[aldo_14]

Word to the wise.... telling Scotland the Us government doesn't like something isn't going to do anything but encourage it.

http://www.sundayherald.com/58917

THE US government has made a dramatic intervention into Scottish politics after a senior diplomat said the Bush administration would “probably” prefer independence not to happen.

Lisa Vickers, the new US consul in Scotland, questioned the effect of separation on American energy firms and criticised the SNP’s anti-Nato policy. She also speculated about whether an independent Scotland would become a member of the European Union.

The official’s comments are controversial because independence looks set to be one of the key issues during next year’s Holyrood election campaign.

An opinion poll last week found a majority of Scots favoured breaking up Britain and revealed the SNP was ahead in the popular vote.

The Nationalists’ flagship policy is to hold a referendum on independence during their first four-year term in government. Their election hopes were boosted in recent weeks by a £100,000 donation from businessman Sir Tom Farmer and encouragement from the leader of Scotland’s Catholics, Cardinal Keith O’Brien, who said he expected independence “before too long”.

But the independence debate has taken an unexpected turn in the light of the comments made by Vickers, the US government’s “voice” in Scotland.

In an interview with the Sunday Herald, she said the US would “probably” prefer the UK to remain united and insisted there were “various elements” of the SNP’s independence policy that had not been fully explained.

“Would an independent Scotland be a member of Nato? They don’t know. Would they be in the EU? They don’t know,” she said. “I don’t think the SNP is willing to say with 100% confidence and security that ‘this is what will happen with independence, and this is how you will be, and this is what will belong to you.’”

She added: “I think there are a lot of questions. And I think that, right now, there are not a lot of answers.”

Vickers also said the consequences of a “yes” vote in a plebiscite were unclear: “Even [the] referendum does not say definitely and conclusively, ‘if you vote for this referendum in this first 100 days, Scotland will be an independent nation again after a period of time’. That’s not what they are saying at all.”

In remarks likely to irk the SNP, Vickers claimed independence was not being seriously discussed by ordinary Scots.

“They may find that, as an article I read in the press a couple of weeks ago quoted, people are not sitting down to breakfast and hotly debating ‘should Scotland be independent?’. It’s sort of an idea in the back of the mind that comes up at cocktail parties,” she said.

However, her most pointed criticisms were reserved for the SNP’s defence policy, which is for an independent Scotland not to be a member of Nato.

The US consul said: “I don’t think it’s nearly that simple. I don’t think you just wake up one morning and say ‘we are going to pull out of Nato’. It doesn’t work like that. There are just so many different questions that would have to be answered. I don’t believe there are any countries that have pulled out of Nato.”

Vickers also claimed Alex Salmond’s anti-Nato stance may not be “set in stone”. She said: “No good politician is going to tell you ‘this is absolutely what we are going to do’. They are going to tell you that ‘this may be what we would like to do, if it seems the prudent thing to do’.

On the future of US energy companies in a separate Scottish state, she said: “Would their situation change were Scotland independent?”

The official’s comments provide insights into the US government’s view on constitutional politics in Scotland. Although Vickers said there were “pros and cons” to separation, the US is not thought to favour independence because it would involve the break-up of its main international ally.

Such constitutional change could diminish the UK’s case for staying in the G8 and weaken the argument for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council.

SNP leader Alex Salmond accused Vickers of “inexperience” and criticised her comments.

“I am sure the US consul doesn’t have to be reminded of diplomatic protocol. It’s a curious position to put so much stress on your own country’s self- determination, and not to think it is important for other people. Maybe it’s time for her to get out of the cocktail party circuit and around the country.

“We have had some good American consuls in the past. I am quite sure that once she gets up to speed, then she will know a bit more of Scottish politics.”

George Foulkes, the vice-chairman of Scottish Labour’s Holyrood election campaign, slammed the SNP’s defence policy.

“Most people in Scotland know that breaking up Britain would be bad for the economy and bad for jobs. They also know that the Nationalist position on Nato is frankly ludicrous. Leaving Nato would threaten thousands of jobs and leave Scotland isolated, exposed and vulnerable,” he said.

(Vulnerable to who?  An invasion by the Faroe Islands?)

[Shade]

Iceland! No, wait...

The whole 'Opposite of America' phenomenon isn't exclusive to Scotland either, it's pretty much europe-wide. Take a look at the Galileo project for example: It languished for years without proper funding since everyone figured GPS was just fine, but once the US said that they'd prefer it not go ahead for various more-or-less contrived security reasons it almost overnight became one of the most well funded projects in the EU

[Colonol Dekker]

I thought Scotland was independant to a point anyway?

[aldo_14]

I would note that Scotland has a bunch of oilfields sitting off the North-East.......

of course, Labour abused their position of (governing) power (using civil servants for political purposes) to release documents that intentionally covered up the extent and strength of Scottish oil wealth in 1974 (the actual assesment was that, with sensible investment, the oil fields could lead to an economically powerful and secure Scotland, akin to how Norway is nowadays), in the face of a strong 'take back Scotlands' oil'-based campaign by the SNP.

I thought Scotland was independant to a point anyway?

