Indyref2 cannot go ahead without UK parliament permission, court rules

Published

3 years ago

November 23, 2022

admin

The Scottish Parliament does not have the power to call a second independence referendum in the country, the Supreme Court has said.

The unanimous ruling from the UK’s top judges said, despite demands from the SNP for a fresh vote, the country’s government would need approval from the government in Westminster before going ahead.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon had proposed a second referendum – dubbed Indyref2 – for 19 October 2023.

Politics live: ‘Disappointed’ Sturgeon responds to Supreme Court ruling

But she had also warned she would use the next general election as an informal referendum if the court ruled against her plan.

Tweeting after the ruling was made, the first minister said while she was “disappointed”, she respected the ruling, adding the Supreme Court “doesn’t make law, only interprets it”.

Ms Sturgeon added: “A law that doesn’t allow Scotland to choose our own future without Westminster consent exposes as myth any notion of the UK as a voluntary partnership and makes [the] case for independence.

“Scottish democracy will not be denied. Today’s ruling blocks one route to Scotland’s voice being heard on independence – but in a democracy our voice cannot and will not be silenced.”

But Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said now the ruling is done, “we must focus on the problems facing our country, from rising bills to the crisis in our NHS”.

“There is not a majority in Scotland for a referendum or independence, neither is there a majority for the status quo.

“One thing is clear – there is a majority in Scotland and across the UK for change. A Labour government will deliver that change.”

And the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Douglas Ross, said: “The SNP must now get back to work, drop their referendum obsession and focus on what really matters to the people of Scotland.”

Scotland held an independence referendum in 2014 and just over 55% voted to remain part of the UK.

But the pro-independence SNP, which has led the country since 2007, believes it has a mandate to hold a fresh vote because of its continued success in elections – the majority of members in the Scottish Parliament back independence – and because of the change in circumstances since Brexit.

Ms Sturgeon began her attempts to get approval for a new referendum in 2017 by asking then-prime minister Theresa May for a Section 30 order, which is used to increase or restrict, permanently or temporarily, the Scottish Parliament’s legislative authority – and was used to temporarily legislate for the first referendum.

But she and subsequent UK PMs have refused, leading to today’s court case on whether the Scottish Parliament could pass a bill to hold a referendum without the nod from Westminster.

‘Political consequences’

Announcing the ruling, the court’s president, Lord Reed, said legislation for a second vote would relate to “reserved matters”, making it outside the powers of Holyrood.

“A lawfully-held referendum would have important political consequences in relation to the Union and the United Kingdom Parliament,” he said.

“It would either strengthen or weaken the democratic legitimacy of the Union and of the United Kingdom Parliament’s sovereignty over Scotland, depending on which view prevailed, and would either support or undermine the democratic credentials of the independence movement.

“It is therefore clear that the proposed bill has more than a loose or consequential connection with the reserved matters of the Union of Scotland and England, and the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament.”

This is a blow for Sturgeon – Analysis by Connor Gillies, Scotland correspondent

This is a major blow for Nicola Sturgeon’s ambition to hold a second independence vote next October. It almost certainly rules out that plan.

But it’s not entirely surprising as the First Minister’s own top law officer wasn’t fully convinced of the legal basis for Holyrood legislating for a referendum against Westminster’s approval. That is why the Supreme Court got involved.

Indy campaigners will not be deflated at this ruling.

They are likely to see this as a stumbling block as they now pivot to Plan B which is using the next General Election as a defacto independence vote.

This will mean more rough and tumble of political back and forward. Opposition politicians will boycott.

To read more, click here

Lord Reed also said the panel of judges did not accept the SNP’s argument about the “right to self-determination” in international law.

The party had cited rulings in the Canadian Supreme Court and the International Court of Justice – namely over Quebec’s own independence referendums in 1980 and 1995.

But the leading justice said such an international law only exists in situations “of former colonies, or where a people is oppressed… or where a definable group is denied meaningful access to government”.

“The court found that Quebec did not meet the threshold of a colonial people or an oppressed people, nor could it be suggested that Quebecers were denied meaningful access to government to pursue their political, economic, cultural and social development,” he said.

“The same is true of Scotland and the people of Scotland.”

‘Scotland will be independent’

SNP MPs took to social media to express the upset at the decision, with Dave Doogan tweeting: “In the eyes of the people of Scotland, there is NOTHING settled about the current constitutional arrangement.

“The people will decide, and Scotland will become independent.”

But former Scottish Tory leader Baroness Davidson welcomed the “unanimity and clarity” of the court.

“No doubt the SNP will try to leverage this ruling for further grievance,” she wrote. “If only the huge effort, capacity and resource spent bidding to rerun the original vote had been put into health, education and the economy.”

UK

890 people arrested at Palestine Action protest yesterday – including 17 on suspicion of assaulting police officers

Published

6 hours ago

September 7, 2025

admin

890 people arrested at Palestine Action protest yesterday - including 17 on suspicion of assaulting police officers

The Metropolitan Police has said 890 people were arrested at a protest against the banning of Palestine Action as a terror group on Saturday – including 17 on suspicion of assaulting officers.

