Sturgeon: I’ll hold vote on breaking up UK next year

NICOLA Sturgeon has vowed to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence next year, even if Boris Johnson says no.

The First Minister yesterday said she would push ahead with plans for a vote despite admitting its legality would be ‘contested’ – and that she could not ‘guarantee’ Scotland would be better off if it left the UK.

Mr Johnson last night urged her to ‘respect’ the result of the first 2014 referendum, as a Cabinet minister suggested another poll should not be held until 2039.

As Miss Sturgeon launched a new drive for independence at a press conference in Edinburgh yesterday, she appeared to concede trade posts may need to be built on the border with England so checks could be performed on goods.

Under devolution legislation, Westminster retains power over matters involving the constitution, meaning the UK Government has to give consent for a legally binding referendum to be held through what is called a Section 30 order.

But Westminster has repeatedly insisted it will not give permission.

Despite insisting yesterday that any vote on independence ‘must be lawful’, Miss Sturgeon vowed to press on regardless. She argued that if the Prime Minister ‘had any respect at all for democracy’ he would allow a vote to take place.

She continued: ‘My duty, as the democratically-elected First Minister, is to the people of Scotland, it is not to Boris Johnson or to any Tory prime minister. This is a UK Government that has no respect for democracy. That means if we are to uphold democracy here in Scotland we must forge a way forward, if necessary, without a Section 30 order.’

It is likely that the Scottish Government would be challenged in the Supreme Court if it held a referendum without a Section 30 order.

Miss Sturgeon also did not deny that border posts would be needed if Scotland rejoined the EU.

Referring to her claims ahead of the 2014 vote that it was a ‘once in a generation’ event, Commons Leader Mark Spencer said yesterday: ‘Once in a generation... is certainly not five years. I think that would be nearer to 25 years before it should be considered again.’