View Full Version : Big oilfield confirmed west of Shetland. Uk government keeping it quiet .
Dog-eared
02-Aug-14, 21:28
https://scontent-a-ams.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/10559913_311538402360153_8800625970642205524_n.jpg ?oh=fd049de40a66ab5d209896b986566d3a&oe=54454F94
https://scontent-a-ams.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/10559913_311538402360153_8800625970642205524_n.jpg ?oh=fd049de40a66ab5d209896b986566d3a&oe=54454F94And your point?
Chook a demus
02-Aug-14, 22:03
The yes campaign have found secret deposits of oil untapped by the UK govt in the case of independence they intend to drain the sumps of all road vehicles and ensure every member of the electorate has their own personal mode of transport donkeys will take time to breed but they aim to ensure every member of the population has one by 2050. So ending Scotland's dependence on fossil fuels and ensuring we meet our renewable targets. So says my aunties sisters brother who has a doctorate in playdoh who heard it from a man down the pub.
These oil fields have been known about for years. It was just too costly to drill there. next!
Chook a demus
02-Aug-14, 22:25
These oil fields have been known about for years. It was just too costly to drill there. next!Are you saying I can go dig up the tin o 3 in 1 I buried oot back now ?
Are you saying I can go dig up the tin o 3 in 1 I buried oot back now ?
aye as long as ye can mind whaur ye buried it......cannae huv ye diggin' up hauf a' Caithness lookin' fur it!
Heisenberg
02-Aug-14, 23:36
The yes campaign have found secret deposits of oil untapped by the UK govt in the case of independence they intend to drain the sumps of all road vehicles and ensure every member of the electorate has their own personal mode of transport donkeys will take time to breed but they aim to ensure every member of the population has one by 2050. So ending Scotland's dependence on fossil fuels and ensuring we meet our renewable targets. So says my aunties sisters brother who has a doctorate in playdoh who heard it from a man down the pub.am outside e noo sawin the front of me Toyota hilux an Weldin on me ole set o shafts as we speak.
orkneycadian
03-Aug-14, 01:21
Great news for the PROOSWI. Not so great for Alex and his cronies who are hopeful that any new oil deposits found are off the coast of rScotland.
Chook a demus
03-Aug-14, 07:47
I as been oot tha back all e night with ma black n wrecker drill must ow got two inches through e stane not a drop o the black gold and ma tin o 3 in 1 has vanished
Facebook rumour started on an 'oil workers for independence' page.
Filled with so many lies and inaccuracies its quite embarrassing.
I'm with you on this theone. I don't DO conspiracy theories but some of the posts about it have been funny as anything. And at least it's a positive rumour. The one started after BannockburnLive was horrid :(
Dog-eared
03-Aug-14, 20:38
http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/987/worlds-a-oil-field-not-found-the-mystery-surrounding-the-prime-ministers-shetland-visit/
Dog-eared
03-Aug-14, 20:40
https://twitter.com/ChrisDarroch2/status/495479252222230528/photo/1
Dog-eared
03-Aug-14, 20:54
http://www.weourselves.com/on-sept-18-scots-can-gift-cameron-westminster-2-5-trillion-of-their-money-to-spend-on-improving-londons-infrastructure/
Chook a demus
03-Aug-14, 21:31
http://www.weourselves.com/on-sept-18-scots-can-gift-cameron-westminster-2-5-trillion-of-their-money-to-spend-on-improving-londons-infrastructure/
https://twitter.com/ChrisDarroch2/status/495479252222230528/photo/1
http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/987/worlds-a-oil-field-not-found-the-mystery-surrounding-the-prime-ministers-shetland-visit/Well they're all totally credible not, mind not surprising that with 6 weeks to go and their campaign heading backwards desperate measures have to be used. Poor squidge all her hard work gone up in smoke lol
This us an interesting story, it's not going away or being refuted. I'll be interested to watch over the next few days how it pans out but I'm not holding my breath.
Scotland can afford to be Independent even without oil. If this find is true then that would be amazing but oil is not the be all and end all of Scotland's skills, talent and wealth. Scotland has a fantastic future, oil is part of that story but it's by no means the whole picture. Remember Scotland has a £17billion construction industry, £32billion rural and island economy, £9.3 billion chemical industry food and drink industry worth £4.7billion - to name but a few. The Financial times said in February that Scotland will be in the top twenty richest countries in the world. There is no doubt from financial experts, politicians on either side of the debate or financial commentators that Scotland has the resources to be a wealthy and successful Independent Country. This would just be the icing on the cake.
