Scottish government publishes white paper on independence: Politics live blog

Here are the verdicts on the white paper from the Comment is Free panel, with contributions from Ruth Davidson, Alex Bell, Alistair Darling, Mike Small and Joyce McMillan.

Huw Edwards is now interviewing Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign.

Darling says Salmond is suggesting that currency is not important. And he is just assuming that a currency union would happen. He cannot assume that.

And the SNP could implement their childcare plans now. But they won't because they don't want the money to go to Westminster. Salmond is placing "dogma" ahead of the need to take measures to help people into work.

Darling says Scottish banks and Scottish insurance companies would not last a day without a central bank standing behind them.

Q: Some of these ideas may be attractive to people. Do you think Salmond's plans might shift votes?

Darling says half the white paper is an SNP manifesto. But taxpayers are paying for it.

People will be sceptical of the childcare measures, because the SNP could implement them now.

That said, the results will be "closer than people think", Darling says. 

The Salmond interview is still going on.

Q: You would have to apply to join the EU.

Yes, says Salmond. But the white paper explains who this would happen.

The real threat to Scotland's membership of the EU would come from remaining in the UK.

Alex Salmond is being interviewed on BBC News now by Huw Edwards.

Q: How is this a game changer?

Salmond says it shows what would happen under independence.

Q: You could change childcare provision now under devolution.

Salmond says eventually the SNP want to supply childcare from the age of one. This would help get 100,000 more mothers into work. But, at the moment, if it did that, the extra tax revenue would go to London.

Q: What will you do if the rest of the UK says no to a currency union?

Salmond says a currency union would be in the interests of rUK.

Q: Isn't it absurd for an independent Scotland to rely on the Bank of England as a lender of last resort?

No, says Salmond. That would be its job.

Q: But that's not full independence.

It would amount to fiscal independence, Salmond says.

Here's Grahame Smith, general secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC), on the white paper. 

The STUC welcomes publication of the White Paper and the ambition it reflects on key issues such as economic development and childcare.

Although most of the ideas and positions set out in the paper are already quite familiar, the commitment to establishing a National Convention on Employment and Labour Relations is interesting and of particular relevance to the STUC. We look forward to discussing how such a body could be made to work in the Scottish context.

The White Paper does raise questions about how an independent Scottish Government might develop a sustainable approach to taxation in order to fund important and legitimate additional social investments. It is also disappointing that new arguments weren’t forthcoming to rebut genuine concerns around a formal currency union with rUK.

 The STUC will now take time to study the detail of the White Paper and respond as part of our next A Just Scotland report.

Here's a white paper reading list, with the most interesting articles about it I've seen on the web.

• Matt Qvortrup at the Scotsman says that the white paper will not win Alex Salmond the referendum.

This document, impressive though it is, will not win the referendum – if anything the document will harm those who favour independence.

To be sure there are many laudable ideas in the document, and also many sweeteners that will appeal to those on the Centre-Left – especially Labour voters - who may be tempted to vote yes. The list of policy promises is impressive. Who but the most dyed in the wool Tories could possibly be against thirty hours of childcare per week, the abolition of the bedroom tax, a higher minimum wage? These ideas are about as difficult to criticise as motherhood and apple pie.

But referendums are not won by white papers. Referendums are won if you set the agenda and force your opponents on the back foot ...

The problem with white papers is that they are hostages to fortune. They allow the opponents to focus on the weaker arguments and thereby to divert attention away from the bigger debate ...

Referendum campaigns are not won by those who try to set out rational arguments - Nor are election campaigns. To win you need to have a single-minded determination, and be willing to use all available means. Just think back to the 1998 referendum on the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland in 1998. In this referendum Tony Blair and others supporting a ‘yes’ simplified the argument and exploited fear and uncertainty to good effect. Yes Scotland needs to do the same if they are to have any chance of winning. For politics is not a gentle debating contest, but a war of words.

• Nick Robinson on his BBC blog says the white paper launch was relatively low-key.

Today I had thought might feel like being present at the birth of a brand new nation - or, at least, the first scan which reveals what the UK's offspring might look like.

Yet Scotland's First Minister and his Deputy behaved today less like excited midwives and more like low-key, well-briefed company executives launching a corporate re-branding exercise

Their pitch to a still sceptical Scottish electorate is: independence would change everything, yet nothing much at all. 

• Alex Massie at the Specator says Scottish independence is a little more likely than it was as a result of today's launch.

An idea once unthinkable is utterly thinkable. The lack of drama – the merciful absence of bagpipes-and-Braveheart-bullshit – at the paper’s launch was quite deliberate. This, Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon insisted, is a sober, sensible calculation of the national interest. It’s not a romantic romp in the heather or a doomed Jacobite jolly.

• Gary Gibbon on his Channel 4 News blog says Treasury tactics could backfire.

Isn’t there a danger exercises like yesterday’s intervention by Treasury Chief Secretary, MP Danny Alexander, saying that on average Scots’ tax bills would go up by £1000 a year, might all sound a bit like those regular Tory tax bombshell campaigns that the Scots never voted for over two decades or so? 

• Nick Pearce at the IPPR says the SNP does not need to wait for independence to extend childcare - but that it is right to say that the move would bring huge benefits.

The SNP is right, however, that many of the fiscal benefits would flow – in the form of increased tax revenues and lower benefit payments – to Her Majesty’s Treasury. When Quebec massively expanded its childcare provision in the late 1990s, the dramatic increase in female employment that flowed from the investment returned a significant fiscal bonus: after a decade, for every $100 invested, the state got $147 back. Of this, Quebec got $104, while the federal government got a windfall of $43.

This is not quite the zero-sum equation the SNP envisages, however. Scotland would reap many fiscal and social benefits from a universal childcare system. It plainly does not require independence both to expand childcare and to return much of the benefit to the Scottish purse.

• George Eaton at the Staggers says Salmond needs a Tory recovery at Westminster if he is going to win the referendum.

