A FORMER Scottish secretary has warned Humza Yousaf against backing Ash Regan’s indyref2 bill – saying it risks a repeat of Westminster-vetoed transgender law reforms.
LibDem MP Alistair Carmichael (below), who served as Scottish secretary during the independence referendum, said the Alba MSP’s Referendum Bill – one of her key demands to the First Minister in exchange for her support in a confidence vote – was a dead-end.
But Alba have hit back, saying the bill had the legal backing of a top KC and said it would “move the independence movement forward”.
Regan has offered her support for the First Minister if he backs her Referendum Bill, which has stalled despite the pro-independence majority of MSPs in the Scottish Parliament.
It would legislate to allow the Scottish Government to hold a referendum on whether Scots believed Holyrood should have the power to hold indyref2; in effect, a referendum on a referendum.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf addresses resignation rumours as he vows to fight no-confidence moves
The bill was drafted in accordance with advice from constitutional law specialist Aidan O’Neill KC.
O’Neill has previously argued the Supreme Court’s decision to block indyref2 was an example of “judicial overreach”.
Carmichael told The National: “To my eye, this is clearly a matter that is reserved under the Scotland Act. The Supreme Court judgment last year was pretty clear on this.
Subscribe to The National for just £20 for an entire year
“At a time when Scotland’s public services in transport, health and education are creaking and the Government has had to abandon its climate change targets, all this offers is more money spent tilting at windmills and distraction from the core business of government.”
But former justice secretary and Alba MP Kenny MacAskill (below) said it was “no surprise that the UK parties are opposed to it”.
He said: “Obviously legal advice received by Scottish ministers cannot be discussed but as Alex Salmond has previously stated, a similar plan was well under way if David Cameron had attempted to block the first independence referendum.
“The Referendum Bill on the powers of the Scottish Parliament proposed by Ash Regan MSP was based on a supportive legal opinion by one of the country’s leading KCs.
“It’s a plan that can move the independence movement forward so it’s no surprise that the UK Parties are opposed to it.”
READ MORE: Inside the room as Humza Yousaf sacked the Scottish Greens from government
Advice obtained by Alba previously from O’Neill on the Supreme Court’s ruling on Nicola Sturgeon’s failed indyref2 plans accused judges of acting “by way of judicial fiat to protect the Union Parliament”.
While O’Neill said the Scottish Parliament could find success in legislating for indyref2 “by passing new referendum legislation with a newly worded question”, other experts have disagreed.
Professor Aileen McHarg of Durham University previously told this paper the bill would “almost certainly be seen as a proxy for a referendum on independence itself” and would also be struck down.
Scottish Secretary Alister Jack (below) made history last January when he vetoed the Gender Recognition Reform Bill.
It was the first piece of legislation passed by Holyrood to be blocked by the UK Government.
A spokesperson for the First Minister said: “We give proper consideration to all members' bills as and when they come forward.”
A UK Government spokesperson said: “The UK Government considers all Scottish Parliament legislation in the context of the devolution settlement.
“Any legislation brought forward would be considered in the usual way at the appropriate time.”
This is a special edition of this week's Worst of Westminster newsletter, which you can get delivered straight to your email inbox every Friday at 6pm FOR FREE by clicking here.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel