THE overall cost of setting up an independent Scotland has not been calculated, the Scottish Government's chief economic adviser has confirmed.
Dr Gary Gillespie told Holyrood's economy committee that detailed work on the cost of setting up new institutions to replace the Ministry of Defence, Department for Work and Pensions, Foreign Office and other UK bodies had not been carried out.
The Scottish Government has faced claims - strenuously denied - that it was concealing calculations from the public. Asked yesterday by committee convener Murdo Fraser whether detailed work on costings had been carried out but kept out of the White Paper, Dr Gillespie replied: "No."
Finance Secretary John Swinney said it was impossible to put a "precise number" on the set-up costs because arrangements to provide pensions and collect taxes would be the subject of negotiations with the rest of the UK in the event of a Yes vote.
The Treasury has claimed the figure could be as high as £2.7 billion - a cost dismissed as wildly exaggerated by the academic upon whose work the calculation was based.
Mr Swinney said the gaffe highlighted the difficulty of producing a meaningful figure. But Tory MSP Mr Fraser said: "This was an astonishing admission from the chief economic adviser that no sums have been done for the start-up of a separate Scotland."
The row came as Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander dismissed Scottish Government forecasts for economic growth, if the country becomes independent, as "pie in the sky" and drawn up on the "back of a fag packet".
Also giving evidence to the committee he said the Scottish Government had made "massively optimistic" projections about tax revenues from North Sea oil.
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