THE official Yes campaign is facing questions after finally admitting it was almost £500,000 in the red after the independence referendum.
Yes Scotland had previously filed company accounts stating it was £75,000 in the black.
It has now radically changed its financial statements to show it actually had massive debts.
Director Scott Martin said there had been a “technical amendment” to its accounts.
Unionist parties said Yes Scotland going broke symbolised the risks of independence.
Yes Scotland Ltd, the legal vehicle behind the cross-party campaign, first filed accounts for the year ending 31 October 2014 in July last year.
These stated it had gross assets of £104,082 (including £69,893 cash at the bank), but owed creditors £28,965, leaving net assets and total reserves of £75,117.
But when Yes Scotland Ltd filed its accounts for the year ended 31 October 2015 last month, those figures had changed dramatically.
Although the asset breakdown was the same, Yes Scotland Ltd said it had owed creditors £600,607 in October 2014, more than 20 times the previously stated debt.
And instead of net assets of £75,117, it had emerged from the referendum nursing a £496,525 deficit.
Both sets of unaudited accounts were signed by the SNP’s in-house lawyer Scott Martin, one of two directors alongside chief executive Blair Jenkins.
Launched in early 2013, Yes Scotland was made up of Green, SNP and Scottish Socialist politicians, and chaired by former Labour MP and Independent MSP Dennis Canavan.
Its advisory board included Nicola Sturgeon, Scottish Green leader Patrick Harvie, former Socialist MSP Colin Fox, the writer Pat Kane, and former Conservative candidate Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, now an SNP MP.
From the outset, Jenkins said that, aside from an SNP start-up fund of £343,000, Yes Scotland would be “self-financing” and would not rely on SNP cash.
However in May 2015, the Sunday Herald revealed the SNP had bailed out Yes Scotland, giving it £275,000 just eight days before the referendum, then another £550,000 in November 2014.
Without the money, Yes Scotland would have been unable to settle its bills.
The company's assets and liabilities are now zero.
Labour MSP James Kelly, a former management accountant, said: “Yes Scotland and the SNP must explain why in the latest accounts Yes Scotland were in debt to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds.
"People who donated to this organisation are entitled to expect open and transparent accounts."
Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie said: “Yes Scotland's finances are as volatile as the price of a barrel of oil. They should be more honest about their own finances and more honest about the country's finances too."
Deputy Scottish Tory leader Jackson Carlaw said: “Much like the SNP's plans for independence, something about Yes Scotland's accounts doesn't add up. The fact they still exist will perplex many people. Scotland has already voted decisively on independence and the last thing Scots want is another referendum."
Better Together 2012 Ltd, the company behind the No campaign, was formally wound up in May after filing accounts showing funds of around £72,000 at the end of 2014.
Although both the Yes and No campaigns raised similar sums from individuals in 2014, the No side stayed afloat with £711,000 from business donors, compared to £20,000 for Yes.
Martin said: “The accounts for 2015 included a technical amendment for the prior period. All referendum expenditure in the accounts was correctly included in the company's expenditure reported to the Electoral Commission as part of the Yes Scotland referendum campaign.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel