Theresa May’s Threats 87

The problem with not being independent is that Scotland would continue to be ruled by people like Theresa May. Her threat to close the border is a patent bluff, and motivated by racism.  Her fear is that “Buried deep in Alex Salmond’s white paper is the admission that, just like the last Labour government, a separate Scotland would pursue a looser immigration policy.”

It is neither hidden nor an admission.  Scotland welcomes immigrants who contribute to its economy and its culture.  Scotland doesn’t have a politics of pandering to racists. That is one of the things which so many Scots want to get away from.

There is no way that independent Scotland will be forced out of the EU.  First, there are no grounds for the assumption that WENI will be the successor state and Scotland a legal new entity; the Czechs and Slovaks, for example, both inherited the entire treaty obligations of the former Czechoslovakia.  But even if Scotland did have to reapply – which I doubt strongly – Scotland already meets the acquis communitaire, by definition.  The Commission report establishing that would be prepared in the transitional period between the referendum and actual independence, and Scotland’s application and acceptance would be a same day process.  If Spain wanted to stop that – and many anti-Catalan Spanish politicians are intelligent enough to realize that extreme hostility to the Scots would provoke more, not less, Catalan nationalism – Spain does not have the political clout within the EU, and is in too dependent a position to isolate itself by a veto.

I worked for four years as First Secretary in the British Embassy in Warsaw specifically on Polish preparations for EU entry, and I know what I am talking about – indeed I have no doubt I know a great deal more about EU accession than Teresa May.  I also know that there is enormous sympathy for Scottish nationalism right across the EU’s international relations community, be it national politicians and diplomats or EU staff.  You would be surprised just how much ground has been quietly prepared by Scottish diplomats and civil servants in advance, sotto voce, in our spare time! With Scotland firmly committed to the EU, and the Conservative Party committed to a referendum on leaving, those who believe the EU’s sympathies lie more with May than with Scotland are deluded.

Actually nobody does really believe that, the propagandists of the mainstream media merely want you to believe it.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

87 thoughts on “Theresa May’s Threats

1 2 3
  • Ed Davies

    Also, isn’t it strange how Tories seem to think it’s a great threat that Scotland might not continue to be in the EU? It underlines how serious they actually aren’t about the referendum and how it’s just being put up to pander to the Ukip fringe and, perhaps, as a negotiating tactic to use with the rest of the EU.

  • Juteman

    Westminster simply doesn’t understand the mind-set of the Scots. Threats will backfire, and only add to the size of the Yes majority.
    Nemo me impune laccesit.

  • Mary

    There is choreography in their campaign. Hammond now.

    15 March 2014

    Scottish Tory conference: ‘Yes’ defence plan not credible, says Hammond

    Scottish Tory Party conference
    Tories ‘to continue cutting deficit’
    PM in pledge to No vote Scotland
    Davidson would stand after Yes
    May says Scots Tories ‘fighting fit’

    UK Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has said the Scottish government’s defence plans under independence are not credible.

    He delivered his message to the Scottish Conservative Party conference.

    Mr Hammond told delegates that the defence industry in Scotland employed about 12,600 people, generating sales in excess of £1.8bn a year.

    A “Yes” Scotland under SNP rule would get rid of Trident and would establish a 15,000-strong defence force.


  • Juteman

    To a London Tory, Scotlands defence plans could never be credible. They are a defence force, not an attack/invading force.

  • guano

    Scottish UK diplomats using their spare time to plot against the UK government? So we could have some fine posturing by May and Cameron or Miliband that they must remain at her Majesty’s pleasure in Belmarsh or Long Lartin awaiting extradition to Scotland.

    Tory government is not racist, it’s people-ist, and always has been.

  • Mary

    Tell David Babbs of 38 Degrees what you think of our electoral system and of our parliament.

    ‘What’s gone wrong with politics in the UK? An influential committee of MPs have asked me to give evidence to them next week. They’re investigating why so many people choose not to vote or to get involved in the formal political process. Please can you help decide what I should say?

    I have a hunch that I’ll have to tell the MPs some home truths. Lots of 38 Degrees members have told me before that they feel there are big problems with our democracy and our politicians. That’s certainly how I feel.

    I want to be sure I’m speaking for all 38 Degrees members, not just giving my own opinions. So what do you think? Do you think there are enough candidates worth voting for? Is it easy enough to vote? Are traditional political parties past their sell by date? What could be done?

    Please take a couple of minutes to fill out this quick survey about voting and elections. I’d really appreciate getting your thoughts by Monday. Click here to get started:

    The number of people who vote in elections has been declining for decades. At the last election over one third of people didn’t vote. Membership of political parties is at an all time low. As is trust in politicians.

    Yet groups like 38 Degrees prove that we haven’t all become apathetic. We might not all like party politics, but we do care about the future of our country and our democracy. 38 Degrees members come together to stand up for what we believe in in ever-greater numbers.

    The ‘Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee’* wants to look into these trends. Why is party politics so unpopular? What turns people off voting? Could people-powered groups like 38 Degrees have something to teach parliament?

    I want to be speaking for thousands of people from across the UK. Whatever your view, this is a chance to be heard together. The more of us that take part the more weight our views will carry and the more the MPs are likely to listen. Please take the quick survey now.


    *The only decent MP on the committee is Paul Flynn as far as I can see.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!


    “the Czechs and Slovaks, for example, both inherited the entire treaty obligations of the former Czechoslovakia.”

    Whatever Treaty obligations you were thinking about could obviously not have been those arising out of the EU-Czech Republic and EU-Slovakia Accession Treaties, since the latter did not exist when Czechoslovakia broke up.


    i”ndeed I have no doubt I know a great deal more about EU accession than Teresa May. I also know that there is enormous sympathy for Scottish nationalism right across the EU’s international relations community, be it national politicians and diplomats or EU staff.”


    Well, it would not be profitable to start a discussion on who knows more about acceding to the EU, but I take leave to query your assertion about ‘enormous sympathy’ for Scottish nationalism. I’d take the view that the majority of people concerned with EU affairs see this whole thing as a rather interesting, mainly technical matter; sympathy or antipathy don’t really come into it.

  • Roderick Russell

    Mr. Salmon recently gave a speech in which he quoted statistics showing that Norway’s per capita standard of living (GDP) is 85% higher than Scotland’s. When I was a boy, Scots were clearly better off than Norwegians.

    Today Norwegians are nearly twice as well off as Scots despite Norway not being in the EU. The difference is mainly due to the oil. Though I think there are other factors too – such as the huge burden that paying for the London Establishment imposes on all UK residents.

    Be that as it may, as in Norway, Scots would be far better of economically even outside the EU and without the Pound. But neither of those scenarios are going to happen. As a matter of fact Scots are quite popular in Europe whereas the London government is increasingly seen as a “Pain in the neck” because it won’t cooperate with the other members on too many issues. As for the pound: without the revenues from Scots oil, England would have a constant balance of payments crises. So the rest of the UK would be desperate for Scots to continue to use the pound, and everybody in the EU would want the Scots to stay.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!

    [ Off-topic comments have been removed. Habbabkuk is currently subject to pre-moderation to preserve the topic. Comments removed: Habbabkuk 5, Mary, Doug Scorgie, Juteman, Herbie; 1 each.]

  • Herbie

    Alex Massie has a good rant about this in The Spectator:

    “Theresa May’s grubby little warning: an independent Scotland will be out in the cold”

    “It is a good thing that government ministers come to Scotland sometimes. It is a bad thing that they insist on opening their mouths when they do. Earlier this year we endured the spectacle of Philip Hammond making an arse of himself; today it has been Theresa May’s turn to make one wish cabinet ministers would, just occasionally, contemplate the virtue of silence.”

    Anyway, I’m sure all readers will wish the Scots well in their desire for self-determination, as of course they’ll wish the Crimeans well in their similar vote tomorrow.

  • Clark

    The message from Westminster seems consistent: “Scotland, we love you and we want you to stay in the UK. But if you leave we will hate you, and act in every way to disadvantage you”.

    Odd that.

  • Herbie

    Dr Andrew Neal addressed May’s threat last year and found it wanting:

    The Home Secretary is disingenuous to claim that an independent Scotland would be left out of the loop on our island’s security, writes Dr Andrew Neal:

    Interesting article and particularly the references to the paper outlining the UK security architecture and of course the way in which politicians are subject to the whims of the security state for what are I’m afraid very dark reasons.

  • Vronsky

    “Scotland already meets the acquis communitaire, by definition”

    You think? It requires a free press. Does anyone qualify?

  • Mary

    Scots NHS staff to receive pay rise denied to Englisn
    By Reevel Alderson
    BBC Scotland’s social affairs correspondent

    The above comes from a BBC webpage entitled ‘Scottish Politics Index’.

    It includes this –

    Defence committee to question Hammond on Vulcan

    MoD ‘to lose’ environment powers
    Q&A: What and where is Vulcan?
    Apology demanded over nuclear fault

    MPs are to question the UK government and Ministry of Defence’s handling of an incident at the Vulcan submarine reactor test site.

    A radioactive discharge discovered at a test reactor at the site adjacent to Dounreay in Caithness in 2012 was made public last week.

    The House of Commons’ defence committee will send its questions to Defence Secretary Philip Hammond.

    The Scottish government has criticised UK ministers and the MoD.

    It is now making plans to remove the MoD’s powers for environmental regulation on radioactivity in Scotland.