The increasing probability of a Labour victory in 2015 has helped to tilt the odds further against independence. One of the arguments Salmond made for secession was the risk that the UK could leave the EU. Earlier this year he gleefully cited a poll showing that the No campaign's lead evaporates when the Scottish public are asked how they would vote if Britain looked set to leave. But the diminishing likelihood of a Tory victory, and of an in/out referendum in 2017 (Labour has still not, and may not, promise a public vote), means it will be harder for him to warn that we're heading for Brexit. 

• Iain Martin at the Telegraph says Salmond's claims were "based on a lot of assertion and not much else".

• Niki Seith-Smith at the Staggers says Salmond can win the independence referendum if he can mobile marginalised voters.

Outside the conference hall in Glasgow, Scotland's largest city, 30 per cent of homes are jobless. These people have little faith in the political system to change their lot. But this is no ordinary vote. If apathetic and disillusioned citizens can be persuaded that an independent Scotland will bring real change to their lives, it isn’t even a question. Scotland will vote yes, with a mandate from the missing million.

• Isabel Hardman at Coffee House says, on monetary policy, the SNP are now essentially unionist.

Ed Miliband has responded to the white paper.

Here's the number you need to ring if you want to order your own copy of Scotland's Future, the independence white paper.

Or here's the email address you need to use if you want to order one by email.

The CBI is opposed to Scottish independence. It has put out this statement saying its members will read the white paper closely.

Professor Robert Hazell, head of the Constitution Unit at University College London has put out a statement saying that the 18-month timetable set for independence negotiations is realistic.

The 18 month timetable for negotiations between September 2014 and March 2016 is reasonable, and realistic. If Scotland votes Yes, the UK government will have to negotiate in good faith, and with all due speed. Both governments will need to identify the big issues to be resolved before independence; a lot of smaller things can be left until afterwards.

The Czech-Slovak divorce took just six months to negotiate, from July 1992 to January 1993. But it required 31 Treaties and 12000 legal agreements to effect the separation. Many of the agreements were still being negotiated years later.

He also thinks that, if Scotland were to vote yes, there could be a case for a second referendum after the independence negotiations have been concluded.

This is an aspirational white paper. Some of the most important questions – membership of the EU, of NATO, keeping the pound, sharing other services with the UK – are not within the gift of the Scottish government, but depend on others. We will not know until the negotiations are concluded whether the Scottish government can deliver all it hopes. 

If the white paper turns out to have been a false prospectus, there is a strong case for offering a second referendum in March 2016. The terms of independence will then be known. They may be very different from the aspirations of 2014. In the second referendum the people of Scotland could then be asked, Do you still want independence on these terms?

A few days ago Ladbrokes said that 94% of the bets it was taking on the independence referendum were for a no vote.

Today, thought, it thinks the mood has changed (at least marginally). It says it has taken its biggest ever bets on a yes vote, at 5/1, "although the £100, £200 and £250 bets struck in Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee pale into insignificance still compared to the £50,000 'no' punt from earlier in the month in the capital".

Sturgeon says she would like to see people like Alistair Darling, Gordon Brown and Margo MacDonald, the independent (and former SNP) MSP, taking part in the independence negotiations on behalf of an independent Scotland.

And that's it. The statement is over.

Labour's Malcolm Chisholm asks how the SNP will deliver its policies when it is committed to neo-liberal economic policies. Isn't she leading project wish against Project Reality.

Sturgeon says she does not think Chisholm really believes this.

She says she has not given up hope of getting Chisholm to vote yes. She thinks that is where his heart really lies.

Asked about ship building, Sturgeon says the white paper proposes diversity. She also says that she expects the rUK government to go ahead with its order for Type 26 warships from Govan after independence.

Fiona McLeod, the SNP MSP, asks what would be done to ensure genuine public participation in the writing of a new Scottish constitution.

Sturgeon says some plans are set out in the white paper. Getting people involved in this would be genuinely exciting, she says.

Patrick Harvie, the Green MSP, condemns members of the Better Together campaign for describing the childcare proposals as a "bribe".

Sturgeon agrees.

Annabelle Ewing, the SNP MSP, asks what the white paper would do to address inequality.

Sturgeon says there are a range of measures in the white paper that would, over time, make Scotland fairer.

Sturgeon says the no campaign has to explain why any member of the EU would not want Scotland to be a member.

Scotland would not be asking for special favours from the EU, she says. The SNP would be asking for a continuation of the arrangements that apply now.

Annabel Goldie, a Conservative, asks what the SNP would do if London said no to a currency union.

Sturgeon says a currency union is in the best interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK.

The Tories gave Alistair Darling an ovation when he spoke on this at their conference. Sturgeon says she is surprised Goldie does not agree with Darling.

Labour's Iain Gray says the white paper proposes setting up an oil fund straight after independence. But it does not say where the money would come from?

Some MSPs laugh. They think the answer is obvious (from oil).

Gray goes on: would the money come from higher taxes, or cuts, or from borrowing - the world's biggest payday loan.

Sturgeon says Norway set up an oil fund before it started paying into it.

She says the government would make a cautious forecast of revenues. It would pay into the fund when revenues exceeded that forecast.

The SNP's Stewart Maxwell asks what the white paper says about welfare.

Sturgeon says the welfare state is being dismantled. Voting yes would enable the Scots to protect it, she says.

Labour's Jackie Baillie says Sturgeon said nothing about pensions in her statement. Wouldn't maintaining pensions be hugely expensive?

Sturgeon recommends pages 138 onwards.

(Sturgeon and Salmond have been very good at citing page numbers. They seem to know the document backwards.)

She says Scotland needs to increase the size of its working age population. The SNP would do that by attracting immigration, she says.

Aileen McLeod, the SNP MSP, says Scotland would be better served by independent membership of the EU.

Sturgeon says she agrees. What has happened recently over agricultural payments shows this, she says.

Willie Rennie, a Lib Dem MSP, asks why the SNP does not extend childcare provision now.

Sturgeon says the SNP is making progressive changes. But it wants to "transform" provision.