I'm with you on this theone. I don't DO conspiracy theories but some of the posts about it have been funny as anything. And at least it's a positive rumour. The one started after BannockburnLive was horrid :(
Not into conspiracy theories either....but I have to say, I'm inclined to believe there is something beneficial to Scotland that Westminster doesn't want out there before September 18th. It may not be as large as is claimed, or even what is being claimed, but there is something. And, personally, I'd believe Shetland's cat, Buster, before I'd believe a word out of the mouths of Westminster politicians...and they have only themselves to blame for that.
The Westminster Government has form in the "hiding good news for Scotland which might encourage the hated SNP" stakes....the hiding of the McCrone Report being the most obvious example.
David Cameron visited Shetland just after the survey, in secrecy, and was the first PM to do so in 34 years. Why? Just to say that staying in the Union would save Shetland residents £46 a year in electricity bills....and party with invited Better Together supporters? Really? He must have spent pretty much a whole year's worth of those electricity savings to fly in with entourage,just to make that announcement, which could as easily have been added to a press release written by any No 10 lackey. The announcement, if slanted in the right way, might even have earned the Scottish Secretary kudos for exerting influence on Westminster and it may well have secured his seat, after a NO vote.
If it’s of no significance beyond confirming what is there, then why not just say so and stop the rumours dead in their tracks? The No Better Together Thanks crowd and Westminster have not yet been backward in coming forward with their doom-laden interpretation of anything at all emanating from the YES campaign.....so why is this one rumour so different?
I have to admit that I don't particularly care if it is correct or not, tbh, as Scotland does not need the oil to be a viable vibrant economy, it just needs access to all its income without a large proportion of it being hived off to pay for the unnecessary boy's toys and and boxing gloves the UK uses to punch above its weight internationally, and the right policies put in place to distribute that income to do the most good for the largest percentage of the population, rather than the smallest wealthiest percentage..what the Common Weal papers call "all of us first".
I am old enough to remember being active for YES in the 1979 referendum, and for YES/YES in 1997, and the NO campaign's tactics, both times, have been exactly the same as they are now...doom, gloom, and emphasising possible risk/punishment rather than possible opportunity. We did not meet the "imposed against our will" (as so much is in the UK), and target criteria in 1979, which would only have been possible with compulsory voting, but we did vote YES in 1979 at much the same level which had kept the UK in the EU four years earlier(when I worked for leaving the EU). And following the 1979 vote, Scotland was forgotten for another eighteen or so years, until the SNP came to the fore again. Post 1979, Scotland was punished for not voting in sufficient numbers for devolution, which was why the SNP came to the fore again....and why the 1997 referendum took place at all.
It is no coincidence that the electoral system chosen by Westminster in 1997, for elections to the Scottish Executive/Government was a system the computer algorithms had worked out would ensure permanent coalitions in Holyrood, and, as no Unionist party would ever form a coalition with the SNP, that equated to ensuring eternal Government by the Scottish branches of the UK political Parties, and a lot of conformity with Westminster policies, such as PFI contracts. The IT specialists, however, didn't allow for the Scottish bolshie tendency, which tends to coalesce round partly their more majority, egalitarian, left wing propensity and their "don't you tell me how to think" one. We thought for ourselves in 2007 and again in 2011....and decided a political party which considered Scotland and the Scots first was worth a shot after eight years of our government kow-towing to Westminster, and even handing back to them money they couldn't spend on improving the lot of the Scots.....which is why we are where we are today.
But despite the fears promoted by the Westminster Government, on both previous referendum occasions, we voted to stick two fingers up at those in Westminster against any form of Scottish control over anything, even though not emphatically enough in 1979..which is why so much of our manufacturing/industrial base no longer exists now. But 35 years on, and after 15 years of devolution, we are slowly changing our focus from adherence to Westminster politics where we can, and gradually improving our economy as a result of that devolution. However, having responsibility only for spending, and no way to adjust any fiscal policy bar tax-raising, whatever we do will not benefit us, because any improvement in our economy as a result of Scottish Government policies and any resulting additional taxes accrued, go direct to the Westminster back pocket, never to be seen in Scotland again.
And that is the problem, and one which Westminster refuses to address, how devolution, in Westminster terms, can ever produce the kind of society most Scots would prefer, with a publicly owned NHS, Royal Mail, Scottish Water, National Grid etc. Devo-Max/federalism may have gone a long way to keep the Union together, at least in the short/medium term, but Westminster refused that option outright....so it is either all.......or nothing much, if anything at all, which is on offer.
