THE money Scotland spends on nuclear weapons would instead be invested in a stronger social security system after independence, a Cabinet Secretary has said.
Speaking to media at the launch of the Scottish Government’s ninth white paper on independence, Shirley-Anne Somerville said that the “poor use” of money on nuclear weapons could be redirected with fuller powers.
The Social Justice Secretary was quizzed on how the Government might fund policies outlined in the white paper, which included a “minimum income guarantee”.
She said: “The minimum income guarantee, we've got an expert group looking at that at the moment. They've done an interim report, and they're due to report again finally next year.
READ MORE: No benefits sanctions in an independent Scotland, ministers say
“What they'll show is what we can do under devolution, because there are some steps we could take under that, and what we would need the powers of independence for.
“That can be a variety of different things. It can be social security, it can be the introduction of public services – and we've got good foundations for that in Scotland already. There are a number of services that aren't available elsewhere in the UK, whether it's free prescriptions or whether it's free tuition, for example. So the minimum income guarantee effectively builds on that social contract that we've had.
“Obviously the decisions about how we can pay for that, under independence we will actually have the ability to have all of the powers to be able to make our own choices about how we can pay for things.
“Of course, there'd be certain things we wouldn't be paying for under independence as well, which would assist us again with the political choices that we make. Nuclear weapons being the most obvious example of something which we feel is a poor use of money and we should be investing in public services and in our people.”
READ MORE: Create 'Scottish triple lock' to increase pensions after independence, Alba say
According to the white paper published on Wednesday, a minimum income guarantee represents “an ambition that would enable all households to live with financial security”.
It states that this minimum income level would be set “at a higher rate than UK Government benefits and be reviewed regularly to respond to real changes to the cost of living”.
The paper argues that most people would achieve the minimum income level anyway through “access to fair, paid work”, with top-up payments for people whose salary does not reach the threshold.
Elsewhere in the paper, the Scottish Government appeared to distance itself from exploring a universal basic income, saying “future governments” could look into the idea “if they wished”.
Scotland after independence, the paper said, would also scrap the current benefit sanction regime and replace budgeting loans with grants, ending the five-week wait for an initial payment.
According to the publication, more than £250 million would have to be paid out to implement the reforms – if they were to take place next year.
“This is not insignificant in itself but needs to be seen in the context of the £24.7 billion being spent on social security in Scotland by UK and Scottish governments in 2023-24,” it read.
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