The anti-independence lobby is losing the economic argument ahead of the 2014 referendum as two leading business figures add to the debate on independence, it has been claimed.
Comments from Clyde Blowers founder Jim McColl and entrepreneur Sir Tom Hunter come as a poll suggests a slightly improved picture for the Yes campaign for the first time in recent months despite a majority still backing the Union.
The latest poll showed a healthy 15-point lead for the No camp, by 47% to 32%, but those undecided on 20% would be sufficient to bridge the gap.
The results follow fresh views on the independence debate from Mr McColl and Sir Tom, who are known to be sceptical about the case for the Union.
Mr McColl, chairman and chief executive of Clyde Blowers, likened independence to a management buy-out from the UK. Sir Tom, the entrepreneur from a sports retail background, castigated the scaremongering of the Better Together campaign and blamed both sides for the "factual void" in the debate.
Following their remarks, SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson MP said: "The anti-independence side is losing the economic argument as more and more people recognise the opportunities a Yes vote in next year's referendum offers Scotland.
"On the economy, as on a host of other issues, it is people in Scotland who are best-placed to make decisions over the direction Scotland takes, and only a Yes vote will give us the opportunity to shape policies that always put the needs of people living here first."
However, a spokesman for Better Together rejected accusations of negativity.
"We are clear there is a positive case to be made for staying in the UK and we have been making this case as we go round the country.
"But it's not negative to ask questions of people who are advocating something that could change our lives forever."
The latest research on voting intentions, conducted by Canadian-based pollsters Angus Reid, canvassed opinion from 1003 Scots.
When questioned about the financial impact of independence, 14% of those asked said they would be better off, 38% worse off, 27% said it would make no difference and 21% said they were not sure.
Mr McColl wrote in a newspaper article: "While Westminster policies may work for London, they are not working for Scotland, for our economy or our society.
"A different approach is needed if we are to make Scotland the kind of country we all know it can and should be.
"We have a Government responsible for economic policy whose focus is not growth in Scotland but rather London and the south-east of England. That tells me Scotland is a nation in desperate need of a well-planned and thought-through management buy-out."
Sir Tom, lamented the choice between a "leap in the dark or staying with a moribund status quo" and said: "Never, in my view, has such a factual void filled such an important debate."
He added: "The No campaigners are digging themselves one enormous hole if they believe a dual 'status quo' and 'scare them to death about independence' message will work."
But he was also critical of the Scottish Government, saying: "Alex Salmond, one of the most talented politicians of his generation, and his Cabinet must also move away from obfuscating the issues, the costs, the EU membership, and on to a clearly defined and costed programme for independence in 2014."
Yes Scotland welcomed the poll, saying: "This is a further indication there is solid and sustained support for a Yes vote in 2014 and with around one-fifth of voters yet to make up their minds there is everything to play for.
"It is also significant that the number of people who think they would be better off or no worse off in an independent Scotland is higher than those who think they would be worse off."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article