Scottish Politics Thread

Drillling rights have been sold, extraction is expensive in the existing North Sea fields due to costs and aging infrastructure etc, it’s very expensive (as technologies improve it will get cheaper) to extract from other ‘new’ fields (which have been known about since the 70’s) which the Nationalists chops off about continually.

Companies only pay revenue on profit so the long and the short of it is oil companies will sit on their assets until financially it suits them. This means, often, favourable tax incentives from the government which I don’t think an independent SG would be able to do so ultimately you can get held to ransom.

We’re a bit late to the party to follow Norway’s lead (and I don’t much like their tax rates) and when Jim Sillars (bless him) mentioned nationalising the Oil Industry in Scotland a few years ago I about pissed myself laughing...... but let them continue to peddle their ‘views’ to people who can’t see the wood for the trees.
Not arguing that but I can forsee a time when oil from the ME becomes a no-no and oil from Europe becomes a much more viable proposition.

Unfortunately Nationalising any industry is a possibility with the SNP in government (as has been shown recently), or Labour in fact, but it is laughable for anyone to think it would improve things for the industry or Scotland.
 
Honestly, Scotland would probably have had the best chance of being independent and successful back in the day, when the oil was discovered and being drilled. Now most of it is gone.
 

Mick9abf

War Hero
Not arguing that but I can forsee a time when oil from the ME becomes a no-no and oil from Europe becomes a much more viable proposition.
In theory yes but my understanding of the cost and quality of the cheaper oils from the ME is that they are more suitable for refining to petrol where the Brent Crude or ‘heavy oil’ is better suited to refining for diesel (not good or popular since the Germans got caught lying about emissions) and high quality lubricants etc; something to do with the composition and sulphur content and whether it is ‘sour’, I may also be totally speaking out of my arrse!
 
In theory yes but my understanding of the cost and quality of the cheaper oils from the ME is that they are more suitable for refining to petrol where the Brent Crude or ‘heavy oil’ is better suited to refining for diesel (not good or popular since the Germans got caught lying about emissions) and high quality lubricants etc; something to do with the composition and sulphur content and whether it is ‘sour’, I may also be totally speaking out of my arrse!

 

Mick9abf

War Hero

Knew there was something to do with it being better quality due to lower sulphur hence the trading term.

Unfortunately the industry is still quite fragile in the North East of Scotland hence the reason that the SG probably doesn’t like to mention it.

The empty industrial estates containing companies supporting the industry surrounding Aberdeen certainly reflect it.
 
Last edited:
Knew there was something to do with it being better quality due to lower sulphur hence the trading term.

Unfortunately the industry is still quite fragile in the North East of Scotland hence the reason that the SG probably doesn’t like to mention it.

The empty industrial estates containing companies supporting the industry surrounding Aberdeen certainly reflect it.
Seen a documentary a while ago which suggested that most biz in the North Sea oil biz is these days mainly in the decommissioning of oil rigs and things?
 

Moral of the story, when expressing your opinion ensure you make it clear it is your own personal and not official party point if view

If you do dare attack any public figure, check your own cupboard first ensuring no skeletons come to life
 

Moral of the story, when expressing your opinion ensure you make it clear it is your own personal and not official party point if view

If you do dare attack any public figure, check your own cupboard first ensuring no skeletons come to life

PS: Eck Salmond should speak to George Galloway on wearing Teflon
 

Mick9abf

War Hero
Seen a documentary a while ago which suggested that most biz in the North Sea oil biz is these days mainly in the decommissioning of oil rigs and things?
Partially correct, they continue to extract in some areas but as mentioned the cost to do so, partially due to aging infrastructure, and partly to do with the cost of wages is expensive compared to say the ME or to a degree the US where they can pull it out the ground, on land, for cheaper.

New harbour extension in Cove Bay, well Torry really, is coming along albeit probably 20 years too late, where dreams of decommissioning and cruise ships are aplenty.

Why you’d want to go on a cruise and visit Aberdeen on your holidays is anyone’s guess as it’s an absolute shitehole and it’ll probably still be cheaper to tow rigs to Gdańsk and tear them apart there but who knows.

The ‘new’ fields which the Nationalists go on about are not new, the have been known about for decades and drilling in some areas has started (new state of the art rig on STV news last week) however they are only viable due to new technology as it’s proper rough up there as you can imagine.

