PATRICK Harvie has suggested a future independent Scotland could consider joining the Euro as the Greens were criticised for launching an uncosted case for independence.
Despite being involved in the Scottish Government’s renewed case for independence, the Greens launched the party’s own campaign for separation, insisting it will not muddy what a Yes vote in a referendum would be backing.
But the party, which is in government with Nicola Sturgeon's SNP at Holyrood, has been accused of being "divorced from reality" after failing to set out any costed plans.
The Greens’s first pamphlet in the series failed to mention currency and offered voters a republic instead of the Government model that keeps the monarchy.
A key policy mentioned in the first document is a universal basic income, but Mr Harvie, co-leader of the Greens, admitted the costings have not been done since the 2014 referendum, but still insisted it was a cheaper option than the current social security system from Westminster.
According to the Scottish Government, a universal basic income could cost up to £58bn a year if introduced.
The paper states an independent Scotland could "ban new oil and gas fields", as well as "get nuclear weapons out of Scotland" and "become an independent republic".
Asked why the paper makes no mention of currency, Mr Harvie said: “I think people know very clearly that the Scottish Greens have taken the view that Scotland should have its own independent currency – we said that during the 2014 referendum and I think things have moved in that direction.
”The Scottish Government’s view is that Scotland should have its own currency as soon as that’s achievable.”
Asked when a new currently could be established, the Scottish Government minister said “it would be silly to set a date”.
Mr Harvie said: “Our position remains that Scotland needs its own independent currency in order to exercise real economy independence.”
Pressed over whether an independent Scotland could join the Euro, Mr Harvie said: “Over the longer term, the option would be there for Scotland.”
He added: “If we join the European Union and I hope and believe we will, obviously it’s entirely up to a future Scottish Government to decide that they might want to align and start meeting the tests of Euro membership.
“I don’t think that a priority at the moment.”
But he said it could be a “possibility in 10,20, 30 years’ time”.
Mr Harvie said the Greens's papers were a “reintroduction to the Green Yes campaign” that would “inspire people of the possibilities” of independence.
He stressed there will be “more detailed policy documents” set out after the first one included very little policy information or detail.
Mr Harvie denied that the project will undermine the Scottish Government’s new case for independence or confuse the public what a vote for Yes entails.
He said: “I don’t think the idea of political parties setting out their own stall undermines the potential for co-operation on genuine common ground.
“That’s what the Greens’ role in the Scottish Government has been focused on – finding the genuine common ground without ever pretending that we don’t disagree about some specifics.
“For example, the world republic appears in this document. It may not do so in Scottish Government publications.
“There are distinctive areas where the Greens and other political parties would like to go further, would like to go faster or move in a different direction after independence is achieved.
“They are voting for independence, they are voting fort the right to make a choice”.
The document says that “with independence, Scotland can ensure that everyone has enough to get by, with proper social security, strong public services and a universal basic income”.
Pressed over how much a universal basic income would cost, Mr Harvie said: “The last costing for that we did in the wake of the 2014 referendum.
"I think it would be a mistake to repeat numbers that are nearly a decade old.
But he insisted it would be “a more affordable system of social security than we have at the moment”.
Mr Harvie added that “over the course of the campaign we will put more detail on some of these specifics”, but stressed “we would fund it through taxation” and establish ”a safety net that actually works”.
But he admitted the initial 2014 costings “would be out of date by now”.
Scottish Conservative shadow constitution secretary, Donald Cameron, said: “The Scottish Government’s own estimates show that a Universal Basic Income would cost up to £58billion per year. Like the Greens’ plans for a four-day week, it is divorced from reality."
He added: The Greens have further muddied the waters on what currency an independent Scotland would use.
“But Patrick Harvie shares the same delusional opinion as Nicola Sturgeon that using the Euro would somehow be a matter of choice, were an independent Scotland to join the European Union. The reality, as Brussels officials have repeatedly spelled out, is that any nation looking to join the EU must commit to adopting the Euro as its currency.”
Scottish LibDems leader, Alex Cole-Hamilton, added: "It's embarrassing that the Green party are expecting the public to vote to break up the UK on the basis of 13-page pamphlets that don't even mention what currency they want to use.
"Scotland deserves a serious government focused on the issues that are actually affecting Scots day-in, day-out, like the cost of living crisis, the climate emergency and the enormous waiting lists in our NHS.
"I have no doubt that ordinary Scots will have little time for the Green party's nonsense."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel