JOHN Bercow has said it must be left up to Scotland to decide its own future.
The former speaker was asked about independence at an event in Edinburgh to promote his new book.
He said that support for a Yes vote will “exponentially rise” if Boris Johnson continues to deny Holyrood requests for a Section 30 order to hold indyref2.
According to The Herald, he said: “I think it will be quite interesting to see whether over a sustained period – let’s say two or three years – there is evidence of a majority of people in Scotland definitely wanting that further referendum, and/or definitely wanting Scottish independence.
“If that happens, it just seems to me that although legally a government might be able to resist, sometimes legal facts can clash with political reality.
“My view, by the way, for what it’s worth on Scottish independence is simply that ultimately, if you believe in sovereignty, if you believe in self-government, if you believe in the right of people to choose their own destiny, it has to be up to Scotland ultimately to decide. At the point at which they do, I think that decision has to be respected.”
Bercow identified a “very real” divide between Holyrood and Westminster.
He highlighted the irony in “an avowedly, explicitly, robustly Unionist Government, made up of the Conservative and Unionist Party, is in charge at a time when the strength of the UK has looked more precarious than for a long time, and the danger of it being ripped asunder [is] greater than for a long time”.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: Tory immigration plans 'devastating' for Scotland
The ex-Tory MP said arguments for a second referendum based on a material change in circumstances were undeniable.
He commented: “The Prime Minister is perfectly entitled to say ad nauseum to Ian Blackford and his SNP colleagues and Nicola Sturgeon, ‘Look you had your referendum on independence in 2014, we agreed it was once in a generation, you lost, we won, be quiet.’ “Legally, he’s entitled to say that. However, there’s one very important caveat.
“I’ve never championed Scottish independence and I’m not here to do that. Nor am I here to argue against it – I’m not here for that purpose at all.
“What I would say is this: it's important to be fair about this.
“At the time it was agreed it would be once in a generation, subject to one very important caveat – unless there was a material change.
“Ladies and gentlemen, it’s very hard to argue that there hasn’t been a change.”
The former speaker, who served in the role until last year, pointed out that Scots had been told to vote No to preserve their European Union status, “and that's no longer to be the case".
He said it is "absolutely predictable that support in Scotland for Scottish independence, and certainly for indyref2, will exponentially rise" if Johnson decides to "bunker down and just repeat that line over and over again".
READ MORE: REVEALED: PM's new aide made vile claims about women and sex on Reddit
Asked about the possibility of Scotland gaining sovereignty via an alternative method to indyref2, Bercow stated it is “perfectly possible at some stage … that if people in Scotland feel that they are being arbitrarily and unreasonably prevented from having a referendum that they obviously want, they might decide to hold a ballot of their own even if it’s not authorised by Westminster”.
Though he warned this would not be legally binding, he believes it would be “very significant indeed” politically.
Bercow added: “It would change the facts on the ground. I’m not arguing for that, but I think that’s not out of the bounds of possibility.”
The former MP was speaking in the capital to promote his new book, Unspeakable.
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