THIS week, the talk has been about whether or not we will stay in the European Union. I want to focus on a topic that’s a lot nearer home.

Many people regard Scottish independence as a matter only for our colleagues over the border, but that’s not the case.

We are so used to being governed by the South-East that we forget how much we have in common with the Scots in terms of our social and economic challenges. If we could forget that imaginary line on the map, we would see benefits from cross-border co-operation.

The universities of Durham and Northumbria, with the Institute for Public Policy Research, have been investigating what Scottish independence would mean to the North-East. They see it is a big challenge.

First, the Scots have a head start. Spending on economic development, scientific research and technology is a third higher than in the North-East. Economy-linked investment in transport is twice as high.

There is a debate to be had on the fairness of the funding formula that allows this to happen – the Barnett formula has been aired in this newspaper many times. But the end result isn’t in dispute.

Scotland, which has not experienced the budget paring and bureaucratic meddling that our region has, has created powerful economic development institutions that allow it to compete for investment globally.

More than that, Scotland has influence. It has a parliament and – like him or not – it has Alex Salmond as First Minister, who can claim to speak for a nation. We do not have any of this apparatus nor any of its clout.

If the economic freedoms that independence would bring further strengthen Scotland’s hand, we could find ourselves between the anvil of a government that looks little farther than the Home Counties and the hammer of a new “tiger” economy to the north. That won’t be very comfortable.

That is the worst case scenario. We should not underestimate our own strengths – in the process industry on Teesside, the digital and renewable energy fields and in education, research and innovation, typified by the two institutions that produced this research.

It won’t be plain sailing for Scotland either.

Recessions do not respect borders. The Scots have invested massively in health and social care, but have yet to ask themselves how they can continue to do so and still create the low tax regimes that businesses crave.

Maybe we can help them.

If recessions know no boundaries, co-operation shouldn’t either. Like the North-East, Scotland was built on shipbuilding, steel, mining and construction. Maybe we should be looking at the successor industries – wind and wave power, processing, technology and tourism – to build a common economic and investment policy.

To do that, business and local government will need a sense of common purpose and a willingness, through the Local Enterprise Partnerships, to pool resources to make a convincing case for joint working. We will also need some of the freedom of movement that has been allowed to our neighbours.

But for this to work we must speak and act as a region, so we can exercise the clout I spoke about earlier.

In the next few years, the UK will experience some of the biggest political and economic challenges in its history.

If the North-East wants to survive and come out a stronger and more prosperous place, we need the independence to shape our own destiny.