There is oil and quite a lot, however if extracting it costs too much the companies won’t bother and will wait until a time it suits them.

The long and short is if you were basing your fiscal dreams on black gold in an independent Scotland that ship sailed a long time ago.
 
Honestly, Scotland would probably have had the best chance of being independent and successful back in the day, when the oil was discovered and being drilled. Now most of it is gone.
We have the infamous McCrone report to thank. Not entirely, but in it's day it provided another crucial nail in the Independence coffin. That report is not well recognised, much remembered, or referred to these days.
Probably the reason for that is, only the report's very existance was acknowledged in 1974, but the detailed content was supressed. It was deliberately manipulated by providing minor mentions in papers like The Guardian, 8th page , column 6 etc. In a way, and so was expertly hidden away in plain sight from the public Red Tops but it hit the UK goverment between the eyes. Surprisingly to me it was not made Top Secret, but "suppressed" cleverly. The less the public ( especially Scottish) saw it the better...for some. We can only muse at the vitriolic firestorm of Scots "activities" had it been openly published. It had to be swept under the public carpet..and no wonder if you read it now.

An independent Scotland could have, under a very different circumstance of a post referendum Independence vote, have developed into a lush Kuwait but it was not to be. We can only guess what begging bowl fiscal sticking plasters would have been provided by Westminster( if any) pending "our oil" revenues to buy "ready cash" would have worked. Would we have been forced to borrow from the International banks and IMF ourselves? I'd guess...probably. Perhaps at very preferential rates...with a "latter day" McCrone Report to back up Scotland's Norwegian-esque projected credit rating. Who can say? It's "Much ado about Nothing" now.

Like Norway, Scotland would also likely have accumulated a vast per-capita slush-funds in gold reserves, Gov. bonds...all the usual wealth piling stuff. However, this would have resulted in numerous fiscal detriments & impacts within the rest of the UK, according to McCrone.

Investments in technology, health, education, public services and social infrastructure & industry would have seen steady increments. Norway owes a staggering 12% of it's GDP to oil alone...or it was such couple of years ago. Suffice to say, Norway is not exactly wondering where it's next dinner is coming from, nor will it ever likely have to in the foreseeable future. It's just too well run and...clever. It always had a huge fish and metal ore industry before.
"Their oil" share pretty much turbo'd the country forward as they could never have imagined. An icing on their already very nice cake of a windfall, rather than a major source of crucial income.

It's important to recognise that certain areas in Scotland did enjoy an oil related boom period, but that is pretty much over. Just look at property prices for example on Zoopla etc in Grampian Region from say 10 years back and now. Not a great story. In short, unlike Norway, not a lot of future investment & revenue driven planning...we did not have direct ownership then, or now, of oil related revenue tax dollars after all.

The death of Indy in the '70s.
By his own recent consideration the 1974 McCrone Report, ordered by Westminster, is no longer as relevant as it was, but certain aspects still have some traction in his view. In 1974 it was a pivotal decision maker.

Link:
McCrone reacts as famous Scottish independence oil report published in newspaper

Extract:
*"An independent Scotland could now expect to have massive surpluses both on its budget and on its balance of payments and with the proper husbanding of resources this situation could last for a very long time into the future.”

He also, in balance, referred to an initial "embarrassment of wealth" for Scotland but warned it would decline or level out eventually...as indeed it began to in the mid-80's. By then? Billions already salted away (?) into a lowly populated country. He also delivered quite fiendishly complex "what ifs" that would cause both Scotland & Westminster immense headaches...like an exchange rate within 2 years of £1.00 Scots to £1.20 English..for a kick off.

*That sentence alone sent shivers right through Westminster, The B of E, and the Treasury.
They knew McCrone was right. So did a few SNP politicians but too few Scots.
I've said before here (being pragmatic) the Westminster mafia had no alternative but to refuse permission for an Indy Ref. The Uk was in deep debt, recessional impacts abound, and oil alleviated a meaningful part of that.
Who could blame them?
Just bad timing depending on which side of Hadrian's wall and your viewpoint.
If you wore a bowler...." Ya-hoooo"!
If you wore a tartan tammy...F-yoooh.