I see independence as an opportunity to change things in Scotland for the better, even if it takes, as it likely will, some years to get up to speed.....and I don't quite understand those who perceive it as a risk, unless they are businessmen, bankers, or the relatively wealthy voting through fear that their privileged position in the UK will be lost in an independent Scotland. Otherwise, as my latest t-shirt says...."How No" vote for independence, because could it really make you any worse off than you are going to be when the next Westminster Government is elected, whether they are red or blue Tories, given austerity cuts and rolling back the Welfare state will continue unabated, as they have said?
Surferstu85
04-Aug-14, 04:33
I agree with you oddquine. Scotland would have a good enough economy without the oil. But as someone who actually works out West of Shetland. Another 30-40years production of oil wouldn't go amiss and believe me there is plenty. Along with the old fields BP are redeveloping Schihallion and Foinavon. Also TOTAL are currently investing heavily on Laggan and Tormore. Correct me if I'm wrong but somebody must like Alex Salmond and the SNP as they won by landslide last time. Vote YES vote Green
erniesspeedshop
04-Aug-14, 04:46
How is burning another 30 or 40 years worth of oil green? Although my average car does about 8 MPH so good news for me! :lol:
erniesspeedshop
04-Aug-14, 05:00
"How No" vote for independence, because could it really make you any worse off than you are going to be when the next Westminster Government is elected, whether they are red or blue Tories, given austerity cuts and rolling back the Welfare state will continue unabated, as they have said?Why am I not surprised you can fit all that on a T Shirt? :eek:
erniesspeedshop
04-Aug-14, 06:25
unless they are businessmen, bankers, or the relatively wealthy voting through fear that their privileged position in the UK will be lost in an independent Scotland. So are you saying that if you've made something of yourself then you shouldn't vote for independence? Because that is what I think too.
Chook a demus
04-Aug-14, 08:05
I am old enough to remember being active for YES in the 1979 referendum, and for YES/YES in 1997,
But hang on a minute the yes campaign don't lie, mislead or misrepresent, yet here we have the biggest lie of all.
It's a once in a lifetime opportunity ..
Well apparently, a bit like the EU we can have them vote make the decision then the separatists wait a few years and try again and if they don't like the democratic answer they start again.
But of course whilst as a NO voter my rights are just as valid as a yes voters it should be noted as a NO voter we've voted NO twice before but the yes campaign need only to get a vote once to make a decision that could never be changed back.
No wonder people are starting to see through the SNPs spin and their numbers are dropping.
As for the oil field funny how you can't find any other reference to it outside the yes campaign and it's fringe loons websites. Yet only they know about it because the govt is so good at hiding massive oil fields and oil rigs.
Conspiracy nuts congregate together, one of the most bizarre I've seen on a yes voters page is how MH17 is actually MH370 under a false flag.. Loons believe loons
If you are wealthy, if you have done really well, if you have been massively successful and made pots of money then you will continue to be wealthy, do really well, be successful and make pots of money in an Independent Scotland. Why wouldn't you?
Look behind you at those who are sick, disabled, carers;those trying to get a start through university education, through apprenticeships, through work programmes; those who rely on the NHS, those who need personal care; those who need childcare they can afford to enable them to work, are having to rely on Foodbanks. You should look behind you and you should know that you have an opportunity to change our society so that more of us can be successful like you, wealthy like you, do really well, like you.
No one need fear independence unless you are an MP or member of the House of Lords and may lose your seat but then there will be a hugely exciting political environment going to be evolving if Scotland votes YES. The best of you will find a role, the worst of you will need to do something else.
Only a YES vote gives the power to change our society into the hands of the electorate in Scotland. We can't take a different route on welfare, foreign policy, tax, investment, defence, energy without Independence. Scotland's Future in Scotland's hands makes sense for the wealthy and successful, for those struggling, and for those who are on their way..
Chook a demus
04-Aug-14, 08:22
Och, and when yae loose dinnae worry just wait a few years and we can have another referendum !
After all it is a once in a lifetime opportunity ......
We will be able to do it again if a party which offers a referendum on Independence wins a majority just like the SNP did.
Given that it was reported this week that a 3% swing is all that's needed and there is still over a month to go I don't think we will give up just yet. But thanks for the rallying call, it will remind us we need to be knocking on doors, doing the street work, speaking at events and talking to undecided friends. It's great that we have so many volunteers and feet on the ground. It must be costing Better Together a fortune to keep up, £25 a pop plus expenses was what I heard they are paying their "volunteers".
Still you have JimMurphy up there this week, I'm sure he will enthuse you all with his performance.
Chook a demus
04-Aug-14, 08:52
Yes it must be costing a fortune as the SNP have found out giving the state of the parties funding which is perilously close to how much in the red are they ? When they loose this they won't have sufficient funding to fight the general election with any gusto maybe that'll be the end of them.
It must be costing Better Together a fortune to keep up, £25 a pop plus expenses was what I heard they are paying their "volunteers"
Still you have JimMurphy up there this week, I'm sure he will enthuse you all with his performance.
I am a volunteer for Better together and I dont get paid, and neither do any that i know, more lies Squidge, shame on you!!
And yes Jim Murphy is a good talker, have heard him, and yes he did fill me with enthusiasim, unlike your picture of a "Nova Scotia".
I'm glad to hear it Golach, but Better Together ARE paying volunteers. Better Together West Lothian are paying £25 plus expenses I think, and suggesting that their volunteers keep quiet about it "in case the taxman is watching".
Chook a demus
04-Aug-14, 09:03
Now you've done it Golach I'm waiting for the but I didn't lie I was just saying what I've heard line to be trotted out.
Also interesting to note West Lothian Better Together Vehemently deny paying volunteers.
I'm glad to hear it Golach, but Better Together ARE paying volunteers. Better Together West Lothian are paying £25 plus expenses I think, and suggesting that their volunteers keep quiet about it "in case the taxman is watching".
There you go Squidge, "you think" is not for definate. More miss truths I think, being thought up be the now desperate yesnp.
Chook a demus
04-Aug-14, 09:42
There you go Squidge, "you think" is not for definate. More miss truths I think, being thought up be the now desperate yesnp.West Lothian Better Together vehemently deny paying volunteers, although their page has been trolled by yes supporters posting the same little meme all over it.
hmm....BIG oilfield....secret....govt cover-up.....MOD veto on west coast oil boom (fact!)......
and then the thread gets hijacked and filled with YES/NO crap YET AGAIN!!!!!
Chook a demus
04-Aug-14, 11:30
hmm....BIG oilfield....secret....govt cover-up.....MOD veto on west coast oil boom (fact!)......and then the thread gets hijacked and filled with YES/NO crap YET AGAIN!!!!!To be fair Gaz if you read the original link the question starts with. I need to ask something re the Indy ref. so it would appear the issue is inextricably linked to the referendum.Whether the oil field exists if it does whether it is the size it's claimed to be, whether the UK govt are deliberately hiding it from the electorate until post referendum or is it just a yes campaign conspiracy put out to mislead and misrepresent.Never mind only just over a month till the deed is done and it will become a dead subject thankfully.
Ok Golach - Jack Macdonald who has a facebook page which is called Proud to be Scots - Delighted to be United and hands out leaflets for Better Together and supports the union and i understand is an organiser for BT posted on 4th July a message on his facebook page which says - "Right Guys for anyone that wants a quick buck we are now paying volunteers £25 to help out at events. Its very easy work just giving out car stickers to those who want them. Let me know if you are interested"
On 8th July he posted "This coming weekend we will be at the Golf Open in Aberdeen, 13000 people last year so worth going. There will be a place to stay if you need one and £25 plus £10 to help with transport"
Then yesterday Better Together West Lothian posted this post "Can I suggest to the volunteers who were out today that much as you would like to respond to the enquiry by the Yes Man as to how much you were paid that you refrain from doing to so and keep that to yourselves. After all the tax man might read this"
This was deleted shortly after and the post which says they had "tidied up" their page appeared.
So golach, am I lying? Really? The information is out there - make your own mind up. Once again the No voices here shout that there is a lie whenever they hear something they dont want to. If it is a LIE then it is one BT supporters started off themselves and why on earth would they say these things, post them on their pages if they are lies?
However we STILL dont need oil to be successfully independent so whether this "Big Find" is real or imaginary it isnt a game changer either way. Oh and We STILL only appear to need a 3% swing for a YES victory
Keep up the good work
Links are available on request as ever. :)
To be fair Gaz if you read the original link the question starts with. I need to ask something re the Indy ref. so it would appear the issue is inextricably linked to the referendum.Whether the oil field exists if it does whether it is the size it's claimed to be, whether the UK govt are deliberately hiding it from the electorate until post referendum or is it just a yes campaign conspiracy put out to mislead and misrepresent.Never mind only just over a month till the deed is done and it will become a dead subject thankfully.
true, it does indeed but i don't see any mention of whether or not volunteers for the hoohah brigade get paid or not.
The main point is whether or not the govt were actually going to announce that that the field "officially" exists and whether or not they would exploit this field or just continue to keep it quiet in the hope it would go away. There's also the fact that why on earth do we as an oil-producing country, import more oil products than we export? we manufacture more than enough fuel to run the country yet import most of it and if the field was to be developed then a glut of oil would be produced, bring down the high cost of oil, lower fuel costs etc but most of all, fuel duty would plummet saving the punter a fortune but unfortunately losing the treasury a fortune.....there's loads of pros and cons whichever way you look at it......bit like the YES/NO campaign......
David Cameron visited Shetland just after the survey, in secrecy, and was the first PM to do so in 34 years. Why? Just to say that staying in the Union would save Shetland residents £46 a year in electricity bills....and party with invited Better Together supporters? Really? He must have spent pretty much a whole year's worth of those electricity savings to fly in with entourage,just to make that announcement, which could as easily have been added to a press release written by any No 10 lackey.
How was his visit secret?
He turned up, did his piece, and left. I actually believe he was due to visit the new gas plant being constructed there but was put off by industrial action taking place - not many politicians would be seen crossing a picket line.
Just because it wasn't announced weeks in advance doesn't make it a secret!
This idea that he was in Shetland for a secret meeting with top oil industry executives is laughable. How many top level executives do you think are in Shetland?? The oil companies don't even have offices there! All the senior management is either in Aberdeen or London.
If it’s of no significance beyond confirming what is there, then why not just say so and stop the rumours dead in their tracks?
The rumours are nonsense started on facebook by some cybernats, with no basis in fact and very little limelight apart from on a few separatist blogs. I'm quite sure if/when the rumours become more high profile they will be denied and exposed as nonsensical.
It only takes a quick look at the links posted earlier to show the authors have little idea about the situation west of Shetland, or the oil industry in general.
Chook a demus
04-Aug-14, 15:55
However we STILL dont need oil to be successfully independent so whether this "Big Find" is real or imaginary it isnt a game changer either way.
Oh and We STILL only appear to need a 3% swing for a YES victoryLinks are available on request as ever. :)
3% of 5 million so current polls say No has over 50% how do you work out that getting an extra 3% on top of what you already have makes over 50% not sure the maths adds up 43 + 3 = 46 hmmm that's not a winning number.
Instead of offering all these links for people to request why not just put them out there if you're so proud and assured of their veracity.
Or will they turn out to be more wee pictures like the oil field stuff made up by the separatists and not really worth a lookey
They were saying the same about Canada's tar sands for years until they found a way of extracting it. It is the same with this massive oilfield off the coast of Scotland.
Surferstu85
04-Aug-14, 23:35
How is burning another 30 or 40 years worth of oil green? Although my average car does about 8 MPH so good news for me! :lol: It's not green to burn fossil fuels. But the revenues from oil production can go towards better greener types of energy. Or we could just continue wasting it on building H2S, new London Underground routes, nuclear weapons, wars. Or we could just leave it be and let other people exploit it.
For those who have asked me what a "swing of 3%" means here is a good explanation.
"Swing is a tool which helps explain how elections are won and lost. In simple terms it is a way of measuring how the public's support of political parties changes from one election to the next.Although it gives an apparently clear picture, the disadvantage of swing is that it can only tell you about a shift from one party to another, not the shift between three or more parties.Swing is calculated by taking the average of one party's fall in the share of the vote and another party's gain in support.The important point to remember when considering any individual constituency is that the swing required for the defending party to lose to the party in second place is half their percentage majority at the previous election.For example, if Labour is defending a seat which they won over the Conservatives with a 10% majority in 2005, it would require a swing of 5% for the Conservatives to take it from them. This is based on the principle that you add 5% to the Conservative vote last time and subtract 5% from the Labour vote last time, thereby neutralising the previous 10% majority"
from the BBC website.
