Politicians, business leaders and union officials yesterday called for a full debate on Scotland's place in the UK after an investigation by The Herald dispelled the myth that Scots are Britain's subsidy junkies.

Politicians, business leaders and union officials yesterday called for a full debate on Scotland's place in the UK after an investigation by The Herald dispelled the myth that Scots are Britain's subsidy junkies.

Commentators south of the Border have cried foul in recent weeks over the apparently high levels of public spending in Scotland, claiming the country is being unfairly subsidised by taxpayers in the rest of the UK.

However, figures published by The Herald showed that public spending per head in Scotland was actually less than in Northern Ireland and London. The investigation also rebutted claims that Scots collect the most in benefits and have access to better public services, courtesy of taxpayers in the rest of the UK.

Murdo Fraser, the deputy leader of the Scottish Conservatives, said: "I congratulate The Herald on an excellent piece of journalism which goes a long way to dispelling some of the myths that exist about Scotland's place in the UK and the financial arrangements around that.

"What we need around this constitutional issue is a calm and rational debate about Scotland's way forward, based upon the facts rather than supposition, so this information is very helpful.

"What we have to do is find a fairer system of government in the UK and that is why we as a party are happy to engage in talks with the other unionist parties to look at how to resolve some of the genuine concerns about unfairness in the current constitutional set-up."

David Lonsdale, assistant director of CBI Scotland, said: "The more scrutiny and the more informed debate there is on these issues, the better."

Stephen Boyd, assistant secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC), said that until now, the debate on Scotland's constitutional future had been hindered by a lack of reliable information.

"We still question the breadth and quality of a lot of the data that is provided," he said. "The STUC is currently considering its position on fiscal autonomy for Scotland and this report is a very helpful contribution to that debate."

Nationalists said the figures disproved unionist claims that an independent Scotland would not be able to survive outwith the UK. First Minister Alex Salmond said: "This destroys the myth that Scotland is anything other than a resource-rich nation, well capable of flourishing with independence.

"Of course, the myth of the subsidised Scot has been peddled not just by Westminster Tories and English tabloids, but also by politicians in Scotland for their own partisan ends."

But Iain Gray, Labour's shadow finance secretary, argued that the figures showed that Scotland was better off as part of Great Britain. "This has never been about subsidies," he said. "It's about the fact that all parts of the UK are better off together. Our combined economies are greater as a whole than the collective sum of these individual parts.

"Being part of a larger economy allows us to weather global economic changes and provide the stability our wealth creators need to drive economic growth and prosperity. To build Scotland's economy on a single, finite and highly price volatile commodity such as oil, which is what the nationalists wish, would destroy that stability."

Among the English commentators who have questioned the amount of money Scotland receives from the Treasury is Kelvin MacKenzie, the former Sun editor.

He caused fury last month when he said on the BBC's Question Time that "the Scots enjoy spending it, they do not enjoy creating it, which is the opposite of down in the south".

Mr MacKenzie remained unrepentant yesterday and said he contested the figures published by The Herald.

He said: "They are not the government's own figures on this issue. It is impossible to believe that the East Midlands and other places can't have free prescriptions and free tuition at universities without (more) money going to Scotland.

"Clearly, there is money sloshing around in the Scottish coffers created from elsewhere that is giving benefit to Scotland that is denied to the rest of the United Kingdom, and that is an unfairness and must stop.

"If you are to believe in universal taxation and universal suffrage, there has to be a universal handout of benefit to us all."

Some of your comments

Hundreds of you replied to our investigation, "Scotching the Myth" that Scotland is a nation of subsidy junkies. Here are some of your views: A fine article and it sounds like an important contribution to the debate over independence. I'm sceptical about independence, not anti and all I've ever wanted is for truth not spin about the economic status of the constituent parts of the UK.

Andymac, Norway

Well done Herald staff! Any chance you can ensure your research is quoted in the London press and on radio and television? Send a copy to Paxman's editor. Investigative journalism is not dead. Our very own Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward. Good work, lads. More please...

Los Angeles, Edinburgh

What is also missed is that many Scottish businesses have relocated their head offices to London over the past 60 years and are considered English companies. This came about as a result of the economic and political centralism that worked to keep Scotland down and to favour the south of England where the large population resulted in political domination.

Charles McLaren, Canada

Great report. Just when I had lost faith with journalism in general, along they come with this - good stuff. I'll have to dig out the Oxford Economics report and have a look through it but, on the face of it, well done Herald journos for providing positive text backed up by hard facts.

Jet McLazer

Well done to The Herald for publicising facts and not the propaganda we've been subject to. When will the media raise the question of the gerrymandered North Sea boundaries that put oil, that rightly should be Scots income, in English hands? Another question is so-called export figures to England, how about a breakdown of what stays in England and what is re-exported abroad, at further profit and providing further employment benefits to companies that have no interest in the Scots economy.

Clayton-moore

Please don't "cherry pick" the geographical and financial areas you choose to make comparisons with. Such as "Great swaths of northern England" and then Northern Ireland, when it suits the points made. The debate is independence from Britain/England as a whole. I would also have thought Kelvin MacKenzie is as popular in Scotland as in England.

Peter Harvey, London

This report puts to bed all those claims by nationalist fanatics that Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK and London in particular. That is clearly not the case. Scotland now pays her way within the Union and could, if the price of oil stays high, maintain current levels of services in the country for as long as the oil lasted if we were to become independent.

Hawick, Lothians

It seems to say Scotland is roughly neutral in financial terms when tax and spend is balanced against one another. The gaping hole is in terms of public-sector employment. Scots have many more public sector jobs than the English, but not as many as Northern Ireland. The point I would make is that Scotland is still very much a winner as far as spending in the UK is concerned and this is a direct union dividend.

Peter1958