The Scottish Government’s defence of Scotland staying within the EU as part of the UK has been remarkably low key. Yes , Nicola Sturgeon has at last joined in a TV debate on the subject - and in the process rather exposed herself as verbose and hectoring but , that's been about it . No pro-EU battle bus touring the country , no real passion or vigour in fighting for Europe.

I don’t think the cause of the low key nature of their campaign is hard to find. The reasons – and there are very good ones – for Scotland staying in the EU are remarkably similar to the reasons why Scotland should remain in the UK - protecting jobs , securing pensions , the advantages which come with pooling sovereignty . Better not say too much then or somebody might make the connection that the SNP being very pro-EU and very anti-UK doesn’t really make much sense. The Leave campaign messages bought to us by Boris and Co are in general amusingly similar to what Alex Salmond was trying to make us believe in 2014. An exception is the nasty anti-immigrant undercurrent in the Leave campaign which Alex Salmond was never guilty of.

This is all just an interesting comparison, what isn’t amusing is that the Scottish and UK economies are palpably slowing. You can see this everywhere , hesitancy in the housing market and falling retail sales are only symptoms of a wider malaise.

There are, as always, a number of reasons why this slowdown is happening but there is one specific self-inflicted cause which is a material part of the unhelpful overall cocktail. Businesses and consumers hate significant uncertainty and there are few things as good at delivering just that as having a Referendum. A side effect of the Referendum on continued membership of the UK in the EU is that it creates economic uncertainty which is clearly hurting growth, making the task of getting the country’s debt under control more difficult, as well as creating new jobs and maintaining public services that much harder.

I think you can probably see where I am going with this; whatever the eventual outcome the process of having a Referendum is bad for your wealth. We should learn this in Scotland.

In 2014 we had a Referendum here and decided by a clear majority that we should remain part of the UK. I entirely accept that if a Scottish Government is elected which has a clear, explicit manifesto commitment to hold a Referendum on independence for Scotland before the next election then democracy trumps economics and we should have one. That hasn’t happened, there was no such commitment in the SNP’s 2016 manifesto. Under the disguise of “nobody must stand in the way of the democratic rights of the Scottish People” the SNP Government lies in wait , hoping that some set of circumstances – Brexit, opinion polls or whatever - will give it and its Green Party accomplices the excuse to call another Independence Referendum. Not only is this morally dishonest so soon after the “once in a lifetime” vote we have already had but the uncertainty it creates is bad for Scotland’s economy, bad for jobs and bad for public services.

The possibility of another Referendum diverts attention from issues which really do matter such as driving higher standards and efficiency in education and health. The Scottish Government, if it actually puts the people of Scotland first, should make it clear that it will not seek another Referendum in the lifetime of this Scottish parliament.

Pinstripe is a senior member of Scotland's financial services community