11/02/2013 Newsnight Scotland

Welcome to Newsnight Scotland. We'll have more on today's

extraordinary events at the Vatican and I'll speaking to a leading

Scots Catholic who says Benedict's resignation was not shocking and

that it was a good thing. But first tonight, how many experts

does it take to win an independence referendum? The answer? Lots, it

seems. The Unionists, in the form of the UK government, gave us two

constitutional experts today. Their views? In the event of Scottish

independence, the remainder of the UK would inherit all 14,000

international treaties and membership of numerous global

organisations. A blow for nationalists? Or only until the yes

campaign find opposing experts? 17 No 7 and an international treaty

is agreed between two estate. -- 1707. Scotland and England decided

to share a parliament. 300 years on, if that union were to end, where

would it leave the two estates? -- state. England and the other bits

of the modern UK would inherit international treaties and

membership rights but Scotland would be treated as an entirely new

state. Scotland, once it is independent, will be in a position

of inequality because it will be an independent state. United Kingdom

will have the veto in the Security Council for example, and Scotland

will not have. That is something long after the treaty of Union. The

treaty of Union will not affect what happens now when and if

Scotland decide to separate. It is only Scotland which is separating.

The United Kingdom is not breaking up into four constituent parts.

Scotland would be deciding to separating -- separate from the

rest of the United Kingdom. Professor Crawford was one of the

two constitutional experts to look at what a newly independent

Scotland's relationship could be with international organisations.

Also, who would inherit Britain's international treaty organise --...

How about this treaty banning the discharge of projectiles from a

hot-air balloons? What the 1877 agreement relating to slave trade

and human sacrifice? -- what about. Maybe we need to look elsewhere.

When Ireland split from Britain in 1922, Britain was the successor

state. The UK Government's position is staggeringly arrogant. The idea

that if Scotland votes democratically to be independent,

the UK waters off with the rights of Scotland is left worth nothing,

undermines any suggestion that when an equal partner within the UK at

moment. It also begs the question, if that is true of rights, it must

be sure of liabilities like the UK national debt as well. This is an

opinion, certainly by m'learned experts, but there are other

experts who take the opposite view. A process needs to one fold in this

country where the expression of the Scottish people need to be -- needs

to be confirmed in a referendum and if it is yes, and I think a pathway

should be discovered for the independence of Scotland. Is it a

case of taking a choice when it comes to constitutional law?

Probably it is but the very act of questioning Scotland's status, if

it becomes independent, is also to introduce uncertainty. The message

today is, why not sit tight and enjoy the best of both worlds?

have greater influence within the UK as well. As part of the United

Kingdom, we play a unique and leading position in the world, as a

member of the UN Security Council, the EU, NATO, the G8, the G20 and

the Commonwealth. Membership of these organisations mean a vet who

have significant influence over international decisions that affect

us in Scotland. Scotland's place in the world would be ventilated in

the course of the next 18 months. But ultimately, its international

rights and obligations are as likely to be decided by raw

politics as refined law. I'm joined now in the studio by

Derek Mackay, the local government minister at Holyrood, and from

Westminster by David Mundell, Scotland Office minister in the

Coalition Government. Good evening. The SNP says near colonial attitude

to Scotland's position as a nation and breathtaking arrogance, this

opinion from the two academics. It's a bit of a shock to the

dignity of Scots who saw themselves as a dignity -- equal part in the

treaty of Union. I think that is what they were saying this morning,

Andrew, but as the day has progressed and they read the

opinion after they had released their press release, I think they

came to a different view. This opinion by the world's leading

expert on such matters of sex and the basis on which Scotland could

move to independence. What I think the SNP don't like about the

opinion is that it suggests that is quite a difficult thing to do

because they would be placed in a position of having to negotiate

14,000 agreements, having to set out Scotland's place in the world.

