There's more to a nation’s wellbeing than cash

While he was Scotland’s chief medical officer Burns campaigned against the scourge of inequality in Scotland, and held up the solutions of education, opportunity and empowerment.

It should come as no surprise that he fully understood the transformational opportunity of Scottish independence. With real democracy comes control – and the power to make different economic and social decisions.

But the idea that independence was for social change escaped many in the media. Instead, commentators forced the discussion on to the sterile ground of bank account comparisons. “Is Scotland richer than the UK?”, they asked. “Will independence make you £500 better off?”

Prepare for more of this nonsense when Scotland’s “national accounts” are released. There will be shrieks and screams, claims and counter-claims. Unionist politicians will strut about TV studios like peacocks, while declaring that accounting gods have verified their genius.

The Scottish Government will, of course, say that Scotland’s resources – especially oil – have been mismanaged and that greater powers are needed to improve Scotland’s economy.

You should recognise those hymn sheets: they were sung for the entirety of the referendum campaign.

Fortunately, the likes of Burns are working on something beyond the catchphrase as part of the Scottish Government’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Broad principles – that are agreed upon across political parties – include the need for higher pay, greater support for manufacturing, and investment-led development.

There are a few important omissions (a fairer tax system, stronger rights at work and guaranteeing a living wage) but it’s noticeable that those are largely in areas where Westminster is in control, for now.

Tomorrow’s headlines will likely focus on deficit claims and oil volatility, with the wider social challenges reduced to small print.

Social starvation at foodbanks, in-work poverty, aggressive tax avoidance from profiteering banks and retail chains. The environmental and health threats of underground fracking and coal extraction. Homelessness and poor access to housing. Racism, sexism, and all forms of bigotry.

These issues do not fit easily into a cold economic calculus – but they are vital challenges for our human experience. “Justice has to take precedence,” Burns said.

I hope we all agree on that. Can we afford it?

Well, let’s look at the small print of those very same dodgy national accounts.

Over the last five years Scotland was charged £15.8 billion in military costs and £2.1bn in UK administrative costs, which are both allocated on a population share. Scotland also paid £17.1bn to service Westminster’s debt.

Whether these costs should be charged to Scotland is hotly contested, especially since little of the benefits of this “expenditure” is identifiable in Scotland.

Scotland has disproportionately experienced military cuts. The combined £5.4bn budget for tax and borders services is focused in London and the southeast. Yet Scotland’s accounts do not reflect this reality.

How much of Scotland’s tax revenue contribute to projects like the Crossrail and HS2 rail lines, the overgrown £2bn security services budget or the upkeep of the Palace of Westminster itself? We don’t know.

What we do know is that Scotland has many, many options when it comes to balancing its books and flourishing as a country. A more reasonable military spend for a country like Scotland would save £6bn in a single parliament. While imperial hangovers cost Britain billions in global security service operations, a Scottish James Bond could save at least half a billion pounds over five years. Add in the set-up savings Professor Patrick Dunleavy said were possible, then Scotland would have rolled back a higher number than tomorrow’s deficit.

Scotland is a developed, wealthy economy with huge resources, talents and competitive advantages. It should be self-evident that Scotland is wealthy in its own right. Even with a few challenging yet manageable adjustments, its finances would be in a reasonable position to maintain the services people rely on.

Like in all countries, any economic downturn would require tax or spending changes. In Scotland we can start with cutting Trident nuclear weapons, a large military overspend, charges to Britain’s global spying network, London’s infrastructure budget, a series of administrative costs and, of course, Westminster.

That’s what power and control means – the ability to take decisions in a collective interest. Without that control, Scotland’s financial position will suffer on the whims of markets and budget-makers far outwith the people’s reach.

That could change in May. Will voters recognise that powerless austerity isn’t Scotland’s financial union, but the dregs of Britain’s empire? Will we agree that there is much more to economic wellbeing than money?