And a link to STV news about the polls. http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/polls/282376-poll-finds-yes-support-at-new-high-but-no-still-ahead-in-standings/, Chook posting links from my phone takes time and like the paragraph thing is fiddly. It also makes posts over long sometimes. So it is simple - If I have time I post links, if I don't have time I don't.
orkneycadian
05-Aug-14, 07:27
You know, its funny.
When Westminster talks about the UK's oil, and its off the coast of Scotland, they get slated by the SNP for "stealing" our oil.
When Holyrood talks about Scotlands oil, and its off the coast of Orkney and Shetland, theres no word of them "stealing" our oil.
Double standards?
Vote No on the 18th of September, or if that doesn't work, vote independence on the 25th of Septemeber.
Oh, hang on, thats right. SNP double standards mean that the independence referendum isn't getting to go ahead.....
Interesting quote from petroleum.co.uk
The North Sea crude oil fields are still fairly full, and are arguably the second most influential oil field in economic terms. Texas, once the world's major oil region, is now almost completely dry.
It cocks a snoop at Better Together's claims that the oil is running out. They also had the cheek to make out that 4% oil contribution to UK GDP is better than 25% contribution to indy Scottish GDP. Only a desperate group would say that.
http://www.petroleum.co.uk/
Chook a demus
05-Aug-14, 17:53
Interesting quote from petroleum.co.ukIt cocks a snoop at Better Together's claims that the oil is running out. They also had the cheek to make out that 4% oil contribution to UK GDP is better than 25% contribution to indy Scottish GDP. Only a desperate group would say that.http://www.petroleum.co.uk/Another website with no affiliations to the actual petroleum industry made up by someone no contact details apart from an email address. I do wish Rheg would stop using these cheap made up quickly websites to justify his arguments.
They are almost laughable I'm surprised you don't get embarrassed having to use such rubbish to try justify your argument.
A massive 29 followers on twitter as well.
Now who is coming out with the conspiracy theories? :roll:
Yes "Game-changer" was used.
Hurricane is particularly interesting in that it’s targeting the basement reservoirs in the West of Shetland Basin. It has two discoveries, each of which is more than 200 million barrels (200 MMbbl) in size, which is particularly significant given that the average size of discoveries in the U.K. over the last four years has only been 25 MMbbl. Hurricane’s discoveries are sufficiently big to attract the majors.
The basement play has been largely ignored in the U.K. It is potentially a game changer for companies, particularly West of Shetland. BP’s massive Clair Ridge development, sits at the other end of the Rona ridge from where Hurricane is active. BP is looking at the third phase of the Clair development and says the field could have 8 Bbbl of oil in place. Given that BP has produced oil from basement with earlier Clair well tests, the potential offered by productive basement reservoirs could add a significant amount to that. In fact, BP has invested in Hurricane. The U.K. government is very keen to see the basement reservoirs developed, and is making noises about offering tax losses for the basement play, which could certainly improve the economics.
http://etfdailynews.com/2014/08/01/africa-new-land-of-opportunity/3/
Chook a demus
05-Aug-14, 19:45
Now who is coming out with the conspiracy theories? :roll:Not a conspiracy theory facts, your sources become more and more risible, desperation does do funny things to person!
Not a conspiracy theory facts, your sources become more and more risible, desperation does do funny things to person!
Nothing to see here, move along quickly.
ETFDaily reporting potential of 8 billion barrels of oil in the massive Clair Ridge oil development. Previous finds in last 4 years were ~25 million barrels.
This is what David Cameron doesn't want you to see because it will affect how people will vote in the independence referendum.
http://etfdailynews.com/2014/08/01/africa-new-land-of-opportunity/3/
Chook a demus
05-Aug-14, 20:21
It's no big secret there's oil out there, hasn't been for some 40 odd years the referendum isn't about oil. If it is god help us when it runs out. More scaremongering and trying to muddy the water in your part. You're sounding like a one trick pony only problem is. It's not a good trick !
14.7 billion barrels of oil gives scotland comparable oil reserves to Qatar. That would make a nice tidy economic oil fund!! :D
erniesspeedshop
05-Aug-14, 22:36
14.7 billion barrels of oil gives scotland comparable oil reserves to Qatar. That would make a nice tidy economic oil fund!! :DMoney needs to be spare before it can go in an oil fund. It will be needed to prop up (in the short term) the bribes. In the long term there will be no hiding the catastrophe the SNP has steered us into. If we vote yes of course.
orkneycadian
06-Aug-14, 06:58
IIt cocks a snoop at Better Together's claims that the oil is running out.
And where is all this oil? 30 years ago, you could hardly move for oil tankers in Scapa flow, shipping it away. These days, theres nothing but dive boats and Orkney Towage are on the bones of their backsides and facing being shutdown.
Oil? Where?
Not all the oil comes to Scapa flow there are pipelines taking it south now.
Its fair to say there is more oil out there and its just not been found due to location and conditions to extract it. But one day in the future the oil and gas will run out NOT just for Scotland nor just for the UK but for the whole world, don't panic we are years from that.
However society will have to change the world over as to how we meet our energy needs when this does eventually happen
For those who have asked me what a "swing of 3%" means here is a good explanation.
"Swing is a tool which helps explain how elections are won and lost. In simple terms it is a way of measuring how the public's support of political parties changes from one election to the next.Although it gives an apparently clear picture, the disadvantage of swing is that it can only tell you about a shift from one party to another, not the shift between three or more parties.Swing is calculated by taking the average of one party's fall in the share of the vote and another party's gain in support.The important point to remember when considering any individual constituency is that the swing required for the defending party to lose to the party in second place is half their percentage majority at the previous election.For example, if Labour is defending a seat which they won over the Conservatives with a 10% majority in 2005, it would require a swing of 5% for the Conservatives to take it from them. This is based on the principle that you add 5% to the Conservative vote last time and subtract 5% from the Labour vote last time, thereby neutralising the previous 10% majority"
from the BBC website.
And a link to STV news about the polls. http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/polls/282376-poll-finds-yes-support-at-new-high-but-no-still-ahead-in-standings/, Chook posting links from my phone takes time and like the paragraph thing is fiddly. It also makes posts over long sometimes. So it is simple - If I have time I post links, if I don't have time I don't.
Basically, in a two horse race such as Yes or No you only need half of the % gap between the two outcomes in order to make the sides equal because your loss is compounded by the other side's gain. That assumes that all voters actually switched their vote to the other option and didn't pick the other option available here, ie not voting at all.
3% would not actually win it based on that poll you linked to, but would actually result in 50% each.
The poll you have referenced has allocated the undecided percentage to the two sides based on the proportion of Yes and No votes, adding 6% to Yes and 7% to No. Further questions show a slight preference amongst undecided voters to vote Yes if forced to choose now, but with the figures swinging much more towards No if still undecided by the day of the referendum.
The article including the poll you linked to was dated 11th July. A more up to date survey by Ipsos-Mori has the figures as 54% for No and 40% for Yes. When extrapolated the figures for people who will definitely vote and have made their mind up already, shows 59% will vote No and 41% will vote Yes.
Either way, a fair bit more than a 3% swing will be required based on this more recent poll and it's a red hot favourite that there will be a No vote come the big day.
Thats fine Scorrie, you pays your money and you takes your choice. But the only poll that matters honey as Moira said elsewhere is the one on 18th September. So you can go home and sit on your hands waiting for your boat to come in as your favourite romps home. Me? Im a guest speaker at an event this weekend, knocking doors and street work next weekend and Ill keep doing so until the vote. And if those are the odds they are giving for a yes vote then it might be worth a wee flutter too. Stranger things have happened.
Dog-eared
07-Aug-14, 01:29
http://etfdailynews.com/2014/08/01/africa-new-land-of-opportunity/3/
Dog-eared
07-Aug-14, 01:30
From the above post - "Hurricane is particularly interesting in that it’s targeting the basement reservoirs in the West of Shetland Basin. It has two discoveries, each of which is more than 200 million barrels (200 MMbbl) in size, which is particularly significant given that the average size of discoveries in the U.K. over the last four years has only been 25 MMbbl. Hurricane’s discoveries are sufficiently big to attract the majors.
The basement play has been largely ignored in the U.K. It is potentially a game changer for companies, particularly West of Shetland. BP’s massive Clair Ridge development, sits at the other end of the Rona ridge from where Hurricane is active. BP is looking at the third phase of the Clair development and says the field could have 8 Bbbl of oil in place. Given that BP has produced oil from basement with earlier Clair well tests, the potential offered by productive basement reservoirs could add a significant amount to that. In fact, BP has invested in Hurricane. The U.K. government is very keen to see the basement reservoirs developed, and is making noises about offering tax losses for the basement play, which could certainly improve the economics."
