The Cabinet Office has done polling on Scottish indepndence since Andy Burnham came to power (Image: Getty)
Ministers must publish unreleased documents on Scottish independence polling, the SNP has demanded. The Cabinet Office has conducted polling on the issue since Andy Burnham became Prime Minister, a Freedom of Information request has revealed.
The department has refused to publish the results of this.
Former SNP MP Tommy Sheppard, who has been involved in fighting for the UK Government to reveal results of previous unreleased polls, said: “I don’t have any objection to the Cabinet Office or the Government consulting the public to inform policy development.” Speaking to the Sunday National, he added: “But if they’re going to spend taxpayers’ money on doing that, then the taxpayer has a right to know what the results are.”
Mr Burnham at Prime Minister’s Questions in September said that the conditions for Scottish independence should be “exactly the same” as for Irish unification.
At the time, Mr Burnham said that there would have to be “a clear consensus [and] I am not aware that there is a majority of public support for another referendum, and until that changes, there won’t be one”.
Mr Burnham’s official spokesman declined to explain what he had meant by a “clear consensus”.
In October, Mr Burnham was in Lanarkshire to make a “serious and genuine offer” to the Scottish Government to put more control “in the hands of local people” through devolution.
After that speech, the Prime Minister was again asked about Scotland’s path to independence. He said: “I just feel we all have to move beyond the constitutional questions.”
Mr Sheppard said: “Burnham talks all the time about transparency in government and the Government not being centralised, autocratic and remote from the people. So, if that’s true, then how can he possibly justify using taxpayers’ money for policy development research and not releasing the results?
“He’s said that if there was growing support for independence, then it would be proper to look at another referendum. So, if he’s asking the question, I think we all have a right to know what the answer was.”
SNP MSP Calum Kerr has demanded the results and documents on the polls be published in full, with the costs having also been concealed by the UK Government.
He said: “The UK Labour Government must publish these documents and results in full, and you can only conclude that their unwillingness to disclose the costs demonstrates this programme of research must be extensive.
“Poll after poll shows independence is the preferred position of the Scottish people. Three out of four nations in the UK are led by pro-independence First Ministers, and the British Prime Minister has agreed it is for the people of Scotland to decide our own future.
“It is no wonder this behind-closed-doors Whitehall operation is in place.”
This is not the first time a UK Government has done extensive polling on Scottish independence using public money and refused to publish the results.
Between January 2018 and May 2019, the then-Conservative UK government spent at least £264,807 hiring polling companies to research public attitudes to the Union.
The government’s refusal to publish the results triggered a long-running legal battle spearheaded by former SNP MP Sheppard, founder of the The Stand comedy clubs in Edinburgh and Glasgow.
A government spokesman said: “The UK Government regularly commissions research across the UK to help understand peoples’ priorities, and ensure the delivery of public services. The Prime Minister strongly believes in the Union, and does not support another referendum on Scottish independence.”
Scottish Independence Chaos as Nationalists Demand Andy Burnham Release Secret Data
Scotland’s independence debate has erupted into another political confrontation, with nationalist politicians demanding that Prime Minister Andy Burnham release previously undisclosed information about the financial and economic consequences of Scottish independence.
The latest dispute has intensified pressure on the Labour Government, with critics accusing ministers of withholding information that could have a significant impact on Scotland’s constitutional future. Nationalists argue that Scottish voters deserve access to the full facts before making decisions about the country’s relationship with the rest of the United Kingdom.
At the centre of the controversy is the question of what independence would mean for Scotland’s public finances, economic stability and future relationship with Westminster. The Scottish National Party (SNP) insists that the government must provide greater transparency, while Labour faces the difficult task of defending the Union without appearing to obstruct legitimate demands for information.
The row comes at a sensitive time for Scottish politics, as support for independence remains a defining issue and political parties prepare for another period of intense constitutional debate.
Nationalists Demand Answers From Westminster
Scottish nationalist politicians have argued that the UK Government possesses important information about Scotland’s financial position that has not been made sufficiently available to the public.
They want ministers to publish detailed assessments covering taxation, public spending, government debt, energy resources and the economic consequences of establishing an independent Scottish state.
For the SNP, transparency is essential. The party believes Scottish voters cannot make an informed decision about independence without understanding the financial assumptions and economic forecasts used by the Treasury.
Nationalists have also questioned whether Westminster has presented an unnecessarily negative picture of Scotland’s economic prospects.
Their argument is that Scotland possesses considerable natural resources, including renewable energy potential, oil and gas infrastructure, agricultural production and an internationally recognised food and drink sector.
They believe these assets could provide the foundation for a successful independent economy if managed effectively.
However, critics of independence argue that economic potential must be distinguished from the practical financial challenges of establishing a new state.
Scotland would need to address questions concerning currency, public debt, pensions, taxation, international trade and the division of existing UK assets and liabilities.
These issues cannot be resolved simply by publishing optimistic economic projections.
Andy Burnham Faces a Difficult Political Challenge
For Andy Burnham, the controversy presents another challenge in his government’s relationship with Scotland.
Labour has traditionally attempted to defend the Union by arguing that Scotland benefits from being part of a larger United Kingdom.
The government maintains that shared resources, combined economic strength and common institutions provide important advantages.
However, the political difficulty is that demands for transparency cannot easily be dismissed.
If ministers refuse to publish information requested by Scottish representatives, nationalists may use that decision to reinforce accusations that Westminster is unwilling to engage openly with the independence debate.
