Oral Answers to Questions

Allan Dorans Excerpts

Wednesday 7th December 2022 Commons Chamber

[Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)]

6. Whether she has made an assessment of the implications for her policies of the findings of the Supreme Court on the reference by the Lord Advocate of devolution issues under paragraph 34 of schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998.

[Allan Dorans (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) (SNP)]

7. Whether she has made an assessment of the implications for her policies of the findings of the Supreme Court on the reference by the Lord Advocate of devolution issues under paragraph 34 of schedule 6 to the Scotland Act 1998.

[The Attorney General (Victoria Prentis)]

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Opposition Front Bench and the Chairman of the Justice Committee for their extremely kind comments. I welcome the ruling of the Supreme Court. The Court was very clear—it was a unanimous decision—that a Bill legislating for a referendum on Scottish independence is not within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.

[The Attorney General]

The UK Supreme Court was very clear that an independence referendum was related to reserved matters, and the Government welcome the Court’s confirmation of this point. What the people of Scotland want is to see the Government working with them to solve the issues that matter to them.

[Allan Dorans]

Following the recent Supreme Court judgment, the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Scotland have been asked on numerous occasions what is the democratic route available to Scotland to leave the Union. Neither has been able to provide an answer. If the people of England wanted to leave this alleged voluntary Union of equals, what democratic process would be available to them?

[The Attorney General]

I believe that I have answered this question already, and I have heard the Prime Minister answer it several times in the course of Prime Minister’s questions. The Supreme Court rejected the Lord Advocate’s submission that an advisory referendum would have only an indirect and consequential effect on the reserved matter. This matter is reserved.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Prime Minister]

It is very nice to hear from my right hon. Friend today. He is absolutely right: there is no better way to spread opportunity around the country than by investing in our children’s future. I am absolutely delighted that Oak Academy in his constituency is benefiting from our school rebuilding programme, and I will certainly ask my office to keep his kind invitation in mind.

[Allan Dorans (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) (SNP)]

Q8. I have raised this matter before, but despite meeting with a previous Prime Minister in 2020 the matter has not progressed. In 1984, I was a serving police officer in the Metropolitan Police when, on 17 April, WPC Yvonne Fletcher was shot in the back and killed while policing a political demonstration outside the Libyan Embassy. No one has ever been charged in connection with her murder. In November last year, delivering his judgment in a civil case, a senior High Court justice, Mr Justice Spencer, said:“I am satisfied that on the balance of probabilities the defendant”—Saleh Mabrouk—“is jointly liable for the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher on the doctrine of common design.”Will the Prime Minister meet with me to see how this case may be taken forward, to finally bring those responsible for the murder of Yvonne to justice in a criminal court?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his continued work on this case. As he said, it is something that he has raised before. He will appreciate that, while I cannot speak in detail on any particular case, there are differences in the standard of proof required for civil and criminal proceedings. That said, the Crown Prosecution Service will consider any new information that is referred to it by the police in relation to this case. Of course, I would be very happy to meet with him.