The SNP’s Growth Commission’s report (“The Sustainable Growth Commission; Scotland - the new case for optimism") has been published.
Billed as a starter for the next independence campaign the report, written by former MSP and economist, Andrew Wilson, has brought divisions within the independence movement to the fore.
Gone is the seamless transition from austerity Britain to a prosperous Scotland set out in the 2013 White Paper.
In its place is a realistic assessment of the economic difficulties that separation would create. Wilson believes that it would take Scotland 25 years to match the economic performance of a range of small countries. The report outlines a 10 year plan to cut Scotland’s £13.3bn deficit and contends that an independent Scotland would pay the remaining UK £5bn annually to pay for Scotland’s part of UK debts and ongoing shared services. And Scotland would keep the pound - at least in the short term.
His report sets out a series of ideas to spur Scotland’s economy including encouraging immigration and population growth with tax relief for highly skilled migrant workers along with measures to encourage international graduates to come and stay in Scotland.
Unsurprisingly, the reaction to the report has been mixed. Some, including economist Will Hutton, argue that the “new realism” would have strengthened the previous independence campaign.
However, Iain Macwhirter, writing in the Sunday Herald argues that calls for austerity are likely to do little to grow support for independence. “This report has raised profound ideological divisions in the broader independence movement, created an entirely new set of currency problems and made Nicola Sturgeon sound as if she is an advocate of austerity. Perhaps it should best be placed on the shelf marked “interesting contributions to the debate” and allowed to gather dust”.
Others have welcomed his report saying that Wilson has made an effective case for developing devolution. Business commentator Bill Jamieson wrote that “improvement in growth and economic performance is not a function of independence per se but a range of policies that would need to be adopted whatever the shape of the constitutional architecture”. And Scotland on Sunday’s, Euan McColm, expressed the view that Andrew Wilson “has made a powerful case for a Scottish Parliament using its existing powers to their fullest”.
Meanwhile, back in the Scottish Parliament MSPs have been debating the Stage 1 Report of the Planning Bill. After close on three years starting with an Independent Planning Review, followed by a White Paper, an interim statement from the Scottish government, two extensive consultations and lengthy deliberations by the Local Government and Communities Committee we appear not to be much further forward. No definition of what planning is about is likely to appear on the face of the Bill.
And MSPs are looking at a right of appeal for communities. Before they come to a final view on the matter they may want to ask why it is that so many Scottish developers are expanding in England; fewer obstacles perhaps? And it’s not as if the Scottish economy is booming.
Maybe it is time for a new realism!