On the other hand, the government must ensure that confidential information, commercially sensitive material and incomplete economic forecasts are not presented as established facts.
A responsible approach would involve publishing relevant assessments wherever possible, explaining the assumptions behind them and making clear where uncertainties remain.
The Prime Minister must therefore balance political considerations with the public’s legitimate interest in understanding the economic consequences of independence.
Scotland’s Economic Future Is at the Heart of the Dispute
The question of Scotland’s financial future remains one of the most important arguments in the independence debate.
Scotland has significant economic strengths, including energy production, financial services, tourism, manufacturing, education and food exports.
Its universities attract international students, while its renewable energy resources offer opportunities for investment in offshore wind, hydrogen and other emerging technologies.
Nationalists argue that independence would allow Scotland to develop economic policies tailored to its own priorities.
They believe decisions about energy, taxation, investment and public services should be made by politicians directly accountable to Scottish voters.
However, opponents of independence point to the economic risks associated with leaving the United Kingdom.
Scotland currently benefits from a shared fiscal framework that allows public spending to be supported through UK-wide taxation and borrowing.
An independent government would need to establish its own borrowing arrangements and determine how to finance public services.
It would also need to negotiate the division of UK national debt and address the financial implications of losing access to some existing UK-wide institutions.
These challenges would require careful planning and transparent economic analysis.
The Currency Question Remains Unresolved
One of the biggest obstacles facing the independence movement is the question of currency.
Scotland currently uses sterling, but independence would create a need for a clear and credible long-term monetary strategy.
The SNP has previously discussed continuing to use the pound during a transitional period before potentially establishing a separate Scottish currency.
However, opponents argue that using sterling without being part of the United Kingdom’s monetary institutions could limit Scotland’s ability to respond to economic difficulties.
An independent Scotland would need to explain how its banking system would be supported, how interest rate decisions would affect its economy and how financial stability would be protected.
Currency arrangements are not simply a technical detail. They influence investment, borrowing costs, international trade and household finances.
This is precisely why nationalists want detailed economic information from Westminster, while unionists insist that the independence movement must provide more convincing answers about its own proposals.
Public Services and the Question of Public Spending
Healthcare, education and social security are also central to the debate.
The SNP argues that independence would allow Scotland to make its own decisions about public spending and develop policies that reflect the priorities of its population.
Supporters believe an independent government could use Scotland’s resources more effectively and establish a different economic model from the one pursued by Westminster.
However, the financial implications remain complicated.
Scotland currently receives funding through the UK system, including arrangements involving the Barnett formula. This provides additional funding for devolved public services based on changes in spending in England.
Independence would fundamentally change that financial relationship.
A new Scottish government would need to determine how much revenue it could raise, how much it needed to spend and what level of borrowing would be sustainable.
The debate is therefore not simply about whether Scotland has sufficient economic resources. It is about whether those resources could reliably finance the public services and social protections that voters expect.
The Unionists Fight Back
Unionist politicians have accused the SNP of focusing too heavily on constitutional arguments while failing to address Scotland’s immediate economic and public service problems.
They argue that Scotland’s most pressing challenges include NHS waiting times, housing shortages, education standards, transport infrastructure and economic growth.
From their perspective, another prolonged independence campaign risks distracting politicians from issues that directly affect households.
Labour has also attempted to present itself as an alternative to both the Conservatives and the SNP, promising stronger economic cooperation across the United Kingdom.
However, the party faces a difficult task.
It must convince Scottish voters that remaining within the Union offers meaningful economic advantages while respecting the democratic right to debate Scotland’s constitutional future.
Simply repeating arguments about the benefits of the Union may not be sufficient if voters feel their concerns are being ignored.
Could the Independence Debate Become More Heated?
The demand for the release of government information could become another flashpoint in Scotland’s constitutional debate.
If Westminster refuses to publish relevant assessments, nationalists may accuse ministers of deliberately withholding information.
If the government releases detailed economic forecasts, the SNP and unionist parties could interpret the figures differently, leading to further arguments about Scotland’s financial prospects.
There is also the question of whether any new information could materially change public opinion.
Independence remains an issue involving identity, sovereignty, economics and political trust. Financial statistics are important, but they are unlikely to settle every disagreement.
Ultimately, Scottish voters will want to know whether independence would provide greater prosperity, stronger democratic accountability and a more secure future.
They will also want credible answers about the risks and costs of making such a fundamental constitutional change.
Conclusion: Westminster Must Answer the Call for Transparency
The latest confrontation over secret government data demonstrates that Scotland’s independence debate remains far from settled.
Nationalists believe Westminster must provide greater transparency about Scotland’s finances and economic future. Unionists argue that independence carries serious risks that cannot be overlooked, particularly concerning currency, public debt and public spending.
Andy Burnham now faces pressure to demonstrate that his government is prepared to engage openly with Scotland rather than allowing another constitutional dispute to dominate political relations.
Publishing relevant information, explaining financial assumptions and allowing independent scrutiny would help ensure that the debate is based on evidence rather than political accusations.
Scotland’s future is too important to be determined by incomplete information, exaggerated promises or partisan arguments.
Whether voters ultimately choose independence or continued membership of the United Kingdom, they deserve a clear understanding of the economic consequences.
The responsibility now rests with politicians on both sides to provide honest answers and demonstrate that they are putting Scotland’s long-term interests ahead of short-term political advantage.