The huge and unprecedented scale of the bailout of those banks that got into debt problems of their own making has asked serious questions of Salmond's economic case for independe nce.

His weekend conference speech gave him the chance to land a few punches of his own, but other than the personal jibes, he looked seriously off-form, like a man desperate for the bell to ring and bring some respite.

Could an independent Scotland have saved the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBoS to the tune of a £30 billion bailout – equivalent to the annual spending of Salmond's Government?

And, of course, it's not just the capital that's being invested – but all the hundreds of billions that are available to deal with any bad debt write-offs and "short-term" liquidity issues. Could an independent Scotland have afforded that too?

Those are the questions now haunting Alex Salmond and the SNP.

For Slugger – the southpaw that once said he would have put up a puny £100 million to save HBoS – the media are now portraying him as a chump rather than a champ.

As the bell rang, Slugger rushed out and went straight for "Bomber" Brown's solar plexus, saying he had created the age of irresponsibility.

But the blow missed.

If Brown was irresponsible for expanding the money supply, helping housing prices let rip and going on a public spending spree like there was no tomorrow – and he was – then one thing was certain, Slugger Salmond had always been ringside cheering him on.

In fact Slugger and his corner were baying for more, more, more.

In the eight years I sat in the Scottish Parliament there was never a day when the SNP did not call for greater spending than Labour offered as the cure-all to Scotland's problems. Even now, Slugger Salmond is at it again, demanding a further £1bn from the UK Treasury to soften the blow as we come off the drug of government money.

Of course an independent Scotland could have put itself in hock to international financiers and other governments (the Russians, England even?) or the International Monetary Fund and left future generations to pick up the bill. Not just you or your children, but your grandchildren too.

True, Iceland is independent of Denmark and despite the collapse of its big banks is not rushing to reunite with the Danes. Still, its financial reputation is in ruins and it's not just the banks there that are bust – the country is too. One can't but help but notice that the British Government – not the Icelandic Government – is guaranteeing the deposits of British people in Icelandic banks.

Would an independent Scotland have felt no shame if an English government had guaranteed the billions invested by English depositors in RBS and HBoS? It would be an independence in mind only.

Ah but, the Nationalists say, we would be in the Euro and the European institutions would bail us out. No doubt they would – but only after they had bailed themselves out first. Germany is raising £62bn, Spain £50bn, France £31bn, Italy £30bn and Portugal £16bn (plus another £854bn in guarantees).

Of course there's always oil. Sure it brings in millions every day (the figure varies, now back below $70 a barrel and falling) but there's a problem there too – for the SNP has already committed that oil money to pay for all our welfare, defence and international expenditure that an independent Scotland needs – and spent it again on the milk and honey it has promised and can't yet afford, such as more teachers and police.

The truth is Scotland can be independent if it wants – and it could pay its way in the world – eventually. It would, however, take a real cut in our standard of living that the Nationalist politicians won't get real about and is, as yet, unquantified.

To make Scotland really prosperous like, say, Singapore or Hong Kong would require just the sort of policies that nearly all Scottish politicians despise – a small welfare state, even smaller taxes and even less government regulation. An independent Scottish Parliament? It might as well become a visitor centre for Holyrood Palace and Arthur's Seat.

But why put ourselves through all that?

Why settle for running Scotland when we already run England too? It's Gordon Brown that RBS has to be thankful for, it's Alistair Darling that First Minister Salmond has to go bunnet-in hand to, and it's all those Scots before them – Robin Cook, Malcolm Rifkind, George Younger – that ran England before them.

Going it alone
Is there something in our Scottish genes that helps us produce individual talent but struggle in team games? I simply observe that, as a nation, Scotland is terrific at producing world champion drivers, snooker players, cyclists, golfers and now, in Andy Murray, a true world-class Scottish and British tennis star has arrived? If someone can capture and bottle that DNA we might win the World Cup one day.