SO YOU pays your money and you takes your choice. Should we condemn David Cameron, the Conservative party leader, for snubbing business by avoiding the CBI conference in London last week?

Conference delegates had to make do with shadow chancellor George Osborne in place of his party leader, with views on his performance varying from mildly impressed to distinctly not so.

The no-show of Cameron, who instead visited Iraq, stood in stark relief to the conference's Tuesday morning session, which became the Gordon and Hank show. Chancellor Gordon Brown and US Treasury Secretary Henry "Hank" Paulson spoke in turn and then appeared on a panel and took questions together.
continued...

Now, there were some there who thought that Brown cosying up to a senior member of president George W Bush's cabinet, given Iraq et al, was not a good idea.

But to me that ignores the fact that Paulson is the Bush administration's best economic appointment and, arguably, the best single appointment in the whole of George W's years in office.

However, it did come in a week when the failures of the earlier years of the Bush administration's economic policies were clear for all to see, with the pound hitting a 14-year high against the dollar at the week's end.

The Bush economic follies have been piling one on another for some time and the question was when, rather than whether, they would begin to seriously have an effect.

As Keith Wade, chief economist at Schroders, put it this weekend: "Lower interest rates in the US, at a time when interest rates are expected to be rising in the euro area and Japan, will hurt the dollar.

"Meanwhile, the current account deficit remains at a massive 7% of GDP and is a persistent downward drag on the dollar. In this respect, comments from the PBoC People's Bank of China that they intend to diversify their reserves have not helped sentiment."

This whole state of affairs has led some strategists to talk of the pound hitting $2 before long - it topped $1.98 on Friday.

There are major eddies and currents in the world economy now and those charged with the financial management of countries have to be particularly vigilant and steady in steering their economic ships of state.

One of the key variables in the whole balance of the world economy will be the relationship of West and East - and particularly China - and it is here that Paulson, who has a strong background in dealing with the emerging economic superpower, will be particularly important.

Paulson should also be lauded for the strong urgings he gave at the CBI conference for the need to make the Doha trade round work.

It is against those world economic tides that the performance of the UK and Scottish economies are set.

And the latest report from the Item club suggests the economic growth gap between England - particularly the southeast - and Scotland, is going to re-emerge on the horizon again just as Scotland prepares for the Holyrood parliamentary elections in May.

The gap emerging at a time when support for Scottish independence appears never to have been higher may indeed be highly politically significant.

If the Item club projections are correct, growth in Scotland next year would be 2.5%.

Now this is well above our trend growth rate of 2% - hurrah - but well adrift of the 2.9% predicted for the UK as a whole - boo!

Add to that the suggestion that, while the GDP growth rate is well above trend, our Achilles heel appears to be our productivity, which Item says is showing "worrying trends".

And yes, productivity is something that Gordon Brown has been continually talking about since he became chancellor.

So all that looks bad for Labour.

But as the Item club report highlights, the growth in jobs over the last few years has been impressive. In this regard there is a strong argument of the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" type.

And what Brown can claim credit for is an era of macroeconomic stability. His early decision to grant independence to the Bank of England is continuing to pay dividends.

Against that stability we have to consider the fact that we are talking here not just about a change of Scottish administration, we are talking about a potential major constitutional change if, as some opinion polls are suggesting, the SNP wins the election.

If voters are considering such a major constitutional change then they will need to take a long hard look at the Scottish economy and what that presages for the future of an independent Scotland.

That very shortfall in productivity, particularly in labour productivity growth, must be worrying those considering major constitutional change.

If the reason, as the Item club report suggests, is that the private sector is having to pay up because they have to compete with public sector pay and conditions then we should pause and think hard.

These are signs of an unbalanced economy in which the public sector accounts for too large a proportion of Scottish GDP (although not as much as some siren voices claim).

Should we really suggest that such an unbalanced economy severs its links with the rest of the UK and goes it alone?

And would an inexperienced SNP economic team really prove better in achieving productivity growth than the chancellor has?