AN SNP MP has called out a BBC Scotland political editor for claiming it is "quite clear" that the power to hold a second independence referendum lies with Westminster.
Joanna Cherry took to Twitter earlier today after Brian Taylor once again insisted that under the Scotland Act, the law states that Westminster solely holds the ability to call for indyref2.
Her thread comes after a top lawyer confirmed that the Scottish Government could proceed with a second constitutional referendum without the permission of Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
READ MORE: Scottish Government could hold indyref2 WITHOUT Johnson's permission
Aidan O’Neill QC said there are “good arguments to the effect that the Scottish Parliament have the power, under the provisions of the Scotland Act 1998 as they currently stand, to legislate for the holding of a referendum on Scottish independence".
I do wish Brian Taylor would stop saying “it’s quite clear” that the power to hold a referendum resides at Westminster because that simply isn’t the case. The weight of legal opinion is that the Scotland Act is open to a different interpretation. #indyref2
— Joanna Cherry QC (@joannaccherry) January 29, 2020
Cherry said that Taylor's comment "simply isn't the case" and that the Scotland Act is open to a different interpretation under legal weighting.
She said: "If Holyrood passed a bill to hold a referendum, it would be up to the UK Govt to challenge its competency and @UKSupremeCourt would decide if it was competent.
"If they held that it was then you would have a 'legal' referendum which might be hard to boycott.
"My point is that having Holyrood pass a bill to hold a referendum could be part of a multi-faceted strategy to move away from the current impasse, and stop this constant talk about #Section30 and seeking 'permission' to act from Westminster."
Johnson previously refused Nicola Sturgeon's request for a Section 30 order to be granted – prompting accusations of attempts to "block democracy".
READ MORE: Possible routes to Scottish independence after Section 30 refused
The First Minister had requested the necessary powers to hold a second referendum following the SNP's performance in December's general election.
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