This policy will "capture the imagination of people around Scotland", she says.

Linda Fabiani, the SNP MSP, asks what the white paper says about job security.

Sturgeon says page 365 explains some of the protections for public sector workers.

Drew Smith, a Labour MSP, asks Sturgeon if she accepts the people of England have a right to say no to a currency union.

Sturgeon says politicians are saying they would reject a currency union. But they would say that; they are in a campaign.

She says the SNP is not proposing a euro-style currency union. The British one would not have such tight controls.

Bruce Crawford, an SNP MSP, says the childcare pledge is excellent.

Sturgeon agrees. Her plan would enable more women to participate in the workforce, she says.

And it would create 35,000 jobs.

Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader, says there was nothing much new in the white paper.

For six years the opposition parties have been pressing the SNP to do more on childcare.

Today the SNP announced a policy. And Sturgeon told the press conference that the SNP would not act now because it did not want the money going to the UK Treasury.

How much does the childcare pledge cost?

Sturgeon accuses Davidson of distorting what she said.

The SNP has extended childcare, she says.

But if it wants to have a dramatic increase, it needs to be sure the increased revenues will go to Edinburgh.

By the end of the first parliament, the SNP would spend £600m on this, she says.

Sturgeon is now taking questions.

Johann Lamont, the Labour leader, says the white paper does not mark the beginning of the end of the UK. But it may mark the beginning of the end of yes campaign.

She says the SNP could deliver on its childcare plan now.

But children are being denied what they need until their parents vote as the SNP wants, she says.

Lamont says the SNP plan relies on the goodwill of people in the rest of the UK. But the SNP claim these people do Scotland down.

The SNP suggests that, if the rest of the UK does not offer a currency union, it will refuse to pay Scotland's share of UK debt. The SNP want a divorce, but they want to keep a joint bank account.

So the question is: if there is no currency union, will Scotland do a runner?

Sturgeon says Lamont is being her usual cheery self.

The no campaign's response to the white paper was written some time ago. The Spectator said it had seen it, she says.

The biggest threat to Scotland's membership of the EU is remaining in the UK, she says.

And Sturgeon explains why she thinks rUK would agree to a currency union.

She is not making any threats, she says. But Scotland should get a fair share of its assets. And it will not pay its liabilities if it does not get a fair share of assets.

Sturgeon says 20,000 copies have been printed.

But anyone how asks for one will be sent one.

Copies to people in the UK are free.

Copies for people outside the UK will cost £10.

Sturgeon says preparing it has cost £450,000. The full cost will not be known until the government knows how many people want a hard copy, she says.

The document is also available online. And it is available as an e-book from the Apple store.

As of today, Scotland's Future really is in Scotland's hands, she says. (That's a pun - the document is called Scotland's Future.)

Part four explains how Scotland would manage the transition to independence, she says.

Scotland would continue to belong to the EU and other international organisations.

The proposals are reasonable and rational, she says. They are common sense.

And part five answers questions about the process, she says.

Part two is about the financial case for independence, Sturgeon says.

She says Scotland could afford to be independent.

Part three is about the opportunities independence offers.

Sturgeon describes the SNP's plan for a transformative expansion of childcare. Some MSPs seem to jeer (because they think it's a gimmick), but a few moments later their is applause, which is louder.

(It's all a bit restrained for someone used to Westminster.)

There are many other details of what an independent Scotland would be like, she says.

Sturgeon sets out what would happen if there were a no vote.

There would be no guarantee of more powers for Scotland, she says.

All main Westminster parties seem to favour a cut in the Barnett formula, she says. That would led to cuts in spending in Scotland.

And there would be a real risk of Scotland leaving the EU, she says.

Sturgeon is explaining the contents of the five parts of the white paper.

Part one sets out the case for independence. That rests on democracy, prosperity and social justice, she says.

Decisions about Scotland should be taken in Scotland, not by governments in London, which have often lost the election in Scotland.

This morning the Scotland Office put out a briefing note claiming that a currency union between Scotland and the rest of the UK would not work. Here's an excerpt.

Currency unions don’t work without close political and fiscal integration, whereas independence is about disintegration: the lesson of the euro area crisis is clear – currency unions are very difficult without fiscal or political union, and can expose all their members to significant risks. Euro area countries are moving towards closer political and fiscal union to address these challenges. The Scottish Government are proposing the exact opposite – currency union without fiscal or political union. And independence would inevitably mean the continuing UK and Scotland moving further apart. This is hardly a credible basis for a monetary union.

Divergence of our economies: the economies of an independent Scotland and the UK would be very different, and would diverge over time. This is particularly because Scotland would have a significant dependence on North Sea oil. Changes in the oil price would therefore affect the countries differently and a one-size fits all monetary policy would not suit both. 

But the SNP has been pointing out that Alistair Darling himself said earlier this year that a currency union would be desirable. Here's what Darling told Newsnight in January.

Of course – of course it would be desirable to have a currency union . . . If you have independence or separation, of course the currency union is logical.

The quote of the day award has gone to the SNP MSP Joan McAlpine. She has a column in the Daily Record, and in it she made this claim.

[The white paper] answers 650 questions about Scotland’s future – everything you ever thought to ask and some that probably never occurred to you.

It makes America’s historic Declaration of Independence look like a Post-it note.

Here's the full statement on the white paper from Alistair Carmichael, the Lib Dem Scottish secretary.

For years we have been promised that all the answers on independence would be in the white paper. The big day has finally arrived and we have 670 pages that leaves us none the wiser on crucial questions such as currency, pensions and the cost of independence.

Rarely have so many words been used to answer so little.

People will draw their own conclusions that the Scottish government have deliberately sought to ignore the uncertainties and difficulties of independence. We are simply expected to believe that everything will be perfect after we leave the UK. We are asked to accept that ending a 300 year United Kingdom will be straightforward. We are told it will all be alright on the night.

