The Big Scottish Independence Debate

[+DoofersDad]

To even things up on the "Yes" v "No" viewpoint you could skip Oddquine's as well.  That will save you at least 4 month's reading.

[Oddquine]

To even things up on the "Yes" v "No" viewpoint you could skip Oddquine's as well.  That will save you at least 4 month's reading.

 

Oddquine does, at least mostly give links to be studied to inform punters how her long-standing opinions are confirmed....which is not necessarily the MSM, but is sometimes.... .which is more than the anti crowd do as they expect us to take it on trust that things will get no worse in the Union, despite link evidence to the contrary........ and here is the next one from me...

 

http://derekbateman1.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/estates-of-the-nation/

 

 

This is what I call love-bombing.....

.http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/letters/topic-of-the-week-england-and-independence.23507786 (To be fair I don't know if it is all available to anyone but me, the Herald viewing restrictions are a monumental pain)....but if not...happy to C&P it for anyone interested.

Edited February 24, 2014 by Oddquine

[Scarlet Pimple]

That remark about Charlie Bannerman's posts being drivel is too much for me. That's not called for and is close to abuse.

 

He has been on this site for years and years longer than you and his thousands of posts compared to yours speaks for itself. In comparison  yours are miniscule.

 

Whether you dislike his posts or not is irrelevant. Here's the thing--his heart lies just as much with Caley Thistle as mine or yours. And he has contributed greatly to the history of ICT by writing a couple of books which is VERY hard and dedicated work indeed.

 

Take it easy ...eh? Credit where credit is due.

 

Sorry we had to beat you guys at Curling in the recent Olympics for the gold  but them's the breaks. I must admit  that our guys seem superhuman and didn't seem to put a foot wrong, both women and men, in the curling anyway.

 

What a fantastic visual feast wasn't it? Some great sportsmanship too .

 

Cheers

[Charles Bannerman]

That remark about Charlie Bannerman's posts being drivel is too much for me. That's not called for and is close to abuse.

 

Scarlet... please don't be concerned on my account. I actually take the post and the expression in question as welcome indications that I continue to annoy the Separatist lobby which has been opne of my life's missions since my youth. And hey! Do you not think the term "drivel", by the normal standard of nationalist Yah-boo politics, is in reality getting quite close to the top of the pile?

Indeed the said "derogatory" post put almost as big a smile on my face as this piece of news from the heartland of our oil industry....

 

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/3587342

 

PS ... Oddquine, should somebody not be telling Derek Bateman that he needs to get out a bit more?

[Alex MacLeod]

Another clever poll Charles. "support has dipped across the north and north east". Are they telling us that this is a poll of a cross section of the population of the whole of the north and north east. I doubt it. More likely sent someone to a town centre somewhere. Also 500 is hardly an accurate reflection of the population. As far as these polls go I'd be willing to bet that if I carried out a poll in say Elgin and then another in Huntly I'd get two different sets of results. The only poll thats going to tell us accurately how the country will vote is the one being held in September across the whole country.

[robbylad]

Naelifts, to save you some time don't bother with Charles Bannerman's they are just drivel

Charles thinks they are comedy gold though.

[Oddquine]

Is it only me who gets the impression that the debate is nearly all about what the rUK will lose if Scotland votes for independence, rather than how Scotland will benefit by staying in the Union!

 

As Lord Healey said: “I think [Westminster politicians] are concerned about Scotland taking the oil. I think they are worried stiff about it. I think we would suffer enormously if the income from Scottish oil stopped but if the Scots want it, they should have it and we would just need to adjust. But I would think Scotland could survive perfectly well, economically, if it was independent.”

 

Nothing to do at all with what is best for Scotland and the citizens of Scotland.......it's all about the oil (and Trident) and Westminster control and not about the poverty, the foodbanks, the crap infrastructure etc and Westminster's policies which are geared towards London and the South and don't work in Scotland.

The debate, until it doesn't do the No campaign any favours, appears to be going to focus on the oil industry for a while...hence the relatively sudden parachuting of the Westminster Cabinet into Scotland for the third time in 300+ years. Is it just a co-incidence that Cameron has chosen to hold this once in a 100 years appearance to show "the caring face of Westminster" (and I'm not even going to mention Brigadoon ) in Aberdeen seven or so miles from where the Scottish Government is holding their long arranged equivalent? 

