Veterans Minister Keith Brown has challenged UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond to a debate on Scottish independence.
The former commando has accused Mr Hammond of short changing Scotland's defence sector, providing incomplete information on its defence capabilities and "scurrying away" from a debate during his trips to Scotland.
Meanwhile, Energy Minister Fergus Ewing has levelled a similar accusation at his UK counterpart Ed Davey, claiming he has downplayed the extent to which England would be reliant on an independent Scotland for energy.
Speaking at General Questions at Holyrood, Mr Brown said: "I have made a public request of Mr Hammond that rather than jetting into Scotland and then scurrying back away without answering any questions, he should stay and debate some of these really important issues.
"It seems he is unaware that Scottish taxpayers pay around £3.3 billion towards defence and get around £2 billion spent in return."
He added: "We have contacted the MoD requesting factual information to support our consideration of the defence options that would be open to an independent Scotland.
"The MoD has been unable to provide the full detail requested."
Mr Ewing said an independent Scotland would have "very substantial resources" to fund its renewable energy infrastructure, free from the costs of subsidising and decommissioning nuclear power stations.
He said: "Contrary to what we hear sometimes from Ed Davey and others, in order to maintain security of supply in England and keep the lights on in England, Scotland's electricity which is massively in greater supply would need to be exported.
"We will fund connectors to the northern and western isles from the very substantial resources available to the people of Scotland.
"There are perhaps around a third more renewables schemes in Scotland than south of the border, but there are no nuclear power stations proposed such as Hinkley Point where the taxpayer subsidy proposed is £35 billion over 35 years nor is there a bill for nuclear decommissioning of around £70 billion.
"So I think we need to look at all parts of the equation, not just those that suit certain political parties."
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