We know that the terms of independence would need to be negotiated with many countries including the rest of the UK and the EU. An honest assessment of the challenges and uncertainties of leaving the UK would have seriously helped the debate between now and September. Instead we have been given a wish with no price list. Today was their chance to level with people. They have chosen a different path and people in Scotland will judge them on that.

 It is astonishing that the Scottish government can sit in private discussing the costs of independence and then refuse to share those figure with the Scottish people. John Swinney’s leaked paper said it would cost £600m every year to run an independent tax system but today we saw nothing about that.

 It looks more and more like the Scottish government will continue to keep these things private. If they had convincing answers then today really would have been the day to share them with everyone.

From now until September 18th we will keep making the positive case for the UK. It works well for Scotland. It gives us the best of both worlds. It offers us a better future. We will fight hard to preserve it against those who have been obsessed with independence for their entire political lives but now seek to disguise it.

Bookmakers William Hill are giving odds of 7/1 on Scotland leaving the UK, and 1/14 on Scots staying put. 

Last year in the Spectator, George Eaton looked at whether Labour would ever win a general election again if Scotland left the UK. He noted that Ed Miliband would lose 41 MPs (he currently has 257) while the Tories would only lose one (of 304). But Eaton notes:

Without Scotland, Labour would still have won in 1997 (with a majority of 139, down from 179), in 2001 (129, down from 167) and in 2005 (43, down from 66). What those who say that Labour cannot win without Scotland are really saying is that they do not believe Labour can ever win a sizeable majority again.

But in 2010, Eaton calculates, a rest-of-UK election would have produced a Tory majority of 21.

What we can say for sure is that for Labour Scotland leaving the UK would make it more difficult for them to win – while the Tories would have an easier time of it in the rump UK.

As for the Lib Dems, 11 of their 55 MPs are Scottish, but it's difficult to say whether the loss of these seats would damage their chances of forming another coalition or not.

The Better Together "no" campaign has put out this graphic illustrating the reasons Scotland should stay part of the UK:

John Curtice of the University of Strathclyde is speaking to Sky News.

Who does the SNP have to win over? Curtice says they are very far behind with women. "There is an extraordinary gender gap in this context." With men, it's very close. But women are firmly against independence at the moment. "That's why we've heard so much this morning about childcare."

Religion makes no difference and there is not a great deal of geographical variation, he says.

Middle-class people are more inclined to see independence as a risk, he says.

The older section of the population are more inclined towards union.

What impact would independence have on the rest of the UK? Curtice says it would have a huge impact on foreign and defence policy, mentioning the Trident nuclear submarines.

Domestically, if trading with Scotland became more difficult, the rest of the UK loses out, Curtice says.

What happens if Scotland doesn't become independent and the UK votes to leave the EU against Scotland's will, Sturgeon asks.

Sturgeon is told she could bring in her childcare plans now.

She says Scotland needs to be independent for this because the purpose would partly to be to increase female participation in the workforce - but if they brought in such childcare plans now all that extra tax revenue from working women would flow to the UK Treasury, instead of being used to support Scots.

If Scotland votes yes, Sturgeon says, we will have a sensible negotiation reflecting the "mutual shared interests" of Scotland the rest of the UK.

What if others don't agree? There's no back-up plan.

Sturgeon says for the UK to turn its back on a shared currency would be against its own interest, and no UK politician has ruled it out.

Scotland's deputy first minister Nicola Sturgeon is being interviewed on BBC News now. Alistair Darling's points about matters being up for negotiation are put to her. 

Sturgeon says Darling probably wrote his comments two weeks ago.

She says currency union would be in the rest of the UK's best interests. "It would make no sense for the Westminster government to force its own businesses to be in a separate currency when Scotland doesn't want that."

Business lobby group the CBI has put out a response to the launch from director-general John Cridland:

Next year’s referendum is a matter for the Scottish voters. The outcome will matter hugely to businesses and consumers across the whole of the UK.

The CBI believes that the nations of the UK are stronger together and that Scotland’s business and economic interests will be best served by remaining as part of the UK. Our members have been pressing for responses to many key questions on independence that we have put to the Scottish government and we will study this white paper closely to decide how far it answers businesses' questions.

Here is some reaction to the launch from UK MPs.

From the aforementioned Alistair Darling:

From Scottish Labour frontbencher Douglas Alexander:

From Tory Henry Smith:

From Scottish Labour MP Jim McGovern:

From Tory Andrew Murrison:

Better Together campaigners handed out thousands of copies of a special newsletter to commuters at rail stations across Scotland this morning, writes Billy Briggs.

At Dundee rail station, which sits across from Captain Scott’s famous ship, Discovery, at the city’s waterfront, three members of the Lib Dems campaigned between 7am to 9am.

They distributed an eight page tabloid called 'bettertogether News’ that was prepared to mark the release of today’s white paper on independence.

The publication given to travellers ran with the headline: “Experts say we’re better together & worse-off apart” and a splash citing a report by the Institute For Fiscal Studies that predicted higher taxes and cuts in public spending if Scotland became independent.

Inside, there were articles entitled “Confused on currency?” and a centre spread giving readers “10 reasons why staying in the UK gives Scots the best of both world.”

The back page was devoted to ‘sport’ with articles quoting both Sir Alex Ferguson and sprinter Brian Whittle voicing support for Scotland remaining part of the UK.

Sir Alex – who has donated to the Better Together Campaign, said: “If ever there was a time to be wary of Scotland pulling out of the UK, it is now. It would be a total distraction from what really matters to people – the economy, jobs, schools and hospitals.

This is Paul Owen taking the reins for the next little while.

Alistair Darling, the former UK chancellor and leader of the Better Together "no" campaign, has put out a response to the white paper's launch:

Nothing has changed as a result of this white paper. The nationalists have ducked the opportunity to answer the big questions about Scotland’s future.

We have waited months for this and it has failed to give credible answers on fundamentally important questions. What currency would we use? Who will set our mortgage rates? How much would taxes have to go up? How will we pay pensions and benefits in future?

It is a fantasy to say we can leave the UK but still keep all the benefits of UK membership.