 

It rather begs the question, though, that if the UK can, (as stated below) boost the oil and gas sector by £200 billion over the next 20 years, why on earth has the UK Government waited until now to even think about it? And is it going to happen before the vote on September 18th...or is it a carrot for (possible) implementation after the vote, as are the promises of some unquantified kind of further devolution...... at some stage.....if enough members of each UK party can agree on the form it will take.....and then if the Westminster Parliament can be encouraged to vote for it...(preferably before voting to remove the Barnett Formula).

 

We are expected to vote for this kind of lying by omission......
“The UK Government has spent 30 years suppressing its own report telling the Scots how rich oil would make them with independence.”  (The Independent, December 2005)
and this kind of "benefit"  of being in this Union ....
“Poverty in Scotland at its worst in 30 years.”   (The Herald, March 2013)
 
When it comes to the oil, they don't even have the native wit to read from the same hymn sheet....so who do we believe.....the people who have continually said  the  kind of thing noted below, over the decades, at the same time as they are spending the proceeds of the windfall as if the income was going to be an eternally available resource.......or those who base their forecasts not on scaring the Scottish people away from support of the SNP in the earlier days, and Independence now, but on the forecasts of the oil industry and a sensible taxation regime to give more certainty to the industry than 16 UK taxation changes have in the past 10 years?

We have had, from Westminster directly, or via the MSM over the years........

“Oil and gas will run out by the end of the 1980s.”(Tory MPs Timothy Eggart and Peter Ross, January 1982)
“Oil will be running out by 1989.”   (Labour MP Jeff Rooker, April 1984)
“The oil will run out by 1994.”  (Labour MP Tony Benn, May 1979)
“The oil will run out by 2000.”  (Labour MP Ioan Evans, February 1980)
“North Sea oil could run out by 2018.”  (The Guardian, May 2008)
“North Sea oil will last for another 50 years.”   (Daily Express, September 2012)
“North Sea oil will last another 100 years.”  (The Telegraph, June 2008)

“There’s no bright future for oil revenue.”  (Dumfries And Galloway Standard, March 2013)
yet also......
“North Sea oil and gas have a long and bright future.”   (UK energy minister John Hayes, March 2013)

And while this kind of misinformation was being trumpeted loud and long, we have also had.....

“Alistair Darling is pocketing an extra £13m A DAY thanks to soaring oil prices.” (The Sun, April 2008)
and
“High oil and gas prices could lead to a Treasury tax windfall.”  (Alistair Darling on BBC News, June 2008)
however
“Soaring oil prices could hold back the economic recovery.”    (Alistair Darling in the Evening Standard, June 2009)
followed within months by
“Collapsing oil revenue will turn the whole UK into a banana republic!”   (The Telegraph, November 2009)

And it continues to this day to fulfill the "make sure Scotland thinks oil is only a blessing if it flows into the UK Treasury and will only be a curse to Scotland if it is independent, because the UK needs it to try to balance their books" self-serving mantra.
 

After all, the UK can use this......“North Sea oil to give George Osborne £25bn boost.”  (The Telegraph, February 2013) to compensate the public purse for some of the taxes they allow Corporate businesses to avoid, as the Tory/Coalition Government happily trashes the poor and disabled and prepare to do worse  until 2015, and even worse if re-elected. Just think what we in Scotland could have done for our economy with that £25 billion!

So if Scotland votes for independence

“Scotland faces bill of £30bn after North Sea oil runs out.”(The Scotsman, April 2012)
“Declining oil revenue will leave Scotland worse off than the UK.” (The Telegraph, November 2012)
“The trouble with oil is that it’s a tremendously volatile diminishing asset.”  (Alistair Darling in the Paisley Daily Express, December 2012)
“Falling oil revenues will mean savage public spending cuts or tax rises.”   (Vince Cable in the Scotsman, March 2013)
“Oil revenue is volatile, and declining, and cheap gas from fracking will probably make it completely worthless.”  (The Scotsman, March 2013)
“It’s not Scotland’s oil, it’s Shetland’s.”    (Tavish Scott in The Shetland Times, March 2013)

But if we vote to stay with the Union......it all changes.....

