The Supreme Court judgment on the legality of a Scottish independence referendum can be broken down into three elements. Two are unsurprising but the third is very problematic.

In rapid Court verdict on legislative competence, the justices assert that even referendums that do not directly change the law have political legitimacy. Richard Parry discusses the political implications and the balance of victory and defeat for both sides

EVENT - 22 November 2022

As we emerge from Brexit and the Covid crisis, and in the midst of the cost-of-living crisis, are the powers of the Scottish Parliament still fit for purpose? Is there a more optimal balance of powers for Scotland within the Union? Is federalism a viable option for the UK, and what would it look like? Alternatively, what would it mean for Scotland to be independent in today’s world? What would be the economic and political challenges facing Scotland were it to become an independent country?

In October 2022, the UK Supreme Court heard arguments on the legal viability of a second Scottish independence referendum, in a reference brought by the Lord Advocate. The purpose of this exploratory blog is not to rerun the argument of this case, but to raise additional points against the UK Government’s conduct in refusing to negotiate with Scotland on independence.

On 17th October, Nicola Sturgeon presented the SNP’s economic proposals for an independent Scotland, including on the currency. Albeit with slightly less fanfare, on the same day I published a report, Twenty-First Century Central Banking and an Independent Scotland’s Currency Choice.

After the Supreme Court oral hearings, Richard Parry assesses the submissions of both sides on an independence referendum and the way the case might be decided