The white paper is a work of fiction. It is thick with false promises and meaningless assertions.

Instead of a credible and costed plan, we have a wish-list of political promises without any answers on how Alex Salmond would pay for them.

As for the promises, they could deliver on childcare now. Their excuse for not using the power they already have beggars belief - Nicola Sturgeon said they couldn’t act now because women would go to work and the tax they pay would go to the UK Treasury. That is our treasury, not that of a foreign country.

With so much uncertainty and unanswered questions about the cost of independence, leaving the UK would be a huge leap in the dark – especially when we know that devolution works for Scotland. We can have the best of both worlds – a strong Scottish parliament with the strength and opportunity of being part of a bigger United Kingdom.

Darling was also interviewed on BBC News just now.

There’s absolutely nothing new here, he said. They have ducked the big questions like: how can they guarantee the pound? What’s plan B if they can’t get that.

He said of their promise on childcare that the Scottish government already had the power to do that. If the tax from women working would go to the Treasury, “that’s our Treasury - it’s not a foreign Treasury,” Darling said.

He said the rest of the UK would have to agree on a currency union with an independent in Scotland. “It’s looking suspiciously like a non-starter … so what is plan B?”

Are we going to use the pound like Panama uses the dollar, he asks. Will Scotland have the euro, or its own new currency?

He notes that this would be a “negotiation” but the document is full of assertions of fact. “We’ve simply got claims and assertions.” There is “precious little in the way of facts”, he says.

Scotland’s population is aging more quickly than that of rUK, he says, and North Sea oil revenue is declining.

Q: What is the cost of your childcare policy?

Sturgeon says the SNP has already been increasing investment in childcare. Its budget has gone up by £600m. But this is a policy that would generate tax income, she says.

It would also create 35,000 jobs in the childcare industry.

Q: Have Nato representatives told you you will be welcome?

Salmond says there have been discussion. Scotland meets the criteria for Nato membership. It expects to be welcomed in.

Q: Can you give Scots a cast-iron guarantee that they will use the pound?

Scotland will keep the pound, Salmond says.

And that's it. "I think we've had a fair kick of the ball," Salmond says.

Q: You say you want to get rid of Trident within the first term of a new Scottish parliament. Does that mean by 2021?

Surgeon says this is set out in question 315. The SNP would want Trident removed within the first term of a Scottish parliament. CND produced a report saying this could be done in two years.

One of the benefits of independence is that the Scots would get to make that choice, she says.

Trident would have to be removed as quickly as it could be safely done. Safety would be important.

Q: Every country that has joined the EU has had to promise to join the euro. Why do you think you would not have to?

Salmond says Sweden has not joined the euro before people voted not to join. That shows that new members states do not have to join.

Q: All your opponents have to do is keep asking awkward questions. Do you think you will run out of time?

Salmond says his view of politics is that the positive beats the negative. We are on the positive side, and we will win, he says.

Q: UK expats can vote in Westminster elections. Would Scottish citizens living in England be able to vote in Holyrood elections?

Sturgeon refers to question 617 in the document. The proposal constitutional convention would look at this, she says.

Q: On page 42 you talk about off-setting assets against the debts you would take on from the UK. What are those assets?

Salmond says some assets are non-territorial. For example, the UK embassy in Paris. It might not make sense to take 8% of the UK embassy in Paris. So instead assets like that could be off-set against debt.

Q: What would you do if the rest of the UK rejects your case on a currency union?

Salmond says his arguments are very powerful. For rUK to reject them, it would have to reject what was in its own best interests. The Edinburgh agreement says they would not do this.

Q: Would Scots living abroad be able to get a Scottish passport?

Sturgeon says the terms of citizenship are set out in a table on page 406.

Q: Even if you had a monetary union, Scotland would still not get the interest rates it needs?

Salmond says the currency proposals are based on the work of his fiscal working group, involving two Nobel laureates.

Productivity in Scotland and the rest of the UK is the same. That is why a currency union would work.

But Salmond says if he were first minister of Wales, where unemployment is out of kilter with unemployment in the rest of the UK, he might be worried about a currency union.

Q: So Scotland would never need to set its own interest rates?

Salmond says having the same interest rates as your main trading partner creates mutual benefits.

Q: What are your plans for a written constitution and to create a new democracy?

Salmond says these plans are in the document. There would be a constitutional convention. Iceland is an example of a country that has reinvigorated itself by having a written constitution. Every other member of the EU (apart from rUK, presumably) has a written constitution, he says. And every other member of the Commonwealth too.

Q: Why should people trust you to deliver?

Salmond says the SNP started as a minority government in 2007. Then it got re-elected with a majority. That was not an accident, he says. It was because people trusted the government.

Salmond says he puts forward a positive case for independence. But on pages 60 and 61 it says what happens if there were a no vote. Scotland would be stuck with Trident, stuck with the bedroom tax, public spending would be cut, and Scotland and the rest of the UK could leave the EU.

That's a bleak outlook, he says. But the rest of the document is uplifting.

Q: Have you had assurances that Scotland would be able to join Nato?

Salmond says 25 out of 28 of them are not nuclear powers. Twenty do not have nuclear weapons on their soil, he says.

Q: What gives you the right to say what's best for the rest of the UK in terms of the currency?

Salmond says he is putting forward an argument about what's best for rest of the UK.

If Scotland's oil and gas were not included in exports, there would be a "massive hole" in the UK's balance of payments.

The currency is part of the UK's assets, he says.

Q: Will Scots keep the pound regardless of whether or not the rest of the UK accepts a currency union?

Salmond says the position is set out in the document. 

Scotland would accept a share of liabilities, he says. But it would expect a share of assets. (This is the veiled threat not to pay Scotland's share of the UK debt.)

Q: There would be difficult negotiations about matters like the euro, Schengen and the rebate. How can you be confident that you will get what you want?

Salmond says Scotland does not want to join the euro. Sweden is in the same position, he says.

He says the Scottish government is putting forward a common sense position. It has every reason to believe it would have wide acceptance.

