NICOLA Sturgeon today suggested Scotland's Unionist parties are "wondering how they can rig" the independence process now they've realised they cannot "block" indyref2.
During First Minister's Questions, Sturgeon was asked about the Electoral Commission's testing of a future indyref2 question by Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard.
Yesterday, Constitutional Relations Secretary Mike Russell (below) warned those attempting to change the question were trying to "muddy the waters".
Today, Leonard asked the FM: "First Minister who is the more expert at setting a clear transparent and neutral referendum question - the Electoral Commission or Mike Russell?"
Sturgeon replied: "The Electoral Commission, I would say, because the Electoral Commission did do it for the question that would be proposed for a future independence referendum.
"I don't know anybody across Scotland, with the exception of politicians who seem to be running scared of the verdict of the Scottish people when that question is asked again, I don't know anybody who thinks that that question is anything other than clear and understandable.
"But I'm going to take today's question from Richard Leonard as progress," she added. "Because in asking me about the question for an independence referendum he now appears to be accepting that an independence referendum is inevitable, so that's progress."
In rebuttal, Leonard (above) said it's "not just politicians" who want to see the question tested but the Electoral Commissioner for Scotland, Dame Sue Bruce, who says the testing is on the grounds of "the integrity of the process". The Labour MSP accused Sturgeon of being "prepared to disregard those principles."
In response Sturgeon again said the question had already been tested, importantly in the context of the actual independence referendum of 2014.
"It seems to me that Labour and the Tories have now realised that they're not going to be able to block the right of the Scottish people to choose their own future so they're now wondering how they can rig the whole process," she said.
"We'll I've got news for Richard Leonard. The people of Scotland will get the chance to choose a better future than Tory Brexit Britain. But again lastly I say to Richard Leonard if he now accepts that it is right to allow the people of Scotland to choose their own future in an independence referendum then let's have the discussions about the detail and let's get on to the substance of that argument."
READ MORE: Michael Russell: Changing indyref2 question would ‘muddy waters’
Leonard denied he would support indyref2, pointing out that Scotland had chosen their future five years ago.
The First Minister responded: "Presiding Officer I have to be honest I am really struggling to keep up with Richard Leonard's twists and turns here."
"If I'm understanding him right, and bear with me here because I know this is a bit complicated, Richard Leonard is standing up here today demanding that we test a question again for a referendum that he also says shouldn't happen and he's not going to allow to happen. That's the first inconsistency and contradiction in Richard Leonard's position.
"Then he says the people of Scotland shouldn't have the right to have a referendum at all because we chose our future five years ago. The people of the UK voted on Brexit three years ago but Richard Leonard supports a second Brexit referendum for the whole of the UK. And he seems to have missed all that has changed in the five years since the independence referendum. When people like him were telling the people of Scotland that the only way to protect their membership of the European Union was to vote againt independence, we now know those promises weren't worth the paper they were written on.
"It's time for Scotland to have the opportunity to choose our future. It's time for Scotland to choose independence."
READ MORE: Richard Leonard branded an 'anti-democrat' over indyref2 claims
Earlier this week Richard Leonard was branded "anti-democratic" after a "car-crash" interview on Politics Scotland.
In the appearance he said that a pro-independence majority in Holyrood wouldn't be enough of a mandate for indyref2 to be held. He failed to clarify what mandate would be sufficient.
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