A total of 857 individuals were arrested in Parliament Square in London under the Terrorism Act 2000 over alleged offences, the force said.

It added that a further 33 were arrested for other offences, with 17 of those detained on suspicion of assaulting officers. The Met Police did not say what the other 16 arrests were for.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Claire Smart, who led the policing operation, thanked Met Police officers for their “professionalism and tireless work despite the level of abuse that they faced”.

Ms Smart said: “The violence we encountered during the operation was coordinated and carried out by a group of people, many wearing masks to conceal their identity, intent on creating as much disorder as possible.

“Many of those individuals have now been arrested and we have begun securing charges.”

Defend Our Juries, which organised the demonstrations, insisted the rally was “the picture of peaceful protest”.

Ms Smart also claimed that the “contrast between this demonstration and the other protests we policed yesterday, including the Palestine Coalition march attended by around 20,000 people, was stark”.

She added: “You can express your support for a cause without committing an offence under the Terrorism Act or descending into violence and disorder, and many thousands of people do that in London every week.

“We have a duty to enforce the law without fear or favour. If you advertise that you are intending to commit a crime, we have no option but to respond accordingly.”

Defend Our Juries previously estimated 1,500 had gathered for the rally on Saturday, where many held signs saying: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”

The group has been banned as a terror group since 5 July after MPs voted overwhelmingly in favour of the move proposed by then-home secretary Yvette Cooper, making it illegal to express support for the group.

It came shortly after two Voyager aircraft suffered around £7m worth of damage at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on 20 June.

Defence Secretary John Healey told Sky’s Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that he expects newly appointed Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood to be “just as tough” as her predecessor on Palestine Action.

He said: “I expect her to defend the decision the government has taken to proscribe Palestine Action because of what some of its members are responsible for, and were planning for.”

The Met Police previously said the consequences for those charged under the Terrorism Act include a maximum sentence of six months’ imprisonment.

The Home Office is set to appeal against the High Court ruling allowing Palestine Action’s co-founder, Huda Ammori, to proceed with a legal challenge against the government over the group’s ban.

UK

Labour considering using military barracks to house asylum seekers

Published

6 hours ago

September 7, 2025

admin

Labour considering using military barracks to house asylum seekers

Defence Secretary John Healey has told Sky News the government is considering using military barracks to house asylum seekers, as an estimated 1,000 people arrived in the UK on small boats on Saturday.

“We are looking at the potential use of military and non-military sites for temporary accommodation for the people who come across on these small boats that may not have a right to be here,” he told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips.

“I’m looking really hard at it. I’m looking at it with the Home Office, and I recognise that the loss of confidence of the public over recent years in Britain’s ability to control its borders needs to be satisfied. And we have to deal with this problem with the small boats,” Mr Healey added.

Politics latest: Labour considers housing migrants on military sites

The measure follows widespread protests this summer over housing migrants in hotels.

Fresh small boat arrivals were spotted on Sunday, after an estimated 1,000 people arrived on Saturday – when French authorities said 24 people were rescued while trying to cross the Channel.

The figures compare to a relatively recent lull in crossings. In the previous seven days (30 August to 5 September) the Home Office recorded no small boat arrivals.

Zia Yusuf, head of policy at Reform UK, told Trevor Phillips that Britain has become a “soft touch” on migration, before suggesting between 15 and 25 detention sites will need to be built to detain asylum seekers. He described these as “purpose-built modular steel structures”.

“We can look around the world at where things have worked and worked well. President Trump stood up 3,000 detention beds in eight days. That was this year in the state of Florida – using steel modular structures,” Mr Yusuf said.

He added that the president’s crackdown has significantly reduced illegal border crossings and suggested the same could happen in the English Channel to deter migrants.

“These are unarmed, largely men in dinghies, we don’t need a particularly formidable military to be able to take them to a detention centre,” he said.

Shabana Mahmood will have the job of tackling illegal immigration after taking over from Yvette Cooper as home secretary on Friday – when Sir Keir Starmer carried out a major cabinet reshuffle following the resignation of his deputy prime minister Angela Rayner.

National Crime Agency (NCA) figures show record levels of disruption of immigration crime networks in 2024/25.

Join the Sky News immigration debate

Officials believe this contributed to the lowest number of boats crossing the Channel in August since 2019.

But, despite the 3,567 arrivals in August being the lowest since 2021, when looking across the whole of 2025, the figure of 29,003 is the highest on record for this point in a year.

Sky’s Political Correspondent Liz Bates said that after Labour scrapped the previous government’s controversial Rwanda policy and shut down the Bibby Stockholm barge, ministers are “hitting up against many of the same problems” with “a really broken and very slow asylum system”.

“The context to all of this is a huge shake-up at the Home Office, and I think something of an admission that [Yvette] Cooper, despite her years of experience, could not get a grip… of this problem of people coming across the Channel in small boats and then ending up in asylum hotels,” she added.

