TORY Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg says Scotland should be allowed to hold a second independence referendum - but not for at least 20 years.
The Conservative MP for Somerset, in Scotland on a short speaking tour, said it would have to wait for a "generation".
In an interview with the BBC, Mr Rees-Mogg also questioned the need for the Scottish Government to assume more powers over areas such as trade and immigration once the UK leaves the EU.
He said: "Of course Scotland is entitled to have another referendum at some point in the future, but I think the SNP's position of a generation is a reasonable one."
"It should be a generational decision and a generational decision is not made over two or three years.
"A generation is somewhere beyond 20 years."
During the last independence referendum, the then First Minister Alex Salmond described the vote as being a "once in a generation" moment for the country to decide.
That has caused some difficulties for his old party since, as it wrestled with a desire from some within the SNP to push ahead with further plans for a second attempt sooner rather than later.
But others are said to want to focus efforts on the more immediate question of Brexit.
And on that, Mr Mogg said granting Holyrood further powers over immigration and trade could prove problematic - despite the Scottish government considering them as vital.
He said: "There are some powers held by the European Union that will inevitably flow down to the devolved parliaments or assemblies.
"Whether it's possible to do it on trade is a more complex issue because those are international treaties that affect the whole of the United Kingdom market and it would be difficult to do on a devolved basis.
"The principle that powers that come from Brussels should, as far as possible, go to the constituent parts of the United Kingdom is a good one but that won't be possible for everything."
"To do it for immigration would be really difficult because once people had come into Scotland, how would you limit their ability to go around the rest of the country?
"We certainly don't want to be the sort of country that has internal controls or identify cards. I think that would undermine some of our most ancient freedoms."
Despite the fact the majority of Scots voted to stay within the UK, a different trend to elsewhere in the UK, he added: "On a democratic basis the decision .. is as valid for Scotland as it is for the rest of the UK."
He also shrugged off research suggesting Scotland's GDP would fall by as much as 8.5% in the event a no-deal Brexit was forced through. claiming they were in some way jaundiced by those who commissioned them.
"They're not in any sense properly independent," he said, These forecasts are predicated are based on the political outlook of the people commissioning the forecasts."
Regarded as a 'hard line' Brexiteer, the MP also insisted Theresa May would still be Prime Minister in a year's time, but heralded Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson as a potential heir.
He said: "She would, at some future date, make a wonderful leader, both as first minister of Scotland and, in due course, leader of the Conservative party in England.
"She is a wonderful, capable person."
"I think Ruth Davidson is a brilliant, charismatic and capable political figure."
However his comments over independence, Brexit and the economy were rubbished by the SNP's Brexit Chief Mike Russell.
"Trust in politics and trust in Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson evaporated a long time ago, given the way that the Brexit referendum was run and given their antics since then," he said. "The way to restore trust in politics is to listen to the people and in Scotland that means to represent the people in Scotland who said 'we don't want to leave'.
Mr Rees-Mogg unsuccessfully stood as MP for Central Fife in 1997.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel