Bill Mitchell has published a two part analysis of the Scottish Growth Commission report. I strongly recommend reading both. There is not a Rizzla paper of difference in opinion between us. My main commentary was here. Bill’s is longer and more technical and on this occassion that is of real value.

What Bill concludes is this:

The Growth Commission recommendations are consistent with the mainstream neoliberal consensus of these issues. They are not conducive to the creation of a vibrant, progressive nation. Scotland would be exposed to British government decisions yet have no political stake in those decisions. If the Scottish people determined that they wanted to retain the use of the pound as the national currency, then Scotland would be better off staying within Britain and exerting internal political pressure to improve its situation. That is an inferior outcome to establishing an independent nation with its own currency. However, it would be much better than declaring independence but then continuing to use the pound and accept whatever monetary and fiscal policies the British government decided. Yes, in that situation, the Scottish government (as now) could have some fiscal initiatives. But, ultimately, when the crunch came, it would face a shortage of pounds and austerity would be required. Overall, an independent nation has to have its own currency and monetary policy. Otherwise, the independence is a sham.

He is right.

The Scottish Growth Commission’ recommendations set Scotland up to fail. That is true whether appraised economically, politically or as a potential nation state.

I sincerely hope the message gets through to the SNP this summer.

In the meantime I suggest reading what Bill has to say.