Flagship plans to create a £30 billion oil fund after independence depend on being able to "spend the same money twice", peers heard yesterday.
Members of the House of Lords were told the Scottish Government would need much of the North Sea oil revenues to pay its bills.
Gavin McCrone, a former chief economist at the Scotland Office, suggested that the fund could only become a reality if the Scottish economy improved significantly. However, the expert said that independence could benefit Scotland economically, depending on the decisions of future Scottish governments.
Earlier this year Alex Salmond said that independence could allow Scotland to build an energy fund that would be worth £30bn within two decades.
The First Minister also said that that figure could have been £150bn if such a pot had been created in the 1970s.
Mr McCrone told peers he agreed in principle with the idea of an oil fund, similar to the one which exists in Norway.
"I agree with it, I wish to hell we had done it. If we had a fund like Norway our present [economic] situation would have been a great deal easier than it had been," he said.
He said the Scottish Government would struggle to set up such a fund at the moment. "They would have to get the economy working a hell of a lot better," he told members of the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, who are holding an inquiry into the potential impact of Scottish independence.
Mr McCrone suggested that the Scottish Government would need the oil revenues to meet public spending costs and would not have the surplus for a fund.
"Because you can't spend the same money twice", he added.
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