Army bases were previously used by the Conservative government, but this prompted local protests, and the sites were widely criticised for their poor conditions in some cases.

As Sky’s Home Editor Jason Farrell writes, Ms Mahmood has become the home secretary of a country where the national flag is being hoisted as a symbol of dissatisfaction – with anger at the arrival of desperate migrants crossing the Channel in small boats.

Sir Keir’s sweeping changes

Sir Keir Starmer has announced sweeping changes to his ministerial team in the Home Office as his government works to get a grip of illegal migration to the UK.

Here’s a list of who has been moved, besides the home secretary.

Dame Angela Eagle, who was border security and asylum minister, has been moved to the environment department.

Dame Diana Johnson, who was policing and crime minister, has been moved to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

She has said in a post on X that it was an “honour” to work with police officers, and she is “delighted” to be moving to the DWP.

Dan Jarvis has been given a role in the Cabinet Office, in addition to his post as security minister in the Home Office.

And Sarah Jones, who was industry minister, has been moved to the Home Office.

UK

Harry wants to put ‘trials and tribulations’ behind him in first UK visit in months – but will he meet the King?

Published

6 hours ago

September 7, 2025

admin

Harry wants to put 'trials and tribulations' behind him in first UK visit in months - but will he meet the King?

Prince Harry will carry out a rare public engagement outside of London this week, as he heads back to the UK for a visit with “no negativity”.

After a tumultuous five years, the Duke of Sussex and his team are hoping this may be a trip that can help begin to “put the trials and tribulations behind them” and herald a reset, according to sources close to the royal.

It’s been confirmed the duke will be in Nottingham on Tuesday, visiting a youth organisation that he’s maintained strong personal contact with since moving to America.

Harry, who is no longer a working royal, is set to carry out a run of engagements and make a substantial donation to BBC Children in Need to support work tackling violence affecting young people.

It is not known if he will meet with his estranged brother, the Prince of Wales, or his father, the King.

The King is currently in Balmoral with the Queen, and so far, no engagements have been announced for the couple this coming week.

The monarch last met his youngest son face-to-face more than 18 months ago, when the duke made a transatlantic dash to see his father after hearing about his cancer diagnosis. The pair spent less than an hour together.

‘There is no negativity with this trip,’ say sources close to Harry

Harry’s past visits to the UK, since stepping away from royal life, have often been shrouded in secrecy with any public moments taking place in London. This will also be the first time in a while that he isn’t returning due to a court case.

Sources close to Harry suggest that already means “there is no negativity with this trip” saying that “Harry is really looking forward to coming back to do what he loves”, focusing on his charity work.

“It’s a moment to put the trials and tribulations of the last few years behind us,” they added.

But Harry and his team are well aware that there will be considerable interest in whether or not he will see his father, the King. Hopes of reconciliation and a potential meeting were ramped up earlier in the summer when members of Harry’s team were photographed meeting with the King’s communications secretary for the first time. Both sides aren’t commenting on any possible contact between Harry and his father this week.

When Harry arrives in London on Monday the King will be in Scotland, marking Queen Elizabeth’s death and his Accession Day. But it’s understood that Harry is due to be in the UK for most of the coming week. The strain in the relationship between father and son was emphasised by Harry in an interview he gave after he lost his legal challenge against the Home Office over his security.

We also understand that his team have tried to “pack in as much as possible” in the coming days, with a number of private meetings and public visits to other organisations with which he has longstanding links.

We are told he will not be meeting lawyers.

Ultimately it appears that Prince Harry and his team are hoping this visit will have a different, more upbeat tone, compared to other recent trips to the UK, in what feels like a reset for the duke.

It has been suggested that he may have wanted to make the trip longer but as he’s “financially responsible” for the visit, including the travel and security bill for him and his team, his time here comes at a considerable cost.

Harry last visited the Community Recording Studio (CRS) in Nottingham’s St Ann’s area to mark World Mental Health Day in 2019, just two months before he and the Duchess of Sussex announced they were stepping down as senior working royals and moving to North America.

He is planning to hold a private briefing with Children in Need, the Police and Crime Commission, the CRS and community outreach group Epic Partners in Nottingham, stage informal catch-ups with some of the young people he met before, and watch performances from CRS artists and make a short speech.

Harry appears to be focusing on his philanthropic ventures while his wife, Meghan, works on her lifestyle brand, As Ever. She is not expected to join him on the trip to the UK.

Senior aides to the King and the duke were pictured together in London this July in what was reported to be an initial step towards opening channels of communication between the two sides.

Harry levelled repeated accusations at the King, Queen, William and Kate in his Oprah interview, Netflix documentary, and memoir Spare. But he outlined hopes for a “reconciliation” with his family in a BBC interview in May.

His sit-down with the BBC came in the wake of a court battle over his security in the UK. His level of security was changed after the couple stepped down as senior royals.

Harry took a legal challenge to the Court of Appeal, which he ultimately lost in May. He said he “can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back” to the UK.