“Oil and gas decline to halt as investment booms.”    (Reuters, January 2013)
“Oil and gas will play a vital role in British energy needs for decades to come.”     (Vince Cable in the Daily Record, March 2013)
“There are probably billions of barrels still to be found in Scottish waters, which is why we’re investing billions of pounds in looking for it.”    (New York Times, March 2013)
“Analysts believe that Clair, along with other developments [in Scottish waters to the west of Shetland], could lead to the Atlantic overtaking the North Sea as the UK’s biggest oil-producing region within 20 years.”  (BBC News, March 2013)


We are, of course, too wee and much too stupid to cope with the oil....

“Scotland will be so rich from oil you won’t be able to handle it by yourselves!”  (The Telegraph, March 2013)

"SCOTLAND could lose out on £200billion worth of oil over the next 20 years if the country becomes independent, David Cameron warned yesterday.  The Prime Minister pledged to fast-track recommendations that could help to pump four billion extra barrels from the North Sea.   He said only the “broad shoulders” of the UK economy could subsidise the cost of recovering the hard-to-get oil."  (Daily Record 24/2/2014) (just as if we hadn't  lost out on on every penny it has brought in to the UK to date! )

although   on the "broad shoulders" of the UK economy.....

"Sir Ian said a new approach is urgently needed in order to address declining production efficiency and exploration.  The former head of the Wood group  said the cost to the UK Treasury of the inefficiencies is estimated to be around £6 billion."

 

and yet a Norway which is just as small. manages its oil very well.........
“Norway’s oil fund grew by 18% in 2012 to £450bn.”   (BBC News, March 2013)

And yet, despite
“It’s definitely Scotland’s oil.”   (Vince Cable in The Telegraph, March 2013)
we have, and I repeat.........
“Poverty in Scotland at its worst in 30 years.”    (The Herald, March 2013)

If you want to check out the links to the various quotes...they are on http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-oil-debate-for-busy-people/.  bar the £200 billion jobbie (and I use that word advisedly) which is on http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/prime-minister-david-cameron-warns-3177827   I have just set the information out in my  own inimitable style for your reading pleasure.

 

 



 

[Alex MacLeod]

"SCOTLAND could lose out on £200billion worth of oil over the next 20 years if the country becomes independent, David Cameron warned yesterday.  The Prime Minister pledged to fast-track recommendations that could help to pump four billion extra barrels from the North Sea.   He said only the “broad shoulders” of the UK economy could subsidise the cost of recovering the hard-to-get oil."  (Daily Record 24/2/2014)

 

Can someone please tell me when the UK government has ever subsidised the cost of recovering hard-to-get oil. The government sells the licences to explore. It then takes taxes from every barrel removed. Granted some tax breaks have been given for the continued production from some older areas but certainly no subsidies.

 

Todays news from the Cameron camp emphasised the drop in revenues for last year over the previous year. What they failed to tell us was that some older platforms were shut in for longer than normal for major refurbishment so production was down. They failed to tell that their hosts for the day (BP) have invested over a billion on its most northerly field to extend its life for a further 30 years. Further billions on two new platforms for its established West of Shetland fields and is spending further billions on Atlantic exploration and production planning. That is just one of the many major companies involved in investing billions around our shores and none of them are doing so just for the sake of spending their cash. And nor are they seeking government handouts to assist them.

[Charles Bannerman]

     

Is it only me .......................................................................................................................................................................................................for your reading pleasure.

 

So yet another anti- English -Westminster -Tories - "anyone else their delusions tell them has got it in for Scotland" rant, typically Tolstoyesque in length, whose content does nothing more than show that separatist policy hasn't progressed a jot from its three word simplistic SNP sloganising of the mid 70s - It's Scotland's Oil, delivered whilst wallowing in an ocean of self pity and simmering resentment about what poor miserable exploited Jocks we are at the hands of the b*****d   English  and  Westminster  As this referendum approaches it's actually interesting to see the rising Anglophobia on the part of the yessers.

