SCOTLAND would be the richest newly independent country in history if it voted Yes, according to a leading economist.
Andrew Wilson, who chaired the SNP’s Growth Commission, made the financial and moral case for leaving the UK as he appeared on the BBC’s Debate Night show.
He said: “We’ve been told for all of my life that Scotland couldn’t afford it and that we’re subsidised.”
The former SNP MSP, who has since founded Charlotte Street Partners, set out a “reality check” on that position.
He explained: “If Scotland becomes independent in the next year – it won’t but let’s say it did) – it would be the richest country ever to become an independent country.
“Scotland’s taxation that it raises itself is enough to pay for all of the Scottish Government’s policy responsibilities, plus all of social security and all of pensions – absent Covid, in a normal year.”
“Right now is a great time to do the transition … It will not be simple. It will be hard work. But it will be worth it.
“The alternative is carrying on the way we are now. If you believe the critics we are subsidised. Is living off handouts a life? Is that the sum of our ambition as a country? No it isn’t.”
READ MORE: Dr Kirsty Hughes addresses myths around Scotland's EU re-entry
He continued: “The UK model prioritises growth in the south east and transfers cash, the argument goes, to the regions and nations. That’s why Boris Johnson says we’ve got to level up. The best way to level up is to give people the power to look after themselves and make choices for themselves.”
Host Stephen Jardine put it to Wilson that Scotland is not in a financial position, following the Covid crisis, to join the EU because its notional deficit is above the 3% threshold set out by the EU for new members.
The former Growth Commission chief pointed out that “many countries” have been accepted by Brussels despite having a bigger deficit than 3%, provided they are on track to meet the target.
He explained: “All countries need to have sustainable finances. The question for Scotland is do you want that sustainability post-Covid led by a Conservative government you didn’t vote for, or do you want to do it yourself?”
Wilson concluded: “We shouldn’t allow criticism of the status quo to lose the ambition for making it better.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel