No matter the question, the SNP always has a two-word answer

‘I’m not sure the two of them managed much respect, but they were certainly being open and honest’

The SNP, protested Ruth Davidson, had got its priorities all wrong. It should be focusing its energies on urgent problems, such as the decline of the Scottish education system under its watch. But instead, once again, the Nationalists were obsessing about their only real interest.

“It matters not the question,” concluded the leader of the Scottish Tories, witheringly. “The answer is always ‘independence’. ”

Come to think of it, maybe that’s where Scottish schools are going wrong. “McTavish! What are eight sevens?” “Scottish independence, Miss.” “McCall! What did Christopher Columbus discover in 1492?” “Scottish independence, Miss.” “McCormack! What was Wordsworth delighted to see when he wandered lonely as a cloud?” “Scottish independence, Miss.” “Excellent. That’s all for today. Your homework for the weekend will be an essay, on the subject: ‘How to end all poverty, war, suffering and injustice with immediate effect.’ I want your two-word answers on my desk first thing on Monday.”

Yesterday the Scottish Parliament finally finished its debate on whether to hold a second referendum on independence. The debate would have concluded last Wednesday, but it was abandoned after the terrorist attack on Westminster.

Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister, began by telling MSPs to conduct themselves “in a spirit of openness, honesty, respect and understanding”. Ten minutes later, she and Ms Davidson were at each other’s throats.

The bone of contention was the timetable for Brexit. Would everything be done and dusted in 18 months or so, as Ms Sturgeon seemed to believe? Or could talks over trade stretch on beyond March 2019, as others had forecast?

“Can I take it from Ruth Davidson’s comments that she thinks I should distrust the Prime Minister?” snorted Ms Sturgeon.

Ms Davidson derided her for “trying to derail” Theresa May’s Brexit plans “from the very beginning”. Ms Sturgeon rose again. “Sit down!” barked Ms Davidson.

Well, I’m not sure the two of them managed much respect and understanding, but they were certainly being open and honest.

After a splenetic but repetitive debate, the decision was made shortly after five o’clock. The Nationalists won. By 69 to 59, Holyrood voted to make Scotland vote again.

So what happens next? Ms Sturgeon left us hanging. If the UK Government refused, she said, to “respect the will of this parliament” by permitting a referendum, she would “set out the steps the Scottish Government will take to progress the will of parliament” after Easter.

Was this a hint that she might hold a referendum anyway, without Mrs May’s approval? That would be some gamble. A nightmare for Mrs May if Ms Sturgeon won it. And a nightmare for Ms Sturgeon if she lost it.

Imagine: boasting of her defiance in standing up to the hated Westminster elite on Scotland’s behalf… only for Scotland to tell her she really needn’t have bothered. What a humiliation. What would she say then?

“Best of five?”