Thursday, 18 February 2016

We can be independent if we want to

One of the most oft-quoted reasons for opposing the idea of independence for Wales is that we’re too poor.  The idea has gained so much currency that even Plaid has fallen for it in recent years.  But is it true – and what does it even mean?
One common way of judging how rich or poor a country is by looking at the country’s GDP – or more specifically, the GDP per capita.  It’s not an entirely unproblematic basis for making an assessment.  It tells us nothing about the relative cost of living in a country, for instance – so the population of a country with a low GDP per capita and a low cost of living might actually feel better off than the people of another country where both figures are higher.  It also tells us nothing about the way wealth is shared out in a country – so the population of a country with a low GDP per capita but where the wealth is evenly shared might feel better off than the people of a country with a high GDP per head and huge inequality.
But, even with those caveats, GDP per capita is as good a starting point as any to assess where Wales fits.  Here’s a series of charts, setting out GDP per head using three different methods of assessing it (that’s another problem with using GDP as a basis – the definition and method of calculation aren’t exactly clear either).  Wales, of course, simply doesn’t figure in the charts at all, being considered solely as part of the UK. 
That doesn’t mean that we can’t make a guess as to where Wales would fit, though.  There seems to be a general acceptance that the GDP per head in Wales is around 75% of that of the UK as a whole.  Using any of these three tables, it’s easy enough to see where a country with 75% of the UK’s GDP per head would sit.  What does that tell us?
·         On IMF figures, Wales would be in 24th place.  Only 150-odd countries worse off than us.
·         On World Bank figures, we’d be in 27th place, again with 150-odd countries lower down the table.
·         On UN figures, we’d be in 31st place, with another 160-odd countries lower down the table.
·         In each case, the list of countries lower down the list than Wales includes at least 15 (i.e. more than half) of the independent member states of the EU.
So if an independent Wales would be rich enough to be a middle-ranking member of the EU in terms of GDP, why are so many of us convinced that we’re too poor to be independent?  Part of the answer is that we are accustomed to drawing the comparison (or having it drawn for us) with too narrow a range of comparators.  In fact, the usual range of comparators is one – the UK.  And for sure, it’s easy to look at the south-east of England in particular and see ourselves as poor.  But if we look out across the world, it becomes obvious that we’re actually one of the world’s richer countries.
None of that means that independence for Wales would be easy, or problem-free.  It would not.  Taking responsibility for our own future; taking our place in the world – these are hard options not soft ones.  The soft option is to continue to close our eyes to any wider analysis and hide behind our perceived poverty. 
Too many people in Wales have become too comfortable avoiding the question, trying to put it off to a later date, as far as possible into the future.  For too long, the case for Wales taking responsibility for its own future hasn’t even been put – and the one thing that I can more or less guarantee is that no argument ever got won by not being put.  It’s time for that case to be put before the people of Wales, and I’m pleased to have ben invited to speak at an event to kick-start that process on Saturday in Cardiff namely the rally organised by Yes.Cymru.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I have no qualms over the matter of independence for Wales or any other part of the UK. It is for the electorate to decide. And it is for that same electorate to bear the financial burden associated with such decisions or otherwise.

However, I think you are very wrong when you suggest that poverty is one of the main reasons for opposing independence. Surely the main reason for opposition is that Wales has, to my mind, no history of independence and certainly no positive history. It is much the same for every other distinguishable region throughout the British Isles.

Unfortunately the rules of 'My heart tells me one thing and my head tells me another' just don't apply in this instance.

John Dixon said...

"I think you are very wrong when you suggest that poverty is one of the main reasons for opposing independence." Actually, that isn't quite what I said. What I said was that it was one of the most 'oft-quoted' reasons for opposing independence. I suspect that most of those using it as a reason actually have other reasons for opposing independence, because the poverty argument doesn't stand up to detailed analysis. But the flaws in what they say need to be exposed in order to get to the real reasons.

Anonymous said...


Anon,could you elaborate on your comment that Wales has "no history of independence and certainly no positive history."
Robert Tyler

Anonymous said...

Robert, Does Wales have a history of independence, positive or otherwise?

I stand to be corrected.

Anon (of comment 1)

Anonymous said...

A Fasle argument?

Why does it need a past precedent of independence to exist

The USA didnt exist before it was created

To my mind it was independent under Owain Glyndwr....and under Hywel dda........and many other centuries past......but that isnt my vision of a modern Wales.

Welsh law in the past was incredibly progressive however.

Anonymous said...

Not entirely sure I'd want to go back to a legal system seemingly inherited from the Irish and based upon Celtic traditions. Forget not, we in a Wales are, by and large, a race entirely devoid of any Celtic gene pool.

And this illustrates the problem with any quest for independence. There is nothing to look back upon in our history with any great 'longing'. So nothing for the 'heart'. And no-one has yet painted a good enough picture of a more rosy, affluent and healthy future. And so nothing for the 'head'.

Until such, we better just try to make the best of where we are.

John Dixon said...

Anon,

From your perspective, it seems that there are only two possible reasons for seeking independence for Wales. The first is that there should be something "to look back upon in our history", and the second is "a good enough picture of a more rosy, affluent and healthy future". That's a clear expression of your opinion, and I can respect that. But don't make the mistake of simply assuming that because that's your view, it must also be the basis on which other people form their conclusions.

Anonymous said...

John Dixon, I very much agree with you, this is my opinion. But isn't it true that people tend to vote in favour of things that make them 'feel' wealthier, better off, more prosperous. And vote against things when there is little certainty of such. I'd like to see the result of a re-run of Scottish independence now the oil price has crashed.

As for my views on the history of all things Wales like Welsh law and so on I really would welcome the considered thoughts of 'an expert'. I'd just like to be able to distinguish between fact and fiction, well meaning and well intentioned fiction notwithstanding.

John Dixon said...

"But isn't it true that people tend to vote in favour of things that make them 'feel' wealthier, better off, more prosperous. And vote against things when there is little certainty of such." Some do, some don't. Again, don't asume that everyone thinks the same way as you. The question of whether independence will lead to us being better off or not is an easy question to ask, but a much more difficult one to answer. I've talked about it on this blog before, and will do so again in the future; but in a comment on a slightly different topic is not the best place to spell that out.

"I'd like to see the result of a re-run of Scottish independence now the oil price has crashed." The belief that a crash in oil prices changes the whole nature of the debate is based on two assumptions, neither of which I accept as valid. The first is that the argument for independence was based on oil wealth - it was not. And the second is that a fall in oil price would have a negative net impact on the Scottish economy - the reality is rather more complex than that. But again, the impact of the oil price on Scottish voting patterns isn't really germane to this particular post.

Cotton Boll Conspiracy said...

https://southcarolina1670.wordpress.com/2016/02/26/shining-a-light-on-anti-independence-fallacies/