Sturgeon says the Scottish government accepts "continuity of effect".

Salmond says there is uncertainty; but that comes from Westminster, which is holding an in/out referendum. 

Q: Has the Scottish government discussed EU membership, and its analysis in the white paper, with other EU countries?

Salmond says he would be happy to enter talks with the European Commission. But those talks have to be initiated by the member state, the UK government. The UK government has said it does not want that.

Q: Your foreign affairs representative has been visiting other EU capitals. You must have had discussions.

Salmond says the Scottish government has not heard anything to suggest that other EU countries are not supportive of Scotland's EU membership.

Q: Aren't these policies reversible?

Salmond says he believes in choice. People should get the government they vote for.

Q: You say there would be no border controls. But you also says there would be a borders agency to control migration. Isn't the inconsistent?

Salmond says there would be no border controls on travel from England and Ireland. But there would be controls on people arriving from outside that common travel area.

Q: You are proposing free childcare for pre-school children. Couldn't you do that now? And how much would that cost?

Sturgeon says this proposal is designed to get more women into the workplace.

If the government did that now, the increased revenues would go to Whitehall, she says.

Part two of the document explains the phased way this would be introduced, she says.

If Scotland had the female participation rates in the workplace of Sweden, tax revenues would increase by £700m.

Q: How much would individual Scots benefit from independence?

Salmond says each Scot would have been £2,400 better off if Scotland had controlled its own finances in the past.

In the future independence could benefit Scots to the tune of £600 each, he says.

But the case for independence rests on the policies an independent Scotland would pursue.

Tax cuts become doable and affordable if you keep the revenues, he says.

Q: [From the BBC's Nick Robinson - normally asked first at Westminster press conferences, but kept waiting here.] You say Scots will keep the pound and will be able to watch Strictly on BBC. Shouldn't you admit that there is a doubt about these outcomes?

Salmond says last week there was a scare story saying Scots would not have been able to watch the Dr Who 50th anniversary special. This story ran for few hours before the no campaign realised it was being broadcast all over the world.

On the currency, he says the Scottish government's case is set out on pages 109 to 117.

Salmond says Scoland would be entitled to a share of UK assets.

Even Alistair Darling said earlier this year that a currency union would be "logical and desirable".

Q: But you don't use phrases like "perhaps", "maybe", "if we get our way", "if other people agree". You are hoping for these outcomes. But you may be proved wrong.

Salmond says he has put forward arguments that are "strong and reasonable". People will judge whether they are reasonable.

People will vote for a positive vision, especially one based on reason and common sense.

Q: You say you will agree with the UK government how to share the national vote. But these are contentious issues. How will you negotiate this?

Salmond says page 75 explains the different calculations you could use.

Both options would lead to Scotland having a low share of debt to GDP.

Q: Do you accept that the negotiations would be difficult, and that you could no guarantee the outcome?

Salmond cites Professor James Crawford. He was chosen by the UK government as their expert. He said the time set aside for negotiations was realistic.

On average, in independence negotiations, agreements have been reached in 18 months.

Salmond says Scotland and the UK are modern, sophisticated democracies. Their governments would follow the will of their electorates.

Q: [From ITV's Chris Ship.] I've been given an international media badge.

We are nothing if not far-seeing, says Salmond.

Q: What do you say about the IFS claims about the costs facing an independent Scotland?

Salmond says the IFS study looked forward to 2062. It imagined Scotland being a low growth economy. But that is not the future the SNP plan. They imagine Scotland pursuing different policies.

The IFS also said there would only be residual oil and gas revenues after 2040.Yet firms are investing in the North Sea on the expectation that there will be revenues after 2040.

Q: What would you do about pensions? 

Sturgeon says the devolved government has introduced measures to tackle Scotland's relatively low life expectancy.

On average, Scots have a lower life expectancy than people in the rest of the UK.

That is why the Scottish government would set up an expert commission to look at whether the pension age needs to rise as quickly as in the rest of the UK.

That is a good example of how Scotland needs different policies, he says.

Scotland has an ageing population. That is a good thing. But it needs to increase the working age population.

Salmond jokes that he looks forward to 2062, so that he can debate who was right and who was wrong with the IFS.

Q: You say immigration would be good. But you also say there would be no border controls.

Salmond says he is arguing for a green card system, similar to the one that operates in the Republic of Ireland.

We do not have a negative view of skilled young people, Salmond says. There are foreign students in Scotland. If they want to work in the country, that is a good thing.

Q: People know there are pros and cons to everything. But there does not seem to be any reference to cons in this. What are the downsides to independence?

Salmond says page 75 sets out the budget of the first independent government. It is not a "spendthrift" budget. 

Scotland would start up to £600 a head better off than the rest of the UK, he says.

But the position would still be challenging.

A Scottish government would have different priorities, he says.

It would not spend billions on nuclear weapons. Instead it would spend money on childcare.

It proposes choices. These choices are more in line with the desires of the people of Scotland.

Q: But it is all milk and honey.

Salmond says he does not accept that.

One of Scotland's biggest problems is the democratic deficit, he says. People vote one way, but get something else.

Q: In 1997 there was a white paper, and people voted for it. Then what it proposed was implemented. You are asking people to vote yes to this white paper. But independence would be subject to protracted negotiations. People would get, not this, but something different. Isn't this not so much a white paper but a negotiating hand?

Salmond says he sees a parallel with 1997. In 1997 Salmond wanted a vote on the white paper.Once the democratic mandate was secured, parliament implemented it. 

The Edinburgh agreement says both governments will accept the results of the referendum, he says, and do what is in the best interests of Scotland and the UK as a whole.

You can read the white paper here or here – although the website currently seems to be struggling.

They are now taking questions.

Q: Isn't it true that your plans are very dependent on others?

Salmond says this is not a paper you can just "take a glance" at.

The white paper does include policies an SNP government would try to pursue, he says.

On the currency, he says he has proposed a "common sense" position in the best interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK.

