Frankly, the worst revelations are in Scotland’s official statistics

I write, of course, about the Government Expenditure and Revenue (GERS) report for 2024/25 that deserved to be taken more seriously than competing publications claiming to be fact but having all the look of wild fiction.

This year’s GERS read more like a horror story worthy of Robert Louis Stevenson (Jekyll and Hyde) or Edgar Alan Poe (The House of Usher) than a dry statistical perambulation around Scotland’s public spending and tax revenues.

Back in 2019/20 only five years ago – public spending in Scotland was £82.8bn, yet it is £117.6bn today. That is an explosive increase of 42 per cent in just five years. If the rate of spending growth had risen in line with inflation it would have been £103bn this year. The additional £14.6bn has gone on what exactly?

The increase in public spending last year alone was by 5.5 per cent – double the rate of inflation – reaching a total per household of £44,882.

These sordid economic facts should be the stuff of festival fringe dramas where tragedy and comedy of the absurd is employed to explore the scheming, evasion, and delusion of SNP politicians taking decisions that cost us millions that amount to billions. Plays such as “Who pays the Ferry, man?” or “Recycling for Dummies” would look at great schemes that even now are still costing huge sums with no end in sight.

Just yesterday the Scotsman reported exclusively the willingness of Scottish Government politicians to test our public finances to destruction. Having established (late as usual) their shiny new political toy, called the Scottish Benefits Agency, the wilful deviation from how things are done in the rest of Britain means the Scottish taxpayer could be on the hook for an additional £36 million. Why? By not seeking to collect overpayments or errors in benefit pay-outs.

Of course, were the Scottish dis-Benefits Agency to not deviate from the norm then the obvious question would be why did we create our own new bureaucracy in the first place? So we can expect more of these policies, higher or different “benefits” than what were paid out before, at greater cost. And all from a pool of money that the Scottish Government does not have.

Remember, the Scottish public finances are spent up to the limit, with any budget underspends quickly reallocated to other departments rather than returned to the taxpayer as a rebate against the next year’s taxes. The public borrowing that is available is also maxed-out – which is exactly why the no new borrowing powers should be allowed, it would simply be used to extend the line of credit to an even higher amount rather than more properly provide the headroom for emergencies such as pandemics or disaster relief.

Why has it come to all this? The cast of characters is substantial, not just the current finance minister Shona Robison, but stretching back to Kate Forbes, Douglas Mackay and John Swinney – all have had a hand. Presenting their past claims and contrasting them with the reality would hardly make great Fringe comedy, for no one would be laughing – although the potential of exploring the well-being economy devised by Kate Forbes could provide many ironic jaw dropping moments.

Record drug-related deaths anyone? Scottish education standards in English, maths and science falling against those of other countries where we previously built schools and taught the masses? The Book Festival could interview past ministers on how it became possible for Scots pupils to gain English qualifications without having read a novel.

We should all be deeply concerned about the waste of money, the rush to book international receptions, the offices we don’t need, the staff complement that only knows how to grow and where redundancies are not allowed. The free bus travel with daily excursions to shoplifting centres for under twenty-fives.

Improv stand-up could take a new form of spontaneous dialogue delivered by foregoing actors and picking participants from the audience to have a serious discourse around a staged kitchen table. Hard questions could be asked with the actors role-playing the politicians but only allowed to ad-lib their answers – as making it all up seems to be how it’s normally done anyway. Likewise, documentaries on devolved disasters could be made for Film Festival premiers.

What GERS tells us is that while the UK public finances are bad (and yes, I have written about that too) they are but a pale imitation of the depressing Scottish public finances. When devolution commenced the size of the Scottish state accounted for 43 per cent of the economy. Now the tartan behemoth is a swaggering 55.4 per cent of GDP before oil, falling marginally to 52 per cent when including oil revenues. It is unsustainable without a sponsor, and that sponsor just happens to be Westminster.

The message from GERS is simple but indisputable; until nationalists can show they can deliver a dynamic, vibrant, prosperous, revenue-raising, job-creating economy the path to secession cannot be found because it does not exist.

Ironically, if Holyrood were to come to its senses by the electorate giving it an administration that seeks to live within its means by eliminating waste and allowing compulsory redundancies then the economy could transform. Taxes could be reduced, the economic activity could rise and Scotland’s wellbeing would be happy again – just not the way the current politicians would like it. It could even make separation possible, but then why would we want to? Frankly, Holyrood is a farce presented as a pantomime – and no one can rewrite any differently.

Brian Monteith is a former member of the Scottish and European parliaments and editor of ThinkScotland.org.