A NEW phrase recently entered the referendum lexicon:

the Wigwam Nat. The invention of the Tory commentator Dominic Lawson, it's meant to sum up those who would vote Yes regardless of consequence, even if the economy collapsed and we ended up in tents.

With a groan of contempt for the term, Nicola Sturgeon insists she's not one of those.

"I've never have had a view we should be independent regardless of what it might mean for Scotland," says the deputy SNP leader and Yes Scotland board member.

"If I thought we could eradicate child poverty without being independent then I would be saying let's do that, but I don't. The evidence tells me we can't. I've always been a means-to-an-end Nationalist. I believe in it for a purpose. It equips us with the powers to build the country I want Scotland to be."

That central message, that independence is not a panacea but "an opportunity to put ourselves in charge of the decisions that shape this country", is the one Sturgeon has pushed constantly in hundreds of public meetings, interviews and street events for two years.

"What I hoped for six months ago is what we've got - a debate that people are fascinated by, deeply engaged in and for the main really enjoying, and two weeks out the Yes campaign is within touching distance of winning.

"My view was that there wasn't necessarily going to be a game-changing moment for us, it was going to be patient persuasion, person by person, public meeting by public meeting, and that's actually how it's developed.

"What [Better Together] have run up against is a population that can't be fooled. A lot of what they do relies on people being very ­vulnerable to scare stories and being scared, and that's not what's happening."

Talking of scare stories, Better Together say the Yes side's focus on "knock-on" NHS cuts because of English reforms is just that.

Sturgeon quickly says Labour have also warned about NHS cuts and privatisation in England.

But you know Labour have been over-egging it. Aren't you just repeating their inflated claims?

"Because of my experience as Health Secretary, nobody will convince me that the agenda of a Tory government privatising the health service is anything other than, over time, reducing the amount of money they spend on health. No-one will ever convince me of that."

Yes has also been accused of ignoring the risks of independence. What are the downsides?

"The biggest downside of independence is that we are responsible. We have got no-one to blame. We have to deal with the ups and the downs. Sometimes an independent Scotland will not be able to point the finger at London, no doubt a challenge for SNP politicians."

This week, one of her fellow ministers, Humza Yousaf, failed on TV to name redistributive policies the SNP would implement post-Yes.

Asked to name some, she lists a bunch of spending plans. Where's the money come from? "We don't need to pay more in tax ..."

Nobody needs to pay more in tax?

"We have a debate in this country that assumes the only way you can increase tax take is to raise the rates of tax. That's not the only way. You increase tax take if you get more folk in work, if they earn more and pay more tax."

The UK Coalition Government cut the top rate of tax to 45p last year, and Labour say they want to restore it to 50p. Would you have a 50p top rate?

"Right now, we think there should still be a 50p top rate of tax," she says carefully.

What about in 2016? Should the rich pay more?

"There will be a whole variety of circumstances by the time we're setting that first budget."

But the fundamental question will still exist: should rich people pay more money?

After five minutes of to-ing and fro-ing, she says: "I believe in progressive taxation. But the specific rates of tax will be decided in budgets."

The Yes campaign's pursuit of Labour supporters has dominated the referendum this week. If it's a Yes, Sturgeon says the SNP would be a left-of-centre "social democratic" party, competing with Labour for votes.

So why tell Labour voters a Yes would help their party when you want to displace it?

"My motivation for independence is not the fortunes of the Scottish Labour Party. But if I was a Labour supporter, I would see independence as a way to take back my party.

"I know the degree of heartbreak Labour supporters have over what they perceive to have happened to the Scottish Labour Party."

But you don't want the Labour party to prosper?

"I don't."

Isn't it disingenuous to say 'Vote Yes to help Labour' when you would rather squash Labour?

"Not really. I'm not pretending that I want to see Labour do well. I'm saying to Labour supporters, if you want to see a Labour Party capable of beating the SNP again, it's probably more likely to happen if we're independent."

Naturally, she says the result will be a Yes, and though she won't discuss internal canvass results, she hints it might be a solid Yes.

"I've come to think in the last few weeks that the result might not be absolutely on a knife edge, that it'll be a few points either way, in either direction. I'm not convinced it will be 51-49. I think it may be more than that. I'm convinced it will be Yes."