Sadly, various UK goverments went on to squander oil revenues paying off IMF debts as just one black hole.
Norway was smart...very smart indeed. Visit there...best of everything & largely pristine. Bloody expensive to live there though. And then look at shithole GB has become over these decades with it's 1.8 trillion national debt and collapsing public service infrastructures. Well done chaps.....
One irony of today is those down south who want rid of the Scots due, amongst other matters, to being a fiscal cartwheel today (?) around the Treasury's neck cannot get rid of us now thanks to Westminster 1970's politics outwith anyone's control. Quite funny that bit. And people wonder what gives alternative Parties to the Westminster old Double Two their oxygen.

Personally, I always regarded the vapid "Oor Oil" screechers an undignified embarrassment.
It never was Oor Oil given Scotland had to remain part of the UK as it still is, but I'll confess to regretting the way things turned out. It's just a great pity the UK did not capitalise upon the now declining boom-times the way Norway did. Just have a look for yourselves at Norway's per-capta populative surpluses, and mirror these against UK per-capita debt. Not much more I can say really other than it's a real shocker.

In 2018,The World Bank and World Economic Forum adjudicated Norway as the wealthiest and most inclusive country in the world. The World Bank declared Norway to be the richest country in the world . One of the keystone reasons was it's intelligent oil revenue management which in part bankrolled it's national development & infrastructures like managed aluminium, nickel, fish exports, which combined are truly massive. The oil exports are shrinking but still account for billions in dollars per annum. Refined petrolium on it's own is around 2 billion P/a. Don't forget, the population is around 700,000 less than Scotland!

We will never know, but perhaps, with a very hypothetical guess, an independent Scotland may have been next on the list. With, like Norway, a small popualtion to consider...... why not? Westminster saw it coming after all..indeed, it seemed obvious to them. A hard Scots currency, just for starters, would have grenaded the English economy according to McCrone & his Economic Think Tank. Real havoc apparently. I've not studied that bit, so I'm not sure what he meant but clearly the UK could and would not allow a population of less than 6 millions to hold fiscal guns to it's head to over ten times it's punching weight by holding a high ground of command.

Today? I'm no where near as certain 100% Independence is a safe choice for Scotland now the mainstream wealth flow is so drastically reduced. On the one hand, we all witness how small population countries like the Scandanavians have developed over the centuries, so there are models of thriving independence there to study. On the other hand, Scotland would need to go to boot-camp from zero. Partial devolution powers at Holyrood are all very well as an emergent constitutional nursery, but Edinburgh is not an historic & experienced Oslo or Stockholm or Copenhagen. Neither do I have much faith " in the management" any more. Thats quite something for me to admit.
 
Last edited:

Dredd

LE
I'm just gonnae buy a job lot of SLR's, point to the south and say "yir wages are thataway lads", they can live off English plunder until we force England into a humiliating and costly surrender. If there's one thing I've learned from this site, it's that the SLR is unbeatable.
SAF.jpg
 

Dredd

LE

Moral of the story, when expressing your opinion ensure you make it clear it is your own personal and not official party point if view

If you do dare attack any public figure, check your own cupboard first ensuring no skeletons come to life
Added to that, the joke was not funny.

Seriously, it was bereft of humour. There is unwise, there is inappropriate, and there was this which didn't even achieve the purported goal of raising a chuckle. But yet again, someone is crucified for one comment on social media. The march towards a population homogeneity blancmanges continues unabated, ably assisted by the ever vigilant useful idiots.

Huzzah.
 
Added to that, the joke was not funny.

Seriously, it was bereft of humour. There is unwise, there is inappropriate, and there was this which didn't even achieve the purported goal of raising a chuckle. But yet again, someone is crucified for one comment on social media. The march towards a population homogeneity blancmanges continues unabated, ably assisted by the ever vigilant useful idiots.

Huzzah.
Took me more than one reading to realise her humour, so certainly not a Fringe Best Joke winner. I have to say though to be suspended for that is more than a tad over zealous, can you imagine the reaction for a squaddie joke about miscarriages?
 

Mick9abf

War Hero
We have the infamous McCrone report to thank. Not entirely, but in it's day it provided another crucial nail in the Independence coffin. That report is not well recognised, much remembered, or referred to these days.
Probably the reason for that is, only the report's very existance was acknowledged in 1974, but the detailed content was supressed. It was deliberately manipulated by providing minor mentions in papers like The Guardian, 8th page , column 6 etc. In a way, and so was expertly hidden away in plain sight from the public Red Tops but it hit the UK goverment between the eyes. Surprisingly to me it was not made Top Secret, but "suppressed" cleverly. The less the public ( especially Scottish) saw it the better...for some. We can only muse at the vitriolic firestorm of Scots "activities" had it been openly published. It had to be swept under the public carpet..and no wonder if you read it now.

An independent Scotland could have, under a very different circumstance of a post referendum Independence vote, have developed into a lush Kuwait but it was not to be. We can only guess what begging bowl fiscal sticking plasters would have been provided by Westminster( if any) pending "our oil" revenues to buy "ready cash" would have worked. Would we have been forced to borrow from the International banks and IMF ourselves? I'd guess...probably. Perhaps at very preferential rates...with a "latter day" McCrone Report to back up Scotland's Norwegian-esque projected credit rating. Who can say? It's "Much ado about Nothing" now.

Like Norway, Scotland would also likely have accumulated a vast per-capita slush-funds in gold reserves, Gov. bonds...all the usual wealth piling stuff. However, this would have resulted in numerous fiscal detriments & impacts within the rest of the UK, according to McCrone.

Investments in technology, health, education, public services and social infrastructure & industry would have seen steady increments. Norway owes a staggering 12% of it's GDP to oil alone...or it was such couple of years ago. Suffice to say, Norway is not exactly wondering where it's next dinner is coming from, nor will it ever likely have to in the foreseeable future. It's just too well run and...clever. It always had a huge fish and metal ore industry before.
"Their oil" share pretty much turbo'd the country forward as they could never have imagined. An icing on their already very nice cake of a windfall, rather than a major source of crucial income.

It's important to recognise that certain areas in Scotland did enjoy an oil related boom period, but that is pretty much over. Just look at property prices for example on Zoopla etc in Grampian Region from say 10 years back and now. Not a great story. In short, unlike Norway, not a lot of future investment & revenue driven planning...we did not have direct ownership then, or now, of oil related revenue tax dollars after all.

The death of Indy in the '70s.
By his own recent consideration the 1974 McCrone Report, ordered by Westminster, is no longer as relevant as it was, but certain aspects still have some traction in his view. In 1974 it was a pivotal decision maker.

Link:
McCrone reacts as famous Scottish independence oil report published in newspaper

Extract:
*"An independent Scotland could now expect to have massive surpluses both on its budget and on its balance of payments and with the proper husbanding of resources this situation could last for a very long time into the future.”

He also, in balance, referred to an initial "embarrassment of wealth" for Scotland but warned it would decline or level out eventually...as indeed it began to in the mid-80's. By then? Billions already salted away (?) into a lowly populated country. He also delivered quite fiendishly complex "what ifs" that would cause both Scotland & Westminster immense headaches...like an exchange rate within 2 years of £1.00 Scots to £1.20 English..for a kick off.

*That sentence alone sent shivers right through Westminster, The B of E, and the Treasury.
They knew McCrone was right. So did a few SNP politicians but too few Scots.
I've said before here (being pragmatic) the Westminster mafia had no alternative but to refuse permission for an Indy Ref. The Uk was in deep debt, recessional impacts abound, and oil alleviated a meaningful part of that.
Who could blame them?
Just bad timing depending on which side of Hadrian's wall and your viewpoint.
If you wore a bowler...." Ya-hoooo"!
If you wore a tartan tammy...F-yoooh.

Sadly, various UK goverments went on to squander oil revenues paying off IMF debts as just one black hole.
Norway was smart...very smart indeed. Visit there...best of everything & largely pristine. Bloody expensive to live there though. And then look at shithole GB has become over these decades with it's 1.8 trillion national debt and collapsing public service infrastructures. Well done chaps.....
One irony of today is those down south who want rid of the Scots due, amongst other matters, to being a fiscal cartwheel today (?) around the Treasury's neck cannot get rid of us now thanks to Westminster 1970's politics outwith anyone's control. Quite funny that bit. And people wonder what gives alternative Parties to the Westminster old Double Two their oxygen.

Personally, I always regarded the vapid "Oor Oil" screechers an undignified embarrassment.
It never was Oor Oil given Scotland had to remain part of the UK as it still is, but I'll confess to regretting the way things turned out. It's just a great pity the UK did not capitalise upon the now declining boom-times the way Norway did. Just have a look for yourselves at Norway's per-capta populative surpluses, and mirror these against UK per-capita debt. Not much more I can say really other than it's a real shocker.