Sturgeon says the white paper also sets out the "seamless" process by which Scotland could stay in the EU.

Nicola Sturgeon is speaking now.

The white paper sets out the economic and democratic case for independence, she says.

It puts beyond any doubt the notion that Scotland can become independent.

And it shows how Scotland can use the powers of independence to make the country better.

Independence is not just an end in itself. It is a means to creating a fair society.

A better childcare system is at the heart of the plan, she says.

Pensions will be protected.

Action will be taken to cut energy bills.

Scotland would have strong defences. But it would not have Trident.

Salmond says the white paper answers 650 questions.

But there really is only one question: should Scotland take decisions for itself?

He says he wants a positive debate.

The referendum won't be decided by him, or by the media. It will be decided by the people.

Scotland's future is now in the hands of the Scottish people.

And here come Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon.

Salmond says the white paper is the most detailed blueprint any people have been offered anywhere in the world as a basis for becoming independent.

Scotland would become independent in better circumstances than almost any other country in the world.

This reflects Scotland's "vast potential". It has an outstanding natural heritage, and skilled and inventive people.

With independence, it could build a fairer nation, he says.

But, to maximise its potential, Scotland needs to be able to take decisions for itself.

It needs to be able to develop its productivity and competitive advantage. And it needs to create a fair society.

Lots of people in the video now: working, dancing, playing. 

The video is starting.

It's images of Scotland's cities, and countryside, with pulsating rock music in the background. So far it's like a Visit Scotland promo without words.

The press conference is about to start.

We're going to get a video, then statements from Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon. Then they will take questions.

They have let us into the hall where the press conference will take place.

Copies of the white paper were on the seats.

I'm at the Glasgow science centre now, in the Starbucks with a gang of other journalists waiting for the press conference to start. (Paul Owen has been posting on the blog for the last 45 minutes or so.) Some reporters have been allowed into a different room to read the report (or start reading the report - it's 670 pages, remember) in what's known as a "lock in" (an event where journalists can read a document under embargo, provided they do not report anything until an agreed time). But only a limited number of people have been let in on that basis.

It's drizzling in Glasgow, but it's not cold and, approaching the science museum, there was a glorious rainbow in the sky. Whether Alex Salmond can conjure up a pot of gold, though, remains to be seen.

There are 200 journalists accredited to be here, including a fair smattering for reporters from non-UK news organisations. When I arrived at reception they had run out of passes saying "domestic media" and I was given one saying "international media". The lady behind the desk was a bit apologetic. "It's not a sign of things to come," she said as she gave me my pass. She was being polite, but she was not being particularly on message. I thought the whole point was that this was meant to be a sign of things to come.

Originally it was expected that the launch would be in Edinburgh. The Scottish government has not given a particularly good explanation as to why we're in Glasgow instead, but the assumption is that it is an attempt to connect with the Glasgow/industrial/Labour-prone voters whose support is seen as crucial if the SNP are to have any chance of winning next year.

An independent Scotland may refuse to accept its share of the United Kingdom's liabilities if London refuses to allow Edinburgh to form a sterling currency union with the remainder of the UK, the deputy first minister of the Scottish government has warned. As Nicholas Watt and Severin Carrell report:

Hours before the launch of the Scottish government's 670-page white paper on independence, Nicola Sturgeon said a shared currency would be in the interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK ...

The deputy first minister told Good Morning Scotland on BBC Radio Scotland: "Sterling is a shared asset. The pound is as much Scotland's as it is the rest of the UK's. The UK government, in the wake of a yes vote, will want Scotland to take its fair share of liabilities. But that only works if we also get our fair share of assets."

You can watch the launch of the independence white paper live from 10am here.

Nicola Sturgeon was pressed on her currency "plan B" in her Today programme interview earlier. (See 8.27am.) Alistair Darling, head of the Better Together campaign, also raised the issue when he appeared on the programme.

I think [the white paper will] set out what Alex Salmond wants, but that's not quite the same thing as a fully worked out, credible and costed plan. At the heart of this is: what currency would we use? Alex Salmond has said that he wants a currency union rather like the eurozone with the rest of the UK. Now increasingly that's looking like a non-starter, because you've got people on both sides of the argument saying 'look, why on earth would you want to walk yourself into a legal straitjacket?'

It's not just people in the rest of the UK, it's people in the nationalist ranks themselves are saying 'hold on, this is not a good idea'. So at the very least today, what we must see is what the plan B is, if you can't get a currency union - either because no one will agree to it or because you don't like the terms and conditions - what's your fallback position?

I'm off to the Glasgow science centre now for the launch. I will post again when I'm there.

Here are two interesting Scotsman columns on the white paper.

• Michael Fry in the Scotsman (an unusual breed - a pro-independence Tory) says that an independent Scotland could easily carry on using the pound.

If independent Scotland wants to use sterling it can do that too, without even asking the English. Ireland did exactly the same during the period of currency union with the UK that came to an end when it joined the European exchange rate mechanism (forerunner of the euro) in 1979. Dáil Éireann had adopted the pound by its Currency Act of 1927 and, as far as I can discover, this unilateral legislation was the sole legal authority for the move.

At any rate, I do not think Irish governments of those days were in the habit of asking permission from Westminster to do whatever the newly independent country, recently liberated by violence, wanted to do. Again, the English should count themselves lucky that what the Scots propose instead is an agreement. But if they spurn it, Scotland can continue using sterling anyway.

The only way the English could prevent this would be by abandoning sterling’s status as a fully convertible reserve currency, which would entail introducing exchange controls. They would need to bring in legislation banning, say, Standard Life, the biggest company in Scotland and doing more business south of the Border than north of it, from using sterling in its Scottish transactions. I am not sure what its English shareholders would have to say about this.

• Peter Jones in the Scotsman says that, if Scotland votes yes, neither side may get what it wants in the independence negotiations.

My, non-partisan, view is that actually it demonstrates the unpredictability of these sort of negotiations and that the major players will look for deals which secure their own interests first and those of other actors are a secondary consideration. It means, assuming a Yes vote, that neither the Scottish nor the UK government will end up with what they expect.

