It may quickly descend into a technical debate about the proper interpretation of the word "held", but an interesting case at the Court of Session today - @ScotGov vs @FOIScotland, re the Nicola Sturgeon ministerial code inquiry of 2021. Live stream here: scotcourts.gov.uk/the-courts/sup… Someone asked via FOI for submissions to the investigation carried out by James Hamilton in 2021; ScotGov said they didn't hold that info, but the Information Commissioner ruled that they did and should reconsider the FOI. Instead, ScotGov have gone to court to argue the point...

ScotGov is going to challenge the UK government's section 35 veto of Holyrood's gender reforms - "the use of the power on this occasion should be legally tested in the courts" This will be a judicial review at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, in the first instance - court will be asked to deliberate on whether UK ministers had "reasonable grounds" to believe the Holyrood bill would have an "adverse effect" on application of reserved equalities law

Only a couple of days into the SNP leadership race but I think the campaigns already show us a bit about where the candidates think the party membership is; those seem to be quite different perspectives, so a brief thread, if you will indulge it: Humza Yousaf has calculated, perhaps not unreasonably, that a party membership that grew tenfold under Nicola Sturgeon might be quite fond of Nicola Sturgeon, and is campaigning effectively as the continuity option on most issues, including the GRR and the SNP-Green deal

In chess, there’s this thing called zugzwang. It generally happens in the endgame, when you only have a few legal moves left open to you, and unfortunately all of them make your position worse. And that is where my morning-after cold take on the Supreme Court ruling begins… The court has provided exactly what was asked of it, which is legal certainty about Holyrood’s competence to legislate for an independence referendum without a section 30 order. The whole idea was that this certainty might help move the issue forward out of the current deadlock.

Nicola Sturgeon's press conference clearly an SNP event, rather than a ScotGov one, with the party's yellow "stronger for Scotland" branding everywhere - underlines that they're essentially using this ruling as a campaign event Nicola Sturgeon says the ruling has exposed that the UK is not a "voluntary partnership of nations" - "quite simply unsustainable". She says its "now clearer than ever before" that independence is the only way for Scotland to be an equal partner.

The Supreme Court has come to a unanimous judgement on the indyref2 case…Lord Reed says the Scotland Act gives Holyrood “limited” powers, and that reserved matters include fundamental aspects of the constitution - like the Union and the UK parliament. Lord Reed notes the 2014 referendum was underpinned by a section 30 order, which temporarily amended the definition of reserved powers. UKgov unwilling to do that again, which is why we’re all here - SG seeking a ruling on whether a referendum bill is within Holyrood’s competence

Perhaps, within the next 24 hours, we will be living in a whole new constitutional world...have written a breakdown of what might happen next in each of the possible scenarios, depending on what the Supreme Court says at 0945 tomorrow morning...🧵🧵

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/1595010471953776640

Scenario 1: ScotGov win. That would give ministers a green light to table the draft referendum bill, and the SNP-Green majority could pass it in a matter of days. Nicola Sturgeon has said it would mean a vote on 19 October 2023 - but she's still going to push UKgov for a deal...

Day one of the Supreme Court hearing. Lord Reed kicks it off by rattling through some background, including stressing that this is Scotlands highest civil court - not just the UK’s - and that it draws judges from across the UK (including him!) and has set in Edinburgh previously Lord Reed stresses that the hearing is “the tip of the iceberg”, with thousands of pages of written material to go through, and it’ll be “some months” before there’s a judgement

Alright nerds, it’s Supreme Court time. Here’s a thread of handy links and info for everyone avidly following along at home… We all know why we’re here, right? Nicola Sturgeon wants a referendum next October; UKgov stonewalling on a deal. So Supreme Court asked to rule on whether MSPs can set up a vote without Westminster’s backing. Basically settling whether an indyref is a devolved or reserved matter

The SNP seeing the economy as an asset rather than a challenge in the debate is one thing; but I'm also quite interested in how heavily Nicola Sturgeon is leaning on renewables. Expecting talk of Aberdeen being a future capital of net zero, rather than the oil and gas industry...

