DANNY Alexander will this week demand that the SNP produces its first "realistic analysis" of the cost of a Yes vote in the independence referendum.
In a speech in Edinburgh on Wednesday, the chief secretary to the Treasury will also attack the SNP's White Paper on independence for its "over-optimistic assumptions" about oil revenue. The Office for Budget Responsibility, the UK Government's fiscal watchdog, estimates oil revenue at around £3.2 billion for 2016, while the SNP government puts it at £7.9bn.
The Treasury will publish its most detailed analysis yet of the fiscal consequences of independence next month. It will set out "the impact of having to absorb the higher spending and lower tax caused by declining oil revenues, an ageing population, the Scottish Government's uncosted policy pledges and the set-up costs of independence in a much smaller budget," the Treasury said.
It has also analysed the SNP's White Paper and "attempted to produce many of the calculations that were missing".
The 650-page prospectus contains no detailed estimates of Scotland's financial position after independence, with the only budget breakdown a single page referring to 2016-17 "under current constitutional arrangements".
Alexander said the White Paper held "lots of promises but nothing credible to back it up". He added: "The problems of declining oil revenues and an ageing population cannot simply be wished away - but the broad shoulders of the UK can help absorb them."
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "Scotland is one of the wealthiest countries per head in the world and is more than capable of being an economically successful independent country."
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