The prospect of Scotland breaking out of the union with England, Wales, and Northern Ireland may not exactly be a threat to global stability, but it is nonetheless an international issue of considerable interest, certainly to European political players and further afield, too.

We know broadly what Mr Salmond expects independence will deliver, which will have an impact internationally – Scottish membership of the European Union, non-nuclear independent membership of Nato, and Scottish sharing of the pound inside a UK sterling zone.

We also know a bit about what the UK government’s attitude to these expectations is. What we don’t know is how other countries, who have levers in this debate, regard it. We might expect that France, for example, which has an equivocal relationship with Britain, or les Anglo-Saxons, might cheerfully help push through Scottish EU membership. But what if it regards the upheaval of having to remove Trident submarines from Scotland as an unacceptable dilution of European, and hence French, security?

Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's deputy first minister, has just finished an interview on the Today programme. She was on Good Morning Scotland earlier.

Both interviews started with questions about the currency that an independent Scotland would use. Why would an independent Scotland be able to have a currency union with the rest of the UK (rUK) when George Osborne and Ed Balls have both indicated that they would block a currency union of that kind?

Sturgeon started with the Mandy Rice-Davies argument: they would say that, wouldn't they?

You would expect opponents of independence to say this now, she said. But, after a yes vote, politicians like Osborne and Balls would change their stance. They would accept a currency union, because it would be in the interests of rUK.

She said there were three reasons for this: Scotland is rUK's second largest export market; its oil and gas sales make a valuable contribution to the UK's balance of payments; and the pound is a shared asset.

In her Today interview, Sturgeon suggested that if Scotland were not offered a currency union, it would refuse to take on its share of the UK's debt. She did not want this outcome, she said. But if Scotland did not get its share of the UK's assets, including the pound, it could not be expected to take its share of its liabilities.

She was also pressed to say whether the SNP had an alternative plan if rUK continued to say no to a currency union (ie is there a plan B?). She repeatedly sidestepped the question, saying that a currency union was in the best interests of Scotland. 

Better Together, the cross-party anti-independence campaign, is running its own live blog about the publication of the white paper today. 

My colleague Severin Carrell, the Guardian's Scotland correspondent, has published a good preview of the white paper. Here's an extract.

The SNP's central strategy is to target key electoral groups who are either the most likely to back independence or the largely reluctant but necessary to win over: the SNP has mastered this technique, using sophisticated data and surveys to identify specific demographics.

In the former category are leftwing, younger voters, small business owners and the urban working class. Women and young mothers, and pensioners fall in the latter.

Ministers have already promised to abolish the bedroom tax and there are reports they would abandon the universal credit welfare reform, too. Nicola Sturgeon, the deputy first minister, has promised action on a higher minimum wage and action on child care. Older voters were lured in September with promises of earlier retirement ages, and better-protected pensions.

The phrase “white paper” is not one that normally stirs the passions, but in Glasgow today the Scottish government is going to publish one that has been described in some quarters as the most important document in the nation's history since the Declaration of Arbroath in 1320.

It's the white paper on independence, a document that is intended to answer all the outstanding questions about how Scotland would become independent, and what the new nation would be like, if Scots vote to leave the United Kingdom in the referendum on 18 September next year.

From what we've been told, it is certainly going to be thorough. Expect something the size of a telephone directory. It is going to be 670 pages long, and it is going to contain more than 170,000 words. And it will apparently include a 200-page section providing answers to 650 specific questions about independence. Alex Salmond, Scotland's SNP first minister, and his deputy, Nicola Sturgeon, believe that this will be the document that sets the terms for the debate over the next 10 months. This is what Sturgeon wrote about it at the weekend:

Tuesday’s publication is, above all, a document designed for the public. We already know what the No campaign will say about it – their script is written. We decided at an early stage that Project Fear wasn’t going to drive the document. Instead it sets out to give the public the information they need. So, for example, on issues where negotiation will be required, we set out the rational, reasonable and responsible case that serves the interests of both Scotland and the rest of the UK.

Our message to the people of Scotland is: read it, compare and contrast it with the increasingly bizarre scaremongering of Project Fear, and make up your own minds. The publication of the White Paper is the moment the scaremongering of No comes head to head with common sense and a clear vision of the future.

We want as many households in Scotland as possible to have a copy of this guide to independence, and I will be setting out next week in more detail the plans for informing the public about the paper and everything that is in it.

She also said that she was confident that it was “without parallel, as the most thorough and detailed blueprint for an independent country ever produced”.

Sturgeon also admitted that the white paper would be something of a mix, because it would combine “two categories of policy choice”. Partly it will be a negotiating document, setting out the concessions the SNP government would demand as it negotiated independence with the Westminster government representing the rest of the UK (or rUK, as it is known in the independence debate) in the period between a yes vote in September 2014 and independence on 24 March 2016. And partly it will be a more visionary manifesto setting out what an SNP government would do with independence post-2016. (It is, of course, theoretically possible that the Scots could vote for independence in 2014, but then vote two years later for another party to take over, but don't expect anyone to waste much time speculating on that scenario today.)

What are we expecting this morning? Probably not many surprises (although there are reports that there will be big childcare announcement in the document), because the SNP has already told us rather a lot about its independence plans. But there will be intense interest in some of the detail. More importantly, the publication of the white paper will mark the moment when Scots can start to make a judgment on the credibility and appeal of the full independence prospectus set out by Salmond.

I'm in Glasgow and I will be covering the launch, the contents of the white paper and the reaction to it all day. My colleague Paul Owen will be helping at points throughout the day, and Guardian specialists will also be contributing.

Here's the timetable for the day.

10am: Launch of the white paper at the Glasgow science centre.

After 2pm: Nicola Sturgeon makes a statement on the white paper in the Scottish parliament.

If you want to follow me on Twitter, I'm on @AndrewSparrow, and Paul Owen is @paultowen.