I think that is possible if Scotland votes to do that but I

think it is not straightforward. The suggestion that always seems to

come from the SNP is that these things will be automatic, it would

be straightforward to become an independent country. It's not. It's

difficult. If the people of Scotland choose to do it, then it

will happen but it is not straightforward. It is not

straightforward, it's difficult. As the report authors say it it is

your -- cure hope that Scotland can be... It's inconclusive. It's

pretty damning for you. David Mundell is already trying to

rewrite the report. Professor Crawford's own words is that it is

not necessarily going to be difficult to renegotiate treaties,

EU membership as possible and UN membership is straightforward.

Incidentally, timescale from yes vote in the referendum to

independence itself, he also described as realistic. Those

comments are helpful. What we maybe don't agree with his some of the

interpretation or misinterpretation from the UK government which is

trying to spin it as quite a negative intervention when the

thrust of the document is actually that it is possible. It is not

going to be difficult. Talking about reinterpretation, the SNP put

out a press release mentioning Professor Crawford comments about

Europe. They missed out the Robert Key point that Scotland, as a new

state will have to become a member of the EU by a treaty of accession.

But key quote was missed out in the SNP press release. What you have

also missed out in describing that is the point that Professor

Crawford made which is because there is no... There is no

precedent and therefore he could only speculate. That element of the

report is pure speculation. Speculation from the academics and

the President's they quoted, the examples were rather odd and

inappropriate. They were colonial examples, for example they quoted

Ireland which had a very different relationship with England compared

with Scotland and the break-up of I do not think that is the case.

The report examines the break up of countries in modern times. It looks

set different circumstances and how those have been interpreted did.

You come to the conclusion if Scotland was to be independent, it

would be a separate state which would begin its journey in the

world and start making relationships with lots of other

countries. These things would not happen automatically. These things

would not happen automatically. It would be difficult for you at local

government. We will have time to do it properly. It will be great to

have Scotland in a proper negotiating position. The report

says the treaties, some of which are irrelevant, a reader does Ian -

- the negotiating them would not be a major issue. It is by a

renegotiation. That is the deal we should get from the Edinburgh

agreement. We want a joint statement of processor based on the

proposition we should share factual information. We can do that. What

is undermining Scotland is the way some UK politicians tell us we are

not equal in the UK. That is a proposition to which SNP object.

are not equal, we are regarded as having nothing, we have to start

with nothing. Does that apply to the share of the national debt?

do not share that interpretation at all. That does not come through in

the opinion. The opinion we have published in full so they can be a

proper debate makes clear is what happens when you become separate.

Scotland would become like that. There would be a negotiation

clearly with the EU, with other international bodies, but there

will be a negotiation within the UK as to what the share of assets and

liabilities between Scotland and the rest of the UK would be. The UK

Government cannot have it both ways. You cannot be just starting out and

carry forward the national debt the UK has managed to accrue. We have

strong opinions, legal opinions, academic opinions, that show is

Scotland would be an equal success estate with the rest of the UK.

