THE publication of the annual Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS) statistics demonstrate how the same set of figures can be used by rival parties and politicians to reach completely different conclusions.
For the SNP, the figures highlight how Scotland is ill-served by the current constitutional set up and unable to reach its full economic potential under it.
On the other hand, the Unionist parties jump on them to suggest Scotland is too poor to be an autonomous nation.
READ MORE: Craig Dalzell: Independence could be worth at least £7.5 billion to Scotland’s deficit
These were the stances adopted again with the publication of the figures which showed Scotland’s deficit fell by £1.3 billion to £13.3bn during 2015/16 amid an increase in oil and gas revenues.
The deficit, the difference between revenue raised through taxation and money spent on public services, amounts to 8.3 per cent of Scottish GDP. It compares with the overall UK deficit of £46.2bn, or 2.4 per cent of UK GDP.
“Scotland’s economy remains strong,” said First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.
“In the last quarter, our economy grew nearly four times faster than the UK and the number of people in employment is at a record high.
“These figures reflect Scotland’s finances under current constitutional arrangements. However, they show that our investment in key industries, such as the life-science sector, is providing a real boost to our onshore economy.”
She continued: “The lower oil price had an impact on North Sea revenues and the wider economy last year. However, it is encouraging to see an improvement in the overall fiscal balance and that onshore revenues grew at their fastest rate in nearly 20 years. However, our long-term economic success is now threatened by Brexit, which risks reducing household incomes, employment and funding for public services. That is why we continue to press for the Scottish Government to have a direct role in Brexit negotiations.”
Scottish Labour joined with the Scottish Conservatives to use the figures to defend the Union.
“These figures prove once and for all that the SNP sold false hope to the poorest people in Scotland,” said Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale.
“Scotland’s own accounts show that the first year of an independent Scotland would have meant unprecedented levels of austerity.”
The Scottish Conservatives said the figures showed Scotland was better off as part of the UK.
Finance spokesman Murdo Fraser MSP said: “These figures ... confirm just how wrong the SNP got it during the referendum campaign.
“In 2014, Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon looked Scottish families in the eye and insisted we’d be better off.
“In fact, in the first year of independence, Scotland would have been staring at the biggest deficit in Europe.”
Green MSP Patrick Harvie said: “Every year these figures set off a tiresome war of words between those who think Scotland could never run its own affairs and those who think the SNP approach is flawless.”
Responding to critics, Sturgeon said she did not accept “in any way, shape or form” that the SNP’s prospectus for leaving the UK had misled voters.
“Nobody foresaw the decline in the oil price,” she said. “That was a change in circumstance that happened after the publication of the figures in the white paper. “
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel