SCOTLAND would have voted Yes in 2014 if the SNP had adopted the measures in its new independence blueprint, leading historians and economists say. The 354-page analysis document by the SNP's Growth Commission is billed as a "new case for optimism".

Scotland would keep the pound for at least 10 years, while public spending would be limited in an attempt to reduce the deficit, its authors said. The report suggests Scotland takes on its share of the UK’s debt burden as part of a “close and positive” relationship, insisting lessons should be learned “from the less than orderly approach to the Brexit discussions so far”.

Last night, opposition parties said the findings delivered by former SNP MSP Andrew Wilson would turn Scotland into the "sick man of Europe".

However, some of the top economic experts said it was more credible than the last prospectus for independence in 2014. Professor Tom Devine, one of Scotland's leading historians, hailed the new report as "convincing intellectually" on the economy. Devine said it "would have made a difference" to the knife-edge referendum result on September 18, 2014. He said it could have tipped support for independence beyond the 45 per cent of votes polled then.

The Herald:

Professor of History Tom Devine.

Devine said: "If the process had gone on for a further week, we might have had a narrow majority for Yes. If it's (the vote) on a knife edge this document would be much more convincing intellectually (for people). I do think it would have made a difference."

Wilson's blueprint says Scotland's deficit should be reduced to below three per cent within five to 10 years, while national debt should not increase beyond 50 per cent of GDP. Both of these policies would fit with EU membership limits.

One of the UK's top economists said the "competence” of the commission's approach could have led to a Yes win.

John Kay, a fellow of St John’s College Oxford University, said it was more credible than the “shopping list” outlined in Alex Salmond's White Paper in 2013-14.

Kay said that the White Paper's key weaknesses was the plan for an independent Scotland to retain the pound in a formal currency union with the UK.

However, Kay said this fault was addressed by the Growth Commission's proposal to keep the pound for at least 10 years, but without seeking a formal currency union.

He said it was "realistic" to have that as a transitional arrangement to provide economic stability before adopting a new currency. Kay said Wilson's approach would have been a recipe for victory in 2014, adding: "There's a competence about this document that nails things down on the fiscal side of things. It's got a big advantage on the Scottish Government document produced before the 2014 referendum. That seemed to be a lengthy shopping list of things that they could have done anyway if they had the money. But this is a fairly realistic assessment and the way they have done it is quite effective. On currency it's the right answer to use sterling as the only realistic option."

Kay said the change in position on the currency could have led to a narrow victory in 2014 for the Yes campaign.

He added: "In 2014 it was close enough, so that's plausible. The failure of Yes Scotland's currency arguments in 2013-14 were a real setback to its credibility."

However, opposition parties claimed Wilson's plan would lead to economic meltdown. In a fresh attack, Labour said it would leave Scotland with a bigger budget deficit than any other nations in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) group. The party said that the predicted 5.9 per cent budget deficit would still be higher than countries such as Greece, Italy and Spain. Scottish Labour’s economy spokeswoman Jackie Baillie said: “Even if we take the SNP’s cuts commission’s rose-tinted figures at face value – which Scottish Labour does not – an independent Scotland would have the highest budget deficit of any developed economy.

“The only way to fix that would be swingeing cuts to public services over a decade. That is simply unacceptable and would hurt the poorest in our society the most. Rather than producing pseudo-academic papers outlining how the SNP’s vision would turn Scotland into the sick man of Europe, Nicola Sturgeon should start fixing the mess she has made of our schools and hospitals.”

However, Harry Burns, who serves on the Scottish government's Council of Economic Advisors, said the blueprint promoted job creation. Burns, Scotland's former chief medical officer, said: "I thought it was pretty good, with the interest in inclusive growth. It feels that the implications of the report are elegant, middle of the road and inclusive."

Burns said the blueprint "might" have led to a Yes win in 2014, adding however: "Whether or not that would have convinced people, I don't know. But I wouldn't rule it out and it might have made a difference."

Will Hutton, an economist and writer, said the "work of the commission would have strengthened the Yes campaign in 2014.

Hutton, the principal of Hertford College, University of Oxford, said: "There's no doubt that it would have helped if it had plausible answers on things like currency. The fact that those weren't available put the independence campaign on the backfoot. However, this is a better document and a stronger one than in 2014."

Leading political scientist Professor John Curtice said Wilson's report "might help to make the argument a little more credible" for the SNP. Curtice warned though that the document may not resonate with the public. "I guess that part of the strategy will be to say that this is an incredibly reasonable document," said Curtice. "It might help to make the argument a little more credible, but there is a question about whether there are enough ideas that can be popularised to people."

Former SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars also claimed the blueprint could have won the 2014 referendum. Sillars said: "If the White Paper had been of this quality, we might have won. The white paper was an albatross around the Yes campaign."

Former SNP cabinet minister Alex Neil said that the commission "lays the basis for a winning platform".

Neil said: "It's sensible to stick to the sterling plan. That's the realistic approach. There could be a debate about whether you need 10 years, but you certainly can't just say on day one that you are going to have another currency. It needs more work, but it lays the basis for a winning platform."