That has been published by two academics. I look forward to these

opinions are being published. Fundamental misunderstanding

between the law in relation to institutions and how they are dealt

with and the negotiations that would take up in relation to the

break up of Britain, these are two different things. He is trying to

conflate them. There will be a process of negotiation. That is

what the SNP are saying. You say you want positive arguments. How

can you say that when we heard you have shot his argument down in

flames? We have said some of the interventions are helpful. The

timescale is realistic. It is not a problem in terms of renegotiating

treaties and membership of international bodies. They will not

be too difficult. That is helpful intervention. We will have to leave

it there. Thank you. The news of Pope Benedict's resignations for

health reasons has been met with surprise. The head of the Catholic

Church here in Scotland added his voice to those expressing sadness

at the decision. Cardinal Keith O'Brien will be the only British

Cardinal who can vote in the conclave. September 2010 saw the

first state visit of a Pope to Britain. Draped in tartan, Pope

Benedict began his tour in Edinburgh where he was greeted by

around 200,000 people lining the streets of the capital. He then

travelled to Glasgow and said an open-air mass in front of more than

60,000 worshippers. This morning, as the news sent in, some of those

who were there said prayers. I am sad. But if he is ill and ailing,

he deserves a bit of rest. I wish him all the best and hope his

health get better. God bless him. He became Pope in 2005, after the

death of John Paul II. He was 78 at the time, one of the oldest new

Pope's in history. Shortly after taking over, the church was

buffeted by the scandal over child sex abuse by priests. This morning,

he made the announcement during a routine gathering of cardinals in

Rome. He told them he felt he was to alter to continue at the age of

85. Even his closest aides were taken aback. But there has not been

his resignation of a Pope in almost 600 years. Although unexpected,

some of those who met him said it was not a total surprise. It is in

the mould of the man. He is, for he is reserved and a small man

physically, when he decides to do something, he really does do it. He

thinks it through. He is quite surprising. Pope Benedict will

officially leave the post at the end of the month. The boat -- the

Vatican says a new Pope will be elected before Easter. There are no

clear front-runners to take on the position. Whoever takes over will

be expected to guide the church into a new era and inspire respect

in new audiences around the world. A I am joined by John Haldane,

Professor of Philosophy at St Andrews University and consultor to

the Vatican Pontifical Council for Culture. Thank you for joining me.

What was your reaction on hearing the news this morning? A great deal

of Catholics were very shocked. Can it be a positive move for the man

himself and the church? I have heard the word shocked used a lot.

I was not shot. I did not expected but it did not come as a great

surprise. Best match I was not shocked. He has done the right

thing. He has been thinking about it for some while. In retrospect,

one can see it, not being signalled, but he did not make a secret of the

fact he considered if someone was ailing, they should consider that

as Pope. It has been a difficult decision because he is conscious of

the fact of this will create speculation of one sort or another.

It has not been done before. He will judge correctly the pace and

the demand on the this office are now so considerable and I would add

to that the fact one aspect of the life of the church he has not been

able to, as it were, address in the way it needs to be addressed is the

internal management of the Vatican. He recognises somebody younger who

is perhaps more acquainted with the ways of the world would be better

placed to do that. You have met with him quite regularly. You go to

the Vatican and see him there. How did you gauge his health when you

saw him face-to-face? He has been a link. Audiences have been cut short.

They have often been delayed. In the period when he visited Great

Britain, at that stage, he was -- the planning had to live for three

hours rest over the course of the day. He was having to conserve his

energy. He has been committed to writing the reflections on the life

of Jesus of Nazareth. He has completed that and it has been

published. That was the plan. I think he feels he has done that and

addressed certain matters in prayer. He has travelled, which he does not

particularly like. He recognises that is it. He wants a bit of time

at the end to recollect before what I think will not be many more years

of life. This year was designated as the year of faith in attempt to

the evangelise Europe. He was trying to fight socialism. How

successful has it been? -- he was trying to fight secularism. Had he

been struggling, I think he was beginning to struggle, he was

walking with a stick, he was having difficulty getting out of chairs,

audiences were curtailed, he was tired, that would become more

apparent and I think he would have found himself failing to make

commitments. It is better now the announcement has been made. There

will be a new Pope by the end of March. That leaves the period for

the new man to get out and try to address some of these issues. The

larger issues will wait but the year of faith, whoever comes to

that office will now throw themselves into it. We have been

hearing a lot churches are being ripped apart by gay marriage, gay

clergy, female ordination. How it will these issues be played out in

the Vatican, particularly with the new man? Will they be looking for a

reformer? Movement on these issues? We think of the office of Pope like

the US President. The new man comes in with new policies. There does

not work like that. These people see themselves as receiving what

has been handed on and then handing it on intact -- handing it on

intact. There will not be much change in that way. But are

concerns that have filled the press are somewhat provincial when you

look at the larger picture. One in six people on earth are a Roman

Catholic. They will come to the 4th. These issues that we are obsessed