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/1579359388724527112

I guess there was always an environmental element to her platform, but feels like it's built up more and more through the climate emergency declaration, through COP26, to opposing Cambo and questioning the new round of North Sea licences...to being a cornerstone of the indy case

Couple of early impressions from SNP conference, after Saturday's set-piece speeches...obviously there's been plenty of dunking on the Tories, which is fish in a barrel stuff at this stage, but also lots of attacks on Labour. Big sections in Ian Blackford & Keith Brown's speeches Went back and had a wee control-F; Nicola Sturgeon's last three SNP speeches combined have included literally one reference to Labour, to 22 mentions of the Tories. It's suited SNP & Tories to contest Scottish politics as a binary affair, with Labour as an irrelevant third wheel

Big day at Holyrood - Nicola Sturgeon's "significant" update on indyref2 is set for 14:20. You can watch live on the BBC Scotland channel, and we'll have full coverage online and everywhere else. But what are we likely to hear? A thread of speculation... bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla… As an early disclaimer; I am always prepared to be wrong. This is one where actually nobody really knows what’s coming, which is actually pretty rare in a political world where lines are pre-briefed and pitches are generally rolled...

https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/873129858502729728

The Fergusons ferry-building saga really is a remarkable thing, when you look at the full timeline forensically laid out by @AuditScotland. Here is the report, and an egregiously detailed thread... audit-scotland.gov.uk/publications/n… We start in 2014. Fergusons Shipbuilders goes bust. The firm is bought by billionaire Clyde Blowers chief Jim McColl in a deal at least partly brokered by Alex Salmond. Later that year, govt-owned ferries/harbours infrastructure agency CMAL puts out a tender for two new ferries.

ScotGov has released its external legal advice from the Salmond judicial review. It's basically set out as a timeline of documents; starting from 27 Sept, when counsel were satisfied that most grounds were "weak", but there was "real risk" over the ground of procedural unfairness However advice changed quickly on 31 October, when the extent of contact between the investigating officer and complainers became clear; Roddy Dunlop QC said he was "very concerned indeed" and said this "presents a very real problem" - adding that IO may have been "not eligible"

From independence strategy to trans rights, NEC factionalism to Alex Salmond, the SNP gives every impression of being a party threatening to tear itself apart on the eve of a crucial election. People will point to the SNP still polling very strongly (and perhaps more to the point, opposition parties very poorly) but there’s an old saying about divided parties not being winners for good reason...and about there only being one poll that matters

The (virtual) Court of Session will be hearing arguments about whether or not Holyrood can legislate for indyref2 today and tomorrow - case brought by activists like @MartinJKeatings rather than ScotGov, but obvs the ruling could have interesting implications... As is standard with the Court of Session I don't imagine there will *be* a ruling this week, but the judge says her "intention is to provide an opinion within days rather than weeks"

Latest in the back and forth between Alex Salmond and the Holyrood inquiry committee - they're now asking if he can come in on February 2nd *at the very latest*. Have also offered 26 January - altho they've also invited Peter Murrell to give further evidence on one of those dates One minor detail I'd pick out from that letter is the note that committee members "unanimously" agreed to invite Mr Salmond to give evidence on 2 Feb. Perhaps a hint that things have not been entirely unanimous during their deliberations so far...

Figure a lot of people have a lot of questions right now so thought a quick thread signposting to where what info we have is might be helpful... This is the current law on travel restrictions, in force now. It includes a legal ban on travel between Scotland and the rest of the UK, and in and out of council areas in levels three and four, without a “reasonable excuse” legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2020/344/s…

MSPs will vote on a motion of no confidence in John Swinney as education secretary today. We already know it'll fail, because the Greens won't back it - so why are the opposition pressing ahead with it? [thread alert] bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla… While the outcome is obvs the immediately important thing for parents and pupils, politically the narrative is significant too, with an election looming - and ScotGov seem to have successfully seized control of it

Holyrood committee investigating ScotGov's handling of complaints against Alex Salmond will start calling witnesses after summer recess - Leslie Evans likely to be the first, while Nicola Sturgeon & Mr Salmond himself will be invited, along with other advisors & civil servants Committee has agreed timetable with ScotGov for handover of written evidence and documents etc; also calls from members to get ahold of SNP records and Nicola Sturgeon's personal phone records, as well as evidence Alex Salmond was to use in the judicial review

The jury have come back in the Alex Salmond trial at the High Court in Edinburgh Charge 1 (indecent assault of Woman A) Not Guilty by majority