’t because Camoron bet the farm on his Project Fear gang frightening the British people to give up their chance for freedom. That his bullshit might fail rarely if ever crossed his “mind”.

    This time the SNP must pre-negotiate and massively publicise the exact conditions and package that the Scottish people are to vote for or against.

    From England it needs to be made clear they get no money at all.

    The SNP must confirm their intent to rejoin the EU and they and the EU must make clear ALL the terms.

    So:

    1–The EU must say if it will keep Scotland solvent with English style subsidy and how much etc.
    2-It must confirm all the terms of Scotland joining the EU–ie it means the Euro.
    3-They must say whether they will –against their rules–relax the financial conditions for Scottish re-entry into the EU/ro –as they orig did for the PIIGS. Thus confirming that Scotland will be the sixth member of the PIIGSS. That will be popular EU-wide I have no doubt.
    4–If EU rules are NOT to be relaxed the Scottish people must have spelled out the required tax increases and Greek-style Austerity measures they will face including their likely duration.

    Then at least they know what they are getting.

  19. Ecksy is tilting at windmills again. The EU has explicitly and repeatedly stated that an independent Scotland will not be accepted under any circumstances whatsoever.

  20. Davedave: You wanna bet that those attacking Scottish synagogues owe their allegiance to clans far away from Scotland? Going in this====> direction and down as you look at the map.

  21. Mr Toad speaks

    “Richard Murphy says:
    March 14 2017 at 12:14 pm
    I will develop this – even add some theory
    But not today
    Students to teach….”

  22. Mr Ecks:

    I work in an open plan office and when news of Sturgeon’s announcement when round yesterday you could here groans and swearing. Admittedly I work in finance and most people have a clue.

    My guess is that most people are fucked off it’s being brought up again so soon but aren’t surprised.

    SNP’s campaign this time will focus on how bad things are because of Brexit, with an ever thicking helping of “Evil Westminster Tories”. They’ll also try to ignore the economics evidence as “replaying the first referendum/Project Fear 2”.

    The No campaign can’t do any worse than last time (I hope) but they haven’t got a popular figurehead. Ruth Davidson is articulate and a fighter, but there are still too many who reflexively hate the Tories.

    For me (and I appreciate many of you would be happy to see the back of us), I think the best I can hope for is May grants the referendum but only after Brexit. It means another few years of SNP whining, but that’s just the default setting now and people are used to it.

  23. Davedave: Yeah they say a lot of things. There is no chance of them being that dumb because of all the little regions–basques etc–who would take Scotland arriving as a call to (metaphorical hopefully) arms.

    But the second proposal would take any wind out of the SNPs sails.

    Even if they got another ref is unlikely that they could win . But proposal Two makes that absolutely certain and leaves them with no comeback.

  24. GlenDorran–I have no animosity towards Scots–apart from leftist ones. But your nations heart has been eaten out by Socialism. Our two lands will still do better together.

  25. A third choice (following on from Mr Ecks) occurs:-

    Why are we talking about referendums? I thought “everybody” agreed that in a parliamentary democracy they we not necessary?

    The Scots have voted for SNP in both their local parliament and UK one. Therefore, if the Scottish Assembly asks for independence, surely the UK parliament should just rubber-stamp it?

    To do otherwise just risks the wrong result again!

  26. He seems to entirely miss the point that that was because the oil revenue was invested in wealth fund and that that opportunity has passed managed by Norwegians, not feckless Scots.

  27. My guess is that most people are fucked off it’s being brought up again so soon but aren’t surprised.

    My suspicion is that a large chunk of the Remain vote in 1975 was driven by this, given we’d only been in the EEC for two years by then. So re-running the Scottish or Brexit referenda within say, 5 years, possibly longer, would merely confirm the existing result, but with larger majority, on the “oh, for fuck’s sake” principle.

    Sturgeon’s got a bit of problem here, if this is true, as she’s been pushing the idea of a second referendum pretty much solely because of the Brexit vote, since OFFS would suggest that she’s​ facing a much harder uphill struggle until about 2025 at the earliest. A second defeat on the independence issue could just focus attention on the SNP’s less savoury aspects.

  28. Mr Ecks:

    “But your nations heart has been eaten out by Socialism.”

    I asked a Common Weal member (i.e. the real far left Indy movement) why, if the SNP won’t pursue a hard left agenda for fear of the voters, why those same voters would endorse the hard left in a future independent Scotland? Got the usual response about “alienated voters” etc.

    Despite the protestations of a desire for ‘radicalism’, currently Scotland is the living embodiment of New Labour: lots and lots of nice middle class jobs in quangos and other public bodies.

  29. KJP- “he says Scotland has an ageing population but this can be countered by immigration”

    So they want to turn Scotland in to London?

  30. There’s a case to be made (I don’t agree with it, but still …) that post-Brexit tariff and non-tariff barriers erected by the EU will have a deleterious effect on the UK economy. But if an independent Scotland were inside the EU (fat chance while Spain is till a member) very similar barriers would operate between them and the rUK,

    So the SNP argument is “staying in the UK will wreck the 20% of our trade that is with the EU – let’s leave and have it wreck the 80% of our trade that is with the rUK”. WTF?

  31. Kevin Hague is currently undergoing the full Ritchie experience, although Ritchie is yet to wave his 0.2Prof status at him yet.

    Maybe someone could direct Kevin to the “Ragging On Ritchie” tag over here?

  32. “Despite the protestations of a desire for ‘radicalism’, currently Scotland is the living embodiment of New Labour: lots and lots of nice middle class jobs in quangos and other public bodies.”

    A Scottish friend of mine who has non-university-educated nephews and nieces explained that in urban Scotland, “getting a job” for these kids means working for one branch or another of the State (NHS, fire, police, a council…). I believe the nephew in question decided to train as a paramedic, as noble a profession as any.

    Can @GlenDorran comment as to the veracity of this?

  33. 1. Why do the Tories want to keep Scotland if it costs so much to run and only elects anti-Tory MPs ?

    2. Why don’t we all get to vote in the referendum on Scottish Independence as it will affect all UK citizens ?

    3. Can we have a referendum on kicking Wales out as well ?

  34. Not GlenDorran, and I don’t have as much contact with folk as I used to, but that’s definitely the impression I’ve got living in Scotland over the last fifteen years or so. A ‘good job’ is a council job. This is more true in the Highlands than in Edinburgh, though. There are real jobs in Edinburgh, but I fully expect them to mostly go away if ‘independence’ happens.

    I’ve always felt that an independent Scotland could work — but not with the people we’ve got running things, and not with the Scots’ apparently unbreakable attachment to socialism.

  35. Bobrocket
    1. Conservative and Unionist Party.
    2. Did the EU get a vote in the UK referendum?
    3. No.

  36. Surely both problems can be solved by England and Wales declaring independence from the United Kingdom of Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    UKSNI is the successor state and stays in the EU – no Article 50 needed. E+W as the seceding state becomes by default outside the EU, and would need to apply through the usual channels if it ever wanted to – which would as previously observed, be blocked by Spain.

  37. BiG

    The UK has nuclear weapons (the SNP is anti nuclear), a permanent UN security seat, membership of NATO, sterling, blah blah blah blah etc.

    However you pretend to dress it, the UK would be leaving. The only way that works is an “assigmnent” of the UK’s membership (I can’t see Spain adapting rules to allow that).

    And which – as you know – is all quite irrelevant, as you make the (flawed) assumption that the Scots and Northern Ireland want independence from England and Wales (as the price for remaining in the EU).

  38. ken,

    RBS has less than 100,000 employees globally, so even if half of those are in Scotland they’re not skewing figures much. And I am not sure they’d be counted, as RBS is a government-owned private enterprise, not an arm of government.

  39. “I have no animosity towards Scots–apart from leftist ones. But your nations heart has been eaten out by Socialism. Our two lands will still do better together.”

    Well said, Ecksy.

  40. BobRocket,

    Wales can’t leave the UK for two reasons:

    1. It’s part of the Kingdom of England, so unlike Scotland and Northern Ireland is not a component part of the union (just to piss off Welsh nationalists). It’s why our slightly off-geometric flag isn’t further confused by a dragon standing in the middle and can therefore be drawn by primary school children.

    2. The one thing that stops outright war between the North and South Welsh (who still can’t even agree on standard spellings of Welsh words) is the distance and time taken to travel it… Wales is so impractical that for much of the middle the local A&E is in Shrewsbury.

    Oh – and most Welsh people seem quite happy in the UK for some reason, but we’ll pass that over as irrelevant.

  41. I like BiG’s idea just for the thought of Sturgeon crawling to the EU the day after independence asking for €Xbn and The EU having to cough up.

  42. It’s part of the Kingdom of England

    Just to be a pendant, it was part of the Kingdom of England, until the K of E was subsumed into the UK of Great Britain.

    .

  43. BobRocket

    Already done – it’s called Offa’s Dyke.

    Well, a Dyke rather than a wall, but it was impressive for its time…

    Jack C

    To continue the pendantry – the UK of GB “and Northern Ireland”.

  44. @PF,

    I’ve no doubt the Scots would cede extraterritoriality for Faslane as part of English independence. Sure they’d rather not, but hey, dealing is dealing. The UK’s permanent UNSC seat would of course be held by the state remaining in the Union. England and Wales could of course make their case to the UN on the basis of those nuclear weapons.

    It’s clear that a constituent part of the UK can leave the UK, and that leaving part of the UK would be, by default, outside the EU. Precedent with Greenland and Algeria. That was all settled to the perfect satisfaction of various attorneys general of nations, parts of nations, of the EU, and other nations (and parts thereof) within the EU.

    So there is absolutely no reason that England and Wales cannot decide to leave the UK (and with it, the EU). I don’t follow why the Scots or Northern Irish would have any say in that decision – seeing as the English and Welsh had no say in eitherthe Scottish independence referendum, or the Good Friday Agreement referendum.

    It’s bugger all to do with Scotland and NI wanting independence from the UK – far from it. They would continue to be the UK. It’s about England and Wales wanting said independence.

    And as has been clarified with Brexit – Britain is a parliamentary democracy, and that clearly now includes the option for parliament to bind a future parliament (no vote on eventual Brexit terms, which could well happen under a new parliament). So if parliament wants to secede England and Wales, it can do it. Without reference to the Scots or Irish.

  45. BiG

    What on earth are you talking about!

    It’s bugger all to do with Scotland and NI wanting independence from the UK – far from it. They would continue to be the UK.

    It’s about England and Wales wanting said independence [ ie from Soctland and Nothern Ireland ].

    Err, we don’t…..

  46. GlenDorran said:
    “@Rob: trouble is, being shown to be ignorant and wrong by Kevin Hague is actually a badge of honour for many Cybernats. This will actually increase Murph’s standing in their eyes.”

    I know you will hate this, but given the Scots’ socialism I cant help thinking that the best outcome for England would be Murphy leaving to become Finance Minister of an independent Scotland. Killing two birds with one stone.

  47. BiG interesting…so the head of state in the new UK of Scotland and NI would be Queen Elizabeth, the Queen of England? There would be some interesting constitutional ramifications

  48. Diogenes – how so? HM serves as Queen of Canada, New Zealand, and Australia with no particular constitutional ramifications, either in the Dominions, England, or the UK.

  49. Dcardno, the UK pm has a rather different relationship with the Queen than the commonwealth pms. Will the new UK pm have weekly meetings as well as the pm of England and Wales? Where will Mugabe stay when he makes a state visit to the UK?

  50. For once I agree with BiG – the best solution has to be that Wales and England leave the UK, thereby leaving the EU, and Scotland and NI stay in the UK, thereby staying in the EU. Everyone’s happy, well apart from the EU who now have a basket case economy to deal with, but they won’t be able to complain, so stuff them.

    But when I suggested this before I was shot down, because reasons apparently.

  51. Jim

    Everyone’s happy

    Which will make the independence referendum – in England & Wales – an absolute doddle!

  52. Rather than a wall between us and the Scots or Welsh, how about a leylandi hedge? OK small when first planted but it would be cheap and before you know it, it’s 50ft tall and pissing the neighbours off no end.

  53. so the head of state in the new UK of Scotland and NI would be Queen Elizabeth, the Queen of England?

    The problem doesn’t arise: as she’s not the Queen of England (due there not being a Kingdom of England for he to be Queen of). The Head of State of the UK would be the current Head of State of the UK.

  54. Jack c

    Your italicisation is strange but are you saying that Queen Elizabeth will be head of state in both the new UK and the new England and Wales?

    OK but what about the state functions such as the Queen’s speech, state visits, etc. Will a visitor to the UK get to visit Parliament and Buckingham Palace or is it Edinburgh and Holyrood? Details of course but only the high and mighty are allowed to be obsessed with detail.

  55. PF – “Well, a Dyke rather than a wall, but it was impressive for its time…”

    And now Scotland has the Dyke. Two of them I suspect.

  56. Jim, except that the UK is the nation with the permanent seat on the UNSC, the U.K. Is the nation that owns the nukes. And is the signatory of countless agreements. Those would remain with rUKS&W.

  57. Diogenes,
    Apologies for the formatting.

    I was pendantically pointing out that there is no Queen of England.

    I have no idea what would happen if the UK splits, but strongly suspect she’d continue as HofS.

  58. Bob rocket : Wales can’t leave the UK for two reasons:
    The first reason you gave also means that England can’t leave the UK without Wales, doesn’t it?

  59. “Rather than a wall between us and the Scots or Welsh, how about a leylandi hedge? OK small when first planted but it would be cheap and before you know it, it’s 50ft tall and pissing the neighbours off no end.”

    It’d be a doddle compared to the last border hedge we planted: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08hmr15

  60. “except that the UK is the nation with the permanent seat on the UNSC, the U.K. Is the nation that owns the nukes. And is the signatory of countless agreements. Those would remain with rUKS&W.”

    I think it would be easy to get our slot back on the UNSC if E&W physically had the nukes (Scotland doesn’t want them, so thats nice and easy). And what exactly does being on the UNSC get us?Would we be poorer if we weren’t? I doubt it, better off probably because our politicians wouldn’t be able to play geopolitics all the time with our armed forces.

    And all the other agreements that the UK has, well we’d have to sign new ones wouldn’t we? Scotland would, if it became independent from the UK, so if they can do it, why can’t E&W?

  61. Read this, and read it now.

    http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/richard-murphy-gers-denier.html?m=1

    Ritchie gets put in his place by not only Kevin Hague but also Professor Ronald MacDonald (don’t laugh, he is to be taken seriously) and Professor Angus Armstrong, previously Head Of Macroeconomic Analysis at the Treasury.

    It’s a proper kicking – some choice quotes:

    “He appears not to understand the basic principles of economic and statistical analysis”

    “he’s either an idiot or that he assumes the people following him are”

    “hopelessly naive and fundamentally flawed.”

    Killer from Prof Armstrong: “Anybody who says these figures are “easily rigged” or “nonsense data” (i.e. Ritchie) frankly doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously. ”

    Final line: “we can say be 100% sure that he doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about.”

    I’m having that post written up on vellum. It’s beautiful.

  62. My comment from last night seems to have been caught in the spam filter, but read Kevin Hague’s blog to witness Ritchie getting the mother of all kickings, all footnoted and referenced , including two proper academics calling him an idiot.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.