In 2018,The World Bank and World Economic Forum adjudicated Norway as the wealthiest and most inclusive country in the world. The World Bank declared Norway to be the richest country in the world . One of the keystone reasons was it's intelligent oil revenue management which in part bankrolled it's national development & infrastructures like managed aluminium, nickel, fish exports, which combined are truly massive. The oil exports are shrinking but still account for billions in dollars per annum. Refined petrolium on it's own is around 2 billion P/a. Don't forget, the population is around 700,000 less than Scotland!

We will never know, but perhaps, with a very hypothetical guess, an independent Scotland may have been next on the list. With, like Norway, a small popualtion to consider...... why not? Westminster saw it coming after all..indeed, it seemed obvious to them. A hard Scots currency, just for starters, would have grenaded the English economy according to McCrone & his Economic Think Tank. Real havoc apparently. I've not studied that bit, so I'm not sure what he meant but clearly the UK could and would not allow a population of less than 6 millions to hold fiscal guns to it's head to over ten times it's punching weight by holding a high ground of command.

Today? I'm no where near as certain 100% Independence is a safe choice for Scotland now the mainstream wealth flow is so drastically reduced. On the one hand, we all witness how small population countries like the Scandanavians have developed over the centuries, so there are models of thriving independence there to study. On the other hand, Scotland would need to go to boot-camp from zero. Partial devolution powers at Holyrood are all very well as an emergent constitutional nursery, but Edinburgh is not an historic & experienced Oslo or Stockholm or Copenhagen. Neither do I have much faith " in the management" any more. Thats quite something for me to admit.
Yes perhaps a boat missed, you do wonder if our inept politicians and at the time strong trade unions were to blame for the U.K. squandering money.

Anyhow fast forward almost 4 decades and we are where we are. I have a friend in Norway involved, or rather currently unemployed due to the downturn in the oil and has been for two years and he is frankly on his arrse. Yes they have reserves of cash etc but that’s needed for the long term.

It’s been on the horizon for a while (ten years) and although their not in as much of a mess as other European countries it’s not all coke’n’whores.... well for the ordinary Norwegian with the cost of living there anyway.



 
Last edited:
Yes perhaps a boat missed, you do wonder if our inept politicians and at the time strong trade unions were to blame for the U.K. squandering money.

Anyhow fast forward almost 4 decades and we are where we are. I have a friend in Norway involved, or rather currently unemployed due to the downturn in the oil and has been for two years and he is frankly on his arrse. Yes they have reserves of cash etc but that’s needed for the long term.

It’s been on the horizon for a while (ten years) and although their not in as much of a mess as other European countries it’s not all coke’n’whores.... well for the ordinary Norwegian with the cost of living there anyway.



Oh, I know. My lad is in Copenhagen right now with Danish GF and travelling to both Sweden & Norway. She has rellos in Norway..an uncle I think..who is going back on the boats. At least Norway has an eye watering cash reserve to see them right. Cash reserves eh? Whassat then.....
 
As Scotland officially has the biggest budget deficit in Europe and is fully dependent upon the rest of the UK to find the 12.6 billion we spend more than we take in on taxes I d say that any credible independence campaign is a total non starter - if the cult were serious they would be cutting spending to achieve a balanced budget - there is a cat in hells chance that the EU would allow an independent Scotland to apply and be accepted for EU membership when we would be a massive drain on their funds. Sadly NS and her govt will continue to mislead the cult faithful that the dream ( nightmare ) is achievable
 
Not unless they adopt the Euro....oh and don't forget Schengen!
To join the EU Scotland would have no choice but to adopt both. The SG plan to keep the £ would I suspect be for the term leading from the English oppressor until they are ruled by the EU oppressor. They are a long standing supporter of freedom ........................of movement in this case.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
As Scotland officially has the biggest budget deficit in Europe and is fully dependent upon the rest of the UK to find the 12.6 billion we spend more than we take in on taxes I d say that any credible independence campaign is a total non starter - if the cult were serious they would be cutting spending to achieve a balanced budget - there is a cat in hells chance that the EU would allow an independent Scotland to apply and be accepted for EU membership when we would be a massive drain on their funds. Sadly NS and her govt will continue to mislead the cult faithful that the dream ( nightmare ) is achievable
The argument os that there are various elements with the deficit side of the GERS figures over which the Scottish Government have no control as it is Westminster spend and we are apportioned a section of that spend. This would not be the case in an IScotland.

(Wales and NI both had higher budget deficits than us so not quite true)
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top