There’s a school of thought that, since Scotland isn’t likely to become independent anytime soon, interrogating the SNP’s claims about what independence would mean in practical terms is hypothetical and academic. This view is usually expressed by Unionists rather than nationalists, and reflects a frustration with the refusal of the constitutional question to go away. Journalists and commentators, they complain, are artificially invigorating a debate that would otherwise fade to silence.
Setting aside the wishful thinking required to sustain such a belief, there are two stories in the news that illustrate why continuing examination of the case for independence is necessary. First up is the Scottish Information Commissioner ruling against the SNP government in a freedom of information appeal.
An FOI lodged two years ago asked St Andrew’s House to provide ‘any analysis that the Scottish government have carried out, since 2016, which assesses the timeframe which would be required for an independent Scotland to rejoin the EU’.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in