The Supreme Court decided rightly on Wednesday, rejecting the Scottish government’s claim that a second referendum on independence was not a ‘reserved matter’. But since it was obvious from the beginning that this was the case, why did Nicola Sturgeon insist on bringing an unwinnable action? Presumably to lay blame, as usual, on UK authorities. The Supreme Court is presented as the enemy of the people, Ms Sturgeon conveniently forgetting that the people, when last asked, voted against independence and may not wish to be asked again in the hope that they will give the ‘right’ answer. The SNP will now claim that the next Scottish parliament election will be amount to the referendum ‘London’ has forbidden. Will this help the SNP? At the risk of being complacent, I suspect not. Scots – like Catalans and Quebeckers – have worked out that it is fun to alarm and milk the central power, but not so much fun to abandon its protection and its money by seceding.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/33b44/33b44f1966e79a8bbc533866eeb159e672891b43" alt=""
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
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