 

Oddquine, if oil is all that blooming important, you're going to need a Plan B for that as well as for currency because, despite some variation in estimates of its longevity, this is a very short term resource compared with a country's history. If independence is forever and not just for Christmas (which it is), you are pinning your hopes on a single resource which will be gone by New Year's day or at least by the January sales. 

People are not going to be fooled by pie in the sky, land of milk and honey promises based on a single resource of highly volatile value which won't even be there to bail out their grandchildren or great grandchildren.

If you make a mistake in a general election you can vote the other way in five years time. There is no such safeguard on September 18th.

The willingness of the separatists to let people hear what they want in the hope that they'll believe it just long enough to get them to vote irreversibly yes is quite breathtaking.

[Oddquine]

 

"SCOTLAND could lose out on £200billion worth of oil over the next 20 years if the country becomes independent, David Cameron warned yesterday.  The Prime Minister pledged to fast-track recommendations that could help to pump four billion extra barrels from the North Sea.   He said only the “broad shoulders” of the UK economy could subsidise the cost of recovering the hard-to-get oil." 

(Daily Record 24/2/2014)

 

Can someone please tell me when the UK government has ever subsidised the cost of recovering hard-to-get oil. The government sells the licences to explore. It then takes taxes from every barrel removed. Granted some tax breaks have been given for the continued production from some older areas but certainly no subsidies.

 

Todays news from the Cameron camp emphasised the drop in revenues for last year over the previous year. What they failed to tell us was that some older platforms were shut in for longer than normal for major refurbishment so production was down. They failed to tell that their hosts for the day (BP) have invested over a billion on its most northerly field to extend its life for a further 30 years. Further billions on two new platforms for its established West of Shetland fields and is spending further billions on Atlantic exploration and production planning. That is just one of the many major companies involved in investing billions around our shores and none of them are doing so just for the sake of spending their cash. And nor are they seeking government handouts to assist them.

 

 

They haven't, afaik, but I'm sure someone will turn up shortly to give us chapter, verse and links.  But they do rely on the ordinary punter not realising that they are taking the proverbial, because they are convinced that all our heads button up the back and we won't notice....and some of us in Scotland certainly confirm that opinion! .

 

They appear to believe that subsidising is what the oil giants should be doing for them...given the raids on oil company profits over the years.(not so dissimilar to  the raids on pensions by Gordon Brown in the not so long ago past).

 

Seems to me, being a thick eejit, that 16 changes in taxation of oil income in 10 years, would produce much the same reluctance to  commit finite monetary resources to expand anything oil related, as I'd have  in committing to taking on a mortgage after that many changes in the mortgage rate in that time, with no way of knowing what the next change was liable to be.

 

Emphasising drops is what Westminster does best.....good news doesn't fit their Independence doom and gloom agenda!  They are spinning to the extent that those of us watching them do so are feeling dizzy, even if they themselves are managing to remain upright!

Edited February 24, 2014 by Oddquine

[IBM]

Scarlet and Charles my previous post was a bit of banter and no offence intended.  I will vote Yes and Charles will vote No in September and I am sure we will still go on supporting ICT whatever the result. 

[Scarlet Pimple]

Frank Kelly speaking, you may be advised that the Canadian Broadcasting Corp states" Scotland will gain TRILLIONS of dollars from a break from England etc" due to the flourishing oil industry in the North Sea which is mostly in Scottish Territory."

 

True or false?

 

Comments please? If the answer is "Yes" then voting yes is a no-brainer isn't it, Charles? 

 

After all , the Scots are well known for their thrift and saving habits, so the future would be  bright for many, many years would it not?

[Sneckboy]

It's a hot debate at the moment, Scarlet! There are lots of different figures being bandied about, and with both the Scottish and UK governments holding meetings in Aberdeen last Monday, is very topical.

 

Channel4 News have tried to cut through 'spin' of the opposing claims and their conclusion is.....inconclusive!

Depending on you wish to believe, there could be as much as the $1.5 Trillion of un-tapped oil remaining in the North Sea, but as Sir Ian Wood observes, the costs of extracting it would/will be huge. There's maybe just $120billion according to the Office for National Statistics.