We have some devolved power, but that's a far cry from the fiscal, defensive, policing, etc autonomy of independence.  For example, immigration policy is still controlled by Westminister, and Scotland has vastly different needs in that situation.

[Shade]

Ick, that's worse than I thought it was. Sounds like you actually have less independence than Greenland and the Faroe Islands do from Denmark, and those two are definitely in the market for more once their economies can stand up to it (which, frankly, is fine by me. I've never been the imperialist type so if they want to run it themselves, then by all means. And they should get there soon enough if they put a little more will and effort into looking for oil).

[aldo_14]

Ick, that's worse than I thought it was. Sounds like you actually have less independence than Greenland and the Faroe Islands do from Denmark, and those two are definitely in the market for more once their economies can stand up to it (which, frankly, is fine by me. I've never been the imperialist type so if they want to run it themselves, then by all means. And they should get there soon enough if they put a little more will and effort into looking for oil).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_parliament#Constitution_and_powers

The specific devolved matters are all subjects which are not explicitly stated in Section 5 of the Scotland Act as reserved matters. All matters that are not specifically reserved are automatically devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Most importantly, this includes agriculture, fisheries and forestry, economic development, education, environment, food standards, health, home affairs, Scots law — courts, police and fire services, local government, sport and the arts, transport, training, tourism, research and statistics and social work. The Scottish Parliament has the ability to alter income tax in Scotland by up to 3 pence in the pound.

Reserved matters are subjects that are outside the legislative competence of the Scotland Parliament. The Scottish Parliament is unable to legislate on such issues that are reserved to, and dealt with at Westminster (and where Ministerial functions usually lie with UK Government ministers). These include abortion, broadcasting policy, civil service, common markets for UK goods and services, constitution, electricity, coal, oil, gas, nuclear energy, defence and national security, drug policy, employment, foreign policy and relations with Europe, most aspects of transport safety and regulation, National Lottery, protection of borders, social security and stability of UK's fiscal, economic and monetary system.

[Shade]

Ah, good. Not quite as bad as it first sounded then. Still, there are definitely some painful areas in the reserved list. And Scotland should certainly be able to stand on its own with a little preparation if so desired.

[Colonol Dekker]

I thought Scotland was independant to a point anyway?

We have some devolved power, but that's a far cry from the fiscal, defensive, policing, etc autonomy of independence.  For example, immigration policy is still controlled by Westminister, and Scotland has vastly different needs in that situation.

If it were down to me, you would be Lairds of your own land.................... Aye.
Man my socialogical lessons at school bit major ass, I dunno how these dang countries are organised....

[vyper]

Once upon a time, I would've supported independence. Then I met the rank ****ing amateurs who would become our proper leaders should the occasion arise. I am not living in a nation led soley by Joke McConnel.

[Colonol Dekker]

Obviously it will have an effect on Scots, how much effect would it have on the rest of the UK though?
Woul Parliament have even more time to screw prossies and get upto ne'erdowell type business?

[aldo_14]

Once upon a time, I would've supported independence. Then I met the rank ****ing amateurs who would become our proper leaders should the occasion arise. I am not living in a nation led soley by Joke McConnel.

 Scottish independence would be predicated on Labour losing the election anyways.

[Colonol Dekker]

I just want you guys to be happy, God know we can avoid the Canada/Americas situation over here too.......

[Taristin]

God know we can avoid the Canada/Americas situation over here too.......

Oh yeah... that constant warfare has reaked hell on both of our nations...

[vyper]

Once upon a time, I would've supported independence. Then I met the rank ****ing amateurs who would become our proper leaders should the occasion arise. I am not living in a nation led soley by Joke McConnel.

 Scottish independence would be predicated on Labour losing the election anyways.

Oh right so we'll have the SNP running things. They're not that much better - christ almighty Salmond had to come back because they were falling apart.

[aldo_14]

Once upon a time, I would've supported independence. Then I met the rank ****ing amateurs who would become our proper leaders should the occasion arise. I am not living in a nation led soley by Joke McConnel.

 Scottish independence would be predicated on Labour losing the election anyways.

Oh right so we'll have the SNP running things. They're not that much better - christ almighty Salmond had to come back because they were falling apart.

Any worse than Blair/Brown, Cameron or Campbell?

I will admit, the union does at least mean we can shove ****wits like John Reid across the border and down to London.

[NGTM-1R]

Well, try it and find out.

[Flipside]

We don't want John Reid back, keep him as a border decoration. In fat, put him in a 1966 England kit and nail him to a board at the bridge in Newcastle, drop 2 hints with one fell swoop

[an0n]

If Scotland or Wales ever gained independence, the Royal Army would have to start patrolling the borders as a matter of course.

This would deplete resources and force levels world-wide. Weakening England. Which would reduce our ability to secure **** for all of Britain. So everyone would get ****ed.

Except the Americans, who would probably just loot the oil fields, or outright invade Scotland.

[redsniper]

What would be our excuse for invading Scotland? They're harboring terrorists?

[aldo_14]

What would be our excuse for invading Scotland? They're harboring terrorists?

Oil and having some socialists.