Kate Forbes has refused to put a timetable on how long the process of becoming independent could take if Scotland voted Yes in referendum however she dismissed the view of an SNP minister who said it could take "many many years" or even decades.
Ben Macpherson, minister for social security in the Scottish Government, claimed in newspaper article yesterday that the transition period following any vote for Scotland to leave the UK could take “many years” or even “potentially decades” and that Scotland was not ready for independence in the short or medium term.
Speaking to journalists today, the finance secretary was asked by The Herald for her response to Mr Macpherson's intervention and also on whether if Scotland did become independent she would favour holding a referendum on EU membership.
"I would distance myself from the assumption that [the process] would decades or indeed many many years," she said.
READ MORE: Forbes hits back at Yousaf claim MSPs may stop her becoming FM
Pressed on how long she thought it would take, she said: "I think it depends on your priorities. My priority on the first day of independence would be to have a stable economy, that would be more critical for example, than moving immediately to a Scottish currency.
"So a lot of this is contingent on the choices you make. You would then build up some reserves [to support the currency] but you could do that after becoming independent."
She added: "I am not going to put a timescale on it, though I know that would be a great headline, because I think that distracts from the core point which is that a transition needs to be gradual but it shouldn't take many many years as that defeats the whole purpose of being independent."
On whether there should be a separate vote on joining the EU if Scotland did vote to back independence, she said: "I wouldn't favour that approach personally.
"Obviously we have seen from the vote back in 2016 that a majority of Scots did vote to remain within the European Union, and the approach we have taken to date is to try and ensure we are as aligned as possible when it comes to regulation.
READ MORE: Poll shows Forbes is public's choice for FM but support falls for SNP
"There is a massive opportunity for Scotland economically to both maintain close ties with our closest neighbours but also to access the single market and I think those huge opportunities need to be realised for Scotland to become a successful independent country."
Mr McPherson, writing in Scotland on Sunday, said he thought the country was not able to become a “successful, modern independent country in the short to medium term”.
He argued that Scotland does not currently have the necessary infrastructure to become independent quickly and successfully.
As a result, he told party colleagues: “Any reckless, overly disruptive path to statehood would quickly make our quality of life in Scotland poorer.
“Better to go down a gear and take the journey at a reasonably safe speed than crash trying to rush things.”
READ MORE: SNP race sliding into 'paranoia and mistrust' amid vote rigging row
His comments came as Mr Yousaf insisted independence could be achieved within five years.
The Health secretary told the Sunday Mail: “It can be achieved within five years but that’s going to take persuasion and we’re going to have to give people a hope and a vision.”
Ahead of the 2014 referendum, the Scottish Government's White Paper said the transition would take less than two years, with Scotland becoming independent on March 24 2016.
Mr Macpherson said his time in government had taught him that this was unlikely.
In his article Mr Macpherson said: “The fact is – and facts matter – Scotland doesn’t yet have all the necessary 21st century state infrastructure to quickly transition to a successful, modern independent country in the short to medium term.”
He said that “like many others” in the run-up to the 2014 referendum he had believed that making the change to Scotland becoming an independent state would be “doable fairly quickly”.
READ MORE: GET THE LATEST HERALD SUBSCRIPTION OFFER
But he added: “I have humbly since learned the hard reality.”
Mr Macpherson said: “What I have learned from my experience as minister for social security – delivering new Scottish Government benefits and transferring thousands of existing cases from the DWP to Social Security Scotland – is that the practical implementation of constitutional change takes time if it is to be done securely and effectively.
“Wishful thinking and good intentions will not change that, and anyone suggesting there are shortcuts is not being upfront about the practical realities.”
He continued: “In the current circumstances, positive changes of the sort we would want to implement after an independence vote would take years to achieve.
“Following a negotiating period, we would be in a long transitional process with the UK Government for many years, and potentially decades, regarding some matters and system transfers.”
Mr Macpherson said he appreciates that many independence supporters would want “faster progress”, “but it is the responsibility of those of us pushing for constitutional change to make sure an independent Scotland is in the best possible position to start successfully, with the means to do so”.
He added: “More independence, greater social justice, higher economic prosperity and re-entry to the EU are all absolutely achievable, but these things take time."
Mr McPherson's claims were angrily dismissed by one former SNP MSP.
Writing on Twitter Gil Paterson, the former SNP MSP for Clydebank and Milngavie, referred to Mr McPherson's article, and said: "The lack of courage, the lack of leadership, the lack of ambition, the lack of how power works and most of all, the lack of confidence in the Scottish people all in one article."
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