Case for greater powers depends on devolution having delivered

IF FURTHER proof were needed that now is an inauspicious moment for the Nationalist government to elucidate on its proposal for a referendum on independence, it is contained in the evidence disclosed by the Scottish Centre for Social Research, as reported in today's Scotsman.

It shows that only 28 per cent of Scots prefer independence to devolution, a figure four points higher than the record low for the survey of 24 per cent recorded in 2007, but still lower than any figure recorded between 2004 and 2006.

So when Alex Salmond unveils his administration's referendum bill within the next few weeks, the First Minister faces an uphill battle to justify testing Scots' views on independence when it is clear that the majority are agin the idea.

It would be too much to expect Mr Salmond to back down in the face of this evidence as his party expects him to press ahead, and the SNP was committed to a referendum in its manifesto.

However, the First Minister will be pressing ahead in the knowledge that Labour, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats will vote down the legislation, killing the referendum for this term of the Scottish Parliament.

Based on this survey they will be right to vote in that way, but before they crow too much they should reflect that there is strong evidence of an appetite for Holyrood to be given greater powers.

Six out of ten Scots believe decisions on benefits and welfare should be taken in Edinburgh and nearly the same proportion support the idea of taxation being handed over to Holyrood. These findings are hardly a surprise, as they reflect what might now be described as, to use a phrase coined by the late John Smith, the "settled will" of the Scottish people.

The Scotsman has long advocated giving the parliament a greater say over raising its revenue to achieve greater accountability and concentrate politicians' minds not merely on spending, which is easy to do, but on persuading voters to part with their money in taxes.

However, before we move to this desirable position there is a further issue to be addressed and that is for politicians who believe in constitutional change to demonstrate that our current arrangement has served Scotland well.

The survey shows that about a third of Scots believe that the economy and education would be better under independence, yet logic tells us that this can only be a belief, or a hope, because there is no absolute certainty over the benefits of independence.

So if Mr Salmond – and indeed the other parties calling for further change – are to make their case, they would be better, for now, spending their time improving Scotland's economy, or our schools, or the health service.

Before we embark on the complex road of further constitutional change we need hard evidence that what we have already has improved the lives of Scots. On the evidence we have before us, they still have a lot of work to do.