Scotland must be set free from the tyranny of being reasonable

Separately, David Murray, one of Scotland’s leading businessmen, has entered the debate by lamenting the absence of an entrepreneurial spirit among Scots. Mr Murray claims that instead "we are creating a country of civil servants".

So is he right? Is that why Scotland is doing so poorly? Well, only up to a point.

I am reminded of a speech made at a conference in New Zealand by a Kiwi friend of mine from Harvard, Dr David Skilling. Until recently, David was principal adviser to the New Zealand Treasury. His recipe for success was clear. "In essence, I want New Zealand in 2020 to be a country where we routinely achieve completely unreasonable goals. Where we take on the world and expect to win on a systematic basis and big time. Where we are not constrained by modest expectations, small goals, what I call the ‘tyranny of reasonableness’, but aspire to the best in the world."

That ambition surely does have a place in both the public and private sector.

It is clear that Scotland embodies the "tyranny of reasonableness" in nearly every aspect of our culture - be it sporting, political, economic or cultural. We don’t take risks and we continue to snipe at those who do. We are in danger of becoming a small country with a small mentality.

So Scotland, too, needs to set "unreasonable goals". We need to build on current global success stories such as the Royal Bank of Scotland. But we need to take that passion to be the best in the world and apply it to every industry. Scotland can be a dynamic, low-tax, flexible economy, but all that will count for nothing if it is not accompanied by a shift in mindset. What we have now is safe, mundane, gradual failure. I don’t want to live in a country where that safety, that "tyranny of reasonableness" is accepted wisdom.

The standard Labour response to such thinking is to condemn people like me for "talking Scotland down". We, apparently, are the problem. Those of us who see "doing OK" as not good enough are to blame for sucking the confidence from Scottish business. We are, in fact, "anti-Scottish".

Nothing could be further from the truth. That frustration, anger and resentment at the current state of Scottish life and the burning desire to see things change is what makes me a Scottish Nationalist. If I did not believe that an independent Scotland was an essential pre-requisite to taking responsibility for cutting taxes, encouraging growth, attracting investment and allowing those with creativity and innovation to succeed I would never have entered politics. I cannot think of a more pro-Scottish agenda than this, when allied to a core belief in a compassionate, courteous and civilised society.

PART of the absence of entrepreneurial thinking in Scotland must be linked to our failure to tackle the core question for national governments in the 21st century. The unthinking maintenance of the traditional relationship between the state and the individual has embedded a particular model of government responsibility and individual dependency. That is not to say all benefits must be slashed and all state aid removed. But it is, emphatically, to support a fundamental reappraisal of what individuals should legitimately expect from government and what level of personal responsibility and risk they should adopt.

Devolution hasn’t just failed to provide an answer - no-one has even yet dared to ask the question for fear of electoral backlash. But political leaders who tell the electorate only what they want to hear and who shirk from the big debates for fear of short-term damage are not leaders at all.

The First Minister claims Scotland is the "best small nation in the world". It should be, but it is not. To be the best, we need to shake off the "tyranny of reasonableness" in politics, in business and in culture. That doesn’t mean losing our belief in a cohesive, caring society but it does mean taking risks, challenging orthodoxies and agreeing that the status quo is not an option.