SHADOW Chancellor Ed Balls has urged Scots to vote No in the referendum, citing higher costs on interest rates and pensions, but he struggled to explain his claim that Border posts could be erected at Berwick and Gretna.
A bullish Mr Balls spoke of high set-up costs for a Scottish state, higher interest rates, the lack of a formal currency union, and during his trip to Scotland repeatedly making reference to border controls.
But asked about the lack of border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland he appeared flummoxed, with Labour colleagues Johann Lamont and Anas Sarwar coming to his aid. Mr Balls insisted that the lack of border controls with Ireland was a result of the Republic agreeing to maintain similar immigration rules to the UK, while Alex Salmond was openly promoting a different policy.
He accused the First Minister of trying to con Scotland into voting for independence by refusing to reveal his currency plans and transition costs. The Shadow Chancellor visited Edinburgh to "convince the people of Scotland to vote No" and outline "the facts" on currency, taxes and interest rates which mean Scotland "would be much, much worse off" if it was independent.
Mr Balls said: "I don't have a vote in this independence referendum but I really care about the result, as do people across the UK.
"We want Scotland to stay in the union. I want not just Labour voters but all voters to vote No in the referendum, because that's the way to make sure that we don't have high interest rates in Scotland, that we don't have our pensions system broken up.
"It's the way that we can have more jobs, more investment, we can continue to work together. I think it's the best way forward and I want to help convince the people of Scotland to vote No.
He added: "Let's have an open debate about what the costs are. We have set out what the costs are, something that Alex Salmond has absolutely, totally failed to do.
"He won't tell us what his currency plan is. Scotland will not be able to stay part of our currency union. So what is Alex Salmond's plan?"
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article