  • Resident Dissident


    When Barroso said

    “In case there is a new country, a new state coming out of a current member state, it will have to apply and – this is very important – the application and the accession to the European Union would have to be approved by all the other member states,”

    Do you really believe that he hadn’t been correctly briefed by his EU mandarin as to the process required by EU legislation? If so, why?

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!

    Rodrick Russell

    Your posts touches on GDP and implies – through the comparison with Norway – that an independent Scotland’s GDP would be much higher (for oil-related reasons) than it is as a part of the UK.

    You are aware, I imagine, that if that is correct Scotland is likely to become one of the highest net contributors to the EU budget, and that the remainder of the UK would become a lower net contributor than at present?

  • fool

    Hong Kong was a Scottish creation, and perhaps Scotland can manage independence. Of course HK was founded on piracy and drug running and was an incredibly laissez faire environment far removed from the current Scottish politics. If they free themselves of the UK and at the same time free themselves of conventional left and right wing political thought perhaps they can make something of Scotland, but it would be a shame to see Scotland go. I hope they don’t, but will support them if they do. IN the meanwhile they really need to spend a bit more time on their rugby.

  • Hector

    “Scotland welcomes immigrants who contribute to its economy and its culture. Scotland doesn’t have a politics of pandering to racists. That is one of the things which so many Scots want to get away from.”

    Yet people are much more enthusiastic about immigrating to England- compare the proportions of immigrants in the populations of the two countries. If Scotland intends to encourage immigrants and England does not, then either Scotland will have to take steps to ensure they do not leave or England will have to take steps to ensure immigrants do not come to Scotland as a means of immigrating to England. Apart from border controls, what measures would you suggest?

  • Juteman

    ” Apart from border controls, what measures would you suggest?”
    Increase economic opportunities in Scotland, so folk aren’t forced to leave in search of employment?

  • Roderick Russell

    @ Habbabkuk 5:16 PM

    If Scotland’s standard of living reached Norwegian levels, nearly doubling as a result of the oil, then she could well afford to pay a little more to the EU.

    Economically I think Scotland benefited in the first 200 years of the Union. The plain fact is that belonging to the UK has not been economically beneficial to Scotland for most of the last century. Over centralization has pumped the economic lifeblood out of Britain’s regions, including Scotland. The City has prospered while the rest of Britain has stagnated. It is time now for Scotland to make its own way; particularly as this is the brief moment in history in which Scotland will have the investment funds (oil) to really invest for its future.

    But for me it’s about more than just economics. I’m not anti-English. In fact I am an anglophile. My late mother, an LSE graduate in the 1930s, came from Norfolk. Most of you know my own well-witnessed history of how London oligarchs – with too much power, and too little brains – have subverted the security / intelligence services to use Stasi style persecution methods against decent citizens.

    It’s not just my problem. What these London establishment buggers have demonstrated is that they can override rule of law and democracy at will. Click on my signature for a description of their methods.

    Behaviour like this is symptomatic of a society that after 300 years has gone rotten and needs changed. As the 6’ 4” guy who skidded a truck at me a few years ago shouted – this is because “you don’t know your place”. And he is bloody right about that – my place is as an equal citizen. I want to live in a free society and that’s not England anymore.

  • craig Post author


    What a curious non-point. The Czech and Slovak Republics each accepted all treaty obligations of the former Czechoslovakia. Of course that did not include not yet existent EU treaties, but had there been any, they would have been included in the process, which was by deposition at the UN. The Czech and Slovak model is the one I would expect Scotland and WENI to follow – it is much more relevant than the Soviet model which is what the unionists are trying to kid us is applicable.

  • Kempe

    The problem here is that neither the Czech Republic or Slovakia actually sought successor nation status, mainly because both wanted shot of their Warsaw Pact obligations. A better example might be the break up of the Soviet Union in which case the UN recognised Russia as the successor state because it had the largest population and largest land mass.

    “Scotland’s application and acceptance would be a same day process. ”

    Yeah right; this is the EU we’re talking about. Whenever did they do anything within a day?

  • craig Post author


    Whenever did they expel a single unwilling citizen? Their entire dynamic is one of enlargement – dream on. And again you are taking the politically unrealistic view that other member states of the UN don’t like Scotland, and do like the English, and would wish to disadvantage the Scots. Believe me, in the real world of diplomacy, the opposite is the case.

  • Kempe

    It’s not a matter of who is liked the most, I dare say Russia has no shortage of enemies at the UN, but of international law.

    I don’t doubt that the EU’s policy is one of enlargement but it’s a bureaucratic juggernaut that moves at a rate that would embarrass a snail. How long did Poland’s negotiations take? Fifteen years wasn’t it?

1 2 3

Comments are closed.