THE provision of welfare services and benefits has been a contentious issue for campaigners in the independence referendum.

For many on the Yes side, welfare reforms and benefit cuts, the bedroom tax and tougher sanctions on Jobseekers allowance claimants are significant reasons for independence.

Yes Scotland and the Scottish Government say that with independence the country will be able to afford and implement a fairer welfare system suited to the needs and principles of the country.

However, supporters of the Union state that it is the very existence of the UK that allows the current system of benefits to be affordable.

Both the Scottish and UK governments have produced reports outlining their arguments over the provision of benefits from affordability to adminis-tration and reform of the system.

The Scottish government White Paper, Scotland's Future, dedicates a chapter to welfare.

It states: "Spending on social protection which includes pensions and welfare is more affordable in Scotland.

"We spend a smaller proportion of our national wealth and tax revenues on the provision of social protection than the UK as a whole."

The paper argues the changes being implemented at Westminster make the need for a new approach more urgent.

It says £4.5billion could potentially be removed from Scottish households.

Both sides argue the research proves their arguments using official figures to bolster their respective cases.

The Scottish Government said: "In 2012/13 the most recent year for statistics, 38% of Scottish tax revenue was spend on social protection compared with 42% of the UK as a whole.

"Expenditure on social protection as a share of economic output has also been lower in Scotland than in the UK in each of the past five years."

It continued: "With independence, therefore we can afford to choose a different path for Scotland, with an approach to social justice that is based on our view of what a healthy and flourishing society should be."

The UK Government has produced a paper on work and pensions as part of its Scotland Analysis series.

It says the Scottish Government's plan to share the social security infra-structure for a transitional period is not feasible.

The report states: "In 2012/13 benefit spending per head of population was £3335 in Scotland, £60 higher than the UK.

"This comes to £17.7bn a year, £330m more than if spending per person was at average UK levels. Historically this difference has been greater and it is likely to fluctuate again over time.

"Accommodating higher spending in Scotland and year on year fluctuations is made possible by the size of the UK economy and associated spending power and the diverse UK tax base."

It said the setting up of a welfare system to cover the functions currently carried out by the UK Department of Work and Pensions would cost around £400m for IT systems alone.

It added: "As well as yearly running costs, estimated to be £720m, an independent Scottish state would also have to develop a wholly new social security system."

WELFARE reform and provision has been raised at public meetings across the country. Some have been dedicated to the issue alone.

Last month the Scottish Campaign on Welfare Reform (SCoWR) held a hustings which included Blair Jenkins, chief executive of Yes Scotland, and Better Together supporter Mike Dailly, a social justice campaigner and housing lawyer.

Peter Kelly, director of the Poverty Alliance - which is affiliated to SCoWR and helped organise the debate - said: "It has been heartening to see welfare reform and poverty issues playing a central role in the debate on independence.

"Both sides have made promises of change and regardless of how Scotland votes on September 18, this debate has shown that there is a real appetite for a new approach to welfare.

"The current social security model is not working. The bedroom tax, sanctions and other 'welfare reform' measures are pushing more people into poverty.

"It is clear that we need a change in the direction and purpose of welfare policy no matter where power lies.

"It is important that whatever the result of the referendum, we fight to keep issues of social justice at the top of the political agenda."

stewart.paterson@ eveningtimes.co.uk