Civic reaction

THE former head of the body tasked with boosting economic development in Scotland last night said the country must become independent in order to secure prosperity in the future.

Robert Crawford, who stood down as chief executive of Scottish Enterprise in 2003, said at the very least, Holyrood must get control of corporation tax in order to increase economic growth.

His comments came as business leaders, union officials and religious figures broadly welcomed the nationwide debate kicked off by the Scottish Executive yesterday on Scotland's constitutional future.

Speaking on BBC's Newsnight, Mr Crawford said the current range of economic powers available to the Scottish Parliament was insufficient.

"The range of economic powers we've presently got will not increase growth and we should stop pretending they will," he said.

"If we'd rather have better economic growth rates, then we need more economic powers. My own bias would certainly be in favour of an independent Scotland within the European Union."

He added: "We certainly need to be able to do something with taxes because that's the best way of making a country competitive quickly.

"The use of corporation tax across Europe and the rest of the world has caused more investment into these economies and significant expansion by existing economies."

While the plans for a "national conversation" on the range of powers which should be available to politicians at Holyrood was largely welcomed, there was no groundswell of opinion in favour of the SNP's goal of independence.

One senior council leader went so far as to describe the whole process as having "little relevance" to ordinary Scots, who he said would prefer the executive to focus on improving public services instead.

Andrew Watson, of the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) in Scotland, said it was in favour of transferring more powers from London to Edinburgh if it could be shown that it would benefit the business community and boost economic growth.

However, he insisted his organisation would not be drawn on whether Scotland should break away from the rest of the UK.

"We believe that it is for the people, not business organisations, to decide the constitutional future of Scotland through a consultative referendum," he said.

Liz Cameron, executive director of Scottish Chambers of Commerce, said it would also take part in the debate.

She said: "Our judgements will be based on facts rather than emotion and we will be asking of our politicians questions on how any changes would affect our ability to do business globally, and what the impact would be in terms of our domestic economy."

But Iain McMillan, director of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) in Scotland, said that while they may be in favour of further limited powers being devolved to Scotland, there were "red line" areas which should remain reserved to Westminster.

These included taxation, employment law, health and safety legislation and macro-economic policy.

Matt Smith, Scottish secretary of the public services union Unison, described the debate as "an opportune moment to discuss further devolution of some powers", such as immigration and public sector pensions.

Grahame Smith, general secretary of the STUC, said an independence referendum would be "a distraction", but said his organisation was willing to debate whether Holyrood should have more powers.

The Church of Scotland was a key player in the constitutional convention which led to the establishment of the Scottish Parliament and Morag Mylne, the convener of the Kirk's church and society council, said they they would also take part in the national conversation.

But Pat Watters, the president of the local authority umbrella body Cosla, said: "On a purely personal note, I see little relevance in this exercise for local government and the people we deliver valuable services to.

"Like me, I am sure they would much rather see money being spent on services."