 

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-scotlands-oil-wealth/17811

 

So, from that article, the top figure quoted compared to the lowest, indicates there's a huge discrepancy in opinion.

Reducing the zero's to make it more digestible, (in units of $10billion) the low is 12 and the high is 150.

 

In essence, it's as clear as mud oil...

[Yngwie]

The only thing we know for sure is that there is less oil today than there was yesterday.

[Oddquine]

Frank Kelly speaking, you may be advised that the Canadian Broadcasting Corp states" Scotland will gain TRILLIONS of dollars from a break from England etc" due to the flourishing oil industry in the North Sea which is mostly in Scottish Territory."

 

True or false?

 

Comments please? If the answer is "Yes" then voting yes is a no-brainer isn't it, Charles? 

 

After all , the Scots are well known for their thrift and saving habits, so the future would be  bright for many, many years would it not?

If you have a look at my previous post  #532 quoting "points" made by Westminster MPs and the MSM, since oil was discovered and started to flow, you can see that opinion varies depending on whether the politicians are trying to put Scotland down or bum the UK up.  Hence, when the SNP has been rising, independence/devolution has been on the agenda and the Westminster politicians have been running scared....the oil is running out..maybe even  tomorrow or the next day...but when Westminster is increasing MPs salaries, handing out tax cuts to millionaires (like most of the UK Cabinet), ignoring the levels of tax avoidance and evasion by the rich and big businesses, it is going to last for ages and is being spent as if it is going to last forever. 

 

Westminster Government, which can't balance its books, even with the oil proceeds flowing directly into the Treasury and straight out again through the enormous hole in the palm of its hand, has some weird idea that only the UK Government is capable of managing  the oil industry and Scotland is too wee and too stupid to do it for ourselves.  A bit ironic, imo, given the only ability our "esteemed" Governments appear to have is the ability to create debt, despite the oil revenue input which is so "near to being completely used up". If Scotland would be fecked with it, as Westminster is always so eager to insist...then the UK would be well buggered without it, given the UK National Debt of £1.3 or so trillion, with £100+ billion a year additional borrowing and annual interest payments of  about £48 billion. 

 

With the oil income in UK's tax stream and without the oil income in Scotland's, Scotland's GDP is 99% of that of the UK. Including the oil, it would be about 118%. For Scotland, the oil would be a bonus, not the only thing standing between us and bankruptcy.

 

According to Oil and Gas UK 2013 Economic Report, over the past 45 years, the UK Treasury has widdled up against the wall £300 billion + (in 2012 money) in production tax. In 2012-2013, it received, from the oil and gas industry, a total of around £12 billion in production tax and in corporate and payroll taxes..and has only a horrendous National Debt to show for it.  In addition, the  offshore oil and gas industry generates almost £40 billion a year for the economy by producing oil and gas worth £32 billion and by exporting oilfield technology and expertise worth £7 billion. There are estimated to be between 15 and 24 billion barrels left, without the discovery of new fields in the West of Scotland (once Trident leaves.)   http://www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/news/news.cfm/newsid/873   or the full report https://publ.com/N6D1Taa#8

 

The UK Government values the wholesale worth of this at £1.5 trillion and the same government claims a future for the industry well past 2055.  If that is what they claim for UK purposes, why would that not equally apply to the worth in an independent Scotland, given approximately 90% of this bonanza lies in Scottish Waters according to UNCLOS (once we get back what Westminster stole in 1999.). It can provide a cushion for the future on the same lines as Norway has, albeit much smaller, given the wasted years of Westminster squandering, but our oil income is a lower percentage of our tax take than it is in Norway.

 

Of course, if you agree with Johan Lamont that " We are not genetically programmed in Scotland to make political decisions", it will certainly be better to leave the political decisions to those extremely intelligent, economically astute millionaires who direct our lives.   But if you reject the "Scottish Cringe" factor....do you really think we will be as incompetent as the last 45 years of UK Government has been?  Do you really believe that  “Scotland will be so rich from oil you won’t be able to handle it by yourselves!”  and it needs the “broad shoulders” of the UK economy to get any benefit from the income.

 

Really?

Edited February 26, 2014 by Oddquine

[Oddquine]

Commonsense from the New Statesman............though I'm still not keen on a Currency Union......

 

.http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/flaw-osbornes-pre-emptive-strike-against-currency-union

 

 

Says a lot of the same thing as http://www.futureukandscotland.ac.uk/blog/currency-reflections-legal-issues

Edited March 1, 2014 by Oddquine

[Scarlet Pimple]

And what about the Scottish Ingenuity factor

[robbylad]

And what about the Scottish Ingenuity factor

didnt you know? we're too wee, too poor and too stupid.

[Scarlet Pimple]

........ and the rest of my post was transferred to the "New Stadium Location" thread instead....incredible.

 

Never a dull moment on here .....I guess .

[Scarlet Pimple]

Well---, if anyone is interested in reading the rest of my post it was inexplicably  transferred to the "New Stadium Thread instead.

Never a dull moment on here I guess. Fascinating.

[Westhill1]

My gut instinct is that the No vote (silent majority) will win in September 60 /40. It'll be good to get on with life after what will be three years wasted energy on both sides. My mini poll at work is currently at 70% No but I suspect it's only that high because we're a fairly intelligent bunch who are not haggis bashers, parochial and anti-English. You will not hear from me on this post for now on as I've got more important things to do I'll leave the intelligent conversation to Charles B.

[Charles Bannerman]

My gut instinct is that the No vote (silent majority) will win in September 60 /40. It'll be good to get on with life after what will be three years wasted energy on both sides. My mini poll at work is currently at 70% No but I suspect it's only that high because we're a fairly intelligent bunch who are not haggis bashers, parochial and anti-English.

I think that is a significant consideration because, although there are of course people on both sides who have come to considered and informed viewpoints, the yessers are seem to be endowed with a rather larger proportion of the less cerebrally aware and resentful Chippy Jimmies who tend to find attraction in the vacuous sloganising and grievance promotion which nationalist parties worldwide tend to retreat into. I mean tosh like It's Scotland's Oil - Penny For Scotland - Free by 93 (      ) - Ah stan' fur Scoa'lan' - and all the rest of the simplistic nonsense which the SNP have peddled for years now.

Anti Enlish haggis bashers - unfortunately there are far too many of them out there, and that is to a fair extent down to the resentment, greed and grievance promotion which the Anglophobic SNP have cultivated for decades.

I well remember being outside Inverness Town Hall for the declaration of one of the 1974 elections where Russell Johnston had well and truly kicked the backside of the SNP candidate and the proceedings were then completely disrupted by a bunch of Nationalist knuckledraggers chanting so loudly that the returning officer could barely be heard. This was the epitome of the SNP's "Macbeth's Soliloquy" approach to politics.... "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound anf fury, signifying nothing."

[IBM]

They are badly needing your money Charles for the better together campaign according to The Sunday Times! 

[Alex MacLeod]

Charles I wish you'd stop with the anglophobia bit. I happily guarantee that, if a poll was taken of already decided YES voters, few to none would be anglophobic. I have very good English friends and have no reason to fear any of them. I am, however, anti Westminster and fear that the workings of that establishment are going to end in catastrophe for both Scotland and England. Oh! and Charles, just like you, I am degree educated. Not some mickey mouse degree either I may add.

[Oddquine]

Worth a read....http://peterabell.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/the-referendum-is-about-us.html

As is this http://www.stringerville.com/2014/02/23/scottish-independence-an-open-letter-to-england/

Not for any particular reason, tbh....just that they are pro-independence POVs, different to the ones you get from we Yeah-sayers on here..and well- written (though as long as anything I can produce when I'm on form.)..and because I liked them. 

 

 The second link, btw, Charles, is by an Englishman who is voting YES...as are many English people who have chosen to make their home in Scotland....and the comments on that blog are how people should conduct a debate of such importance. You will notice the almost complete lack of sneering, patronising and supercilious contempt for others' opinions. Those on there who disagree with the concept of independence are worth reading. Unfortunately, you are not.