Thats fine Scorrie, you pays your money and you takes your choice. But the only poll that matters honey as Moira said elsewhere is the one on 18th September. So you can go home and sit on your hands waiting for your boat to come in as your favourite romps home. Me? Im a guest speaker at an event this weekend, knocking doors and street work next weekend and Ill keep doing so until the vote. And if those are the odds they are giving for a yes vote then it might be worth a wee flutter too. Stranger things have happened.
It is always the case that the side behind in a poll will point to only one vote actually mattering. Nobody is as hypocritical as the Politician in later pointing to another poll, that shows them in the lead, as evidence that everything is going swimmingly well and that victory is imminent.
I am merely pointing out to people the reality of other figures to the ones you quoted, and am challenging the notion that a 3% swing will turn the ship around for the Yes campaign.
Ah right, that's fine then. I thought you were following Chook in telling us that it's all over and we should give up our campaigning and go home. Everything still to play for I think
Ah right, that's fine then. I thought you were following Chook in telling us that it's all over and we should give up our campaigning and go home. Everything still to play for I think
Back to Plan B Squidge, oh no, there is not one. :lol:
From the above post - "Hurricane is particularly interesting in that it’s targeting the basement reservoirs in the West of Shetland Basin. It has two discoveries, each of which is more than 200 million barrels (200 MMbbl) in size, which is particularly significant given that the average size of discoveries in the U.K. over the last four years has only been 25 MMbbl. Hurricane’s discoveries are sufficiently big to attract the majors.
The basement play has been largely ignored in the U.K. It is potentially a game changer for companies, particularly West of Shetland. BP’s massive Clair Ridge development, sits at the other end of the Rona ridge from where Hurricane is active. BP is looking at the third phase of the Clair development and says the field could have 8 Bbbl of oil in place. Given that BP has produced oil from basement with earlier Clair well tests, the potential offered by productive basement reservoirs could add a significant amount to that. In fact, BP has invested in Hurricane. The U.K. government is very keen to see the basement reservoirs developed, and is making noises about offering tax losses for the basement play, which could certainly improve the economics."
Exactly Dog-eared. The no voters on here would have us to be disingenuous or even worse. lol
Dog-eared
08-Aug-14, 00:58
http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/8215-investment-boost-for-sumburgh-airport
Dog-eared
08-Aug-14, 01:00
https://www.facebook.com/YesShetland/photos/a.689750037705010.1073741828.565189126827769/890663677613644/?type=1&theater
Dog-eared
08-Aug-14, 23:23
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-25651586
orkneycadian
08-Aug-14, 23:27
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-28707072
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-28707072)
Top story on the Scotland Section of the BBC News site.
Touche....
Dog-eared
09-Aug-14, 00:34
It's the British Broadcasting Corporation
. Try to find some unbiased information.
orkneycadian
09-Aug-14, 00:36
It's the British Broadcasting Service . Get real.
Er....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-25651586
And the above is?
Dog-eared
09-Aug-14, 00:53
It does say that some staff might be relocated . Shetland ?
It does say that some staff might be relocated . Shetland ?
No it doesn't.
The Scottish government spokesman said he HOPED they might be relocated.
Shell never. Only the loss of 250 jobs.
And here we are squabbling over oil. The only country in the world to think that oil is a curse, to think that it's own parliament can't manage the resource and to think it is a BAD thing. Who cares about conspiracy theories? We KNOW that the Clair Ridge oilfield is massive - that's been in the public domain for ages. Are we really squabbling over whether it's massive or ABSOLUTELY massive? However massive it is, it is another bit of evidence that shows that Scotland can afford to be independent.
I don't think oil is a curse squidge, and I've never thought it a bad thing, I've got a great career out of it.
As for conspiracy theories - I care if they're trying to withhold/hide/confuse the truth. Where there's nonsense and lies it should be shown to those who would otherwise be none the wiser.
Scotland can afford to be independent with, or without Clair Ridge. The field will make little difference to total treasury income.
Ooooh theone... I think we agree lol
piratelassie
10-Aug-14, 00:13
And your point?
Silly Question
Silly QuestionSilly answer!!
Dog-eared
14-Aug-14, 16:43
Another field looking good.Not new news, but encouraging. . http://blog.maerskoil.com/post/80778649083/key-project-culzean-field#.U-zYCaOorPN
Dog-eared
16-Aug-14, 02:07
Here's something from Yes Shetland, about what they are seeing going on up there -
CLEARING UP A FEW POINTS
Part of Scotland?
There are no secret deals to be done with Westminster nor
Holyrood with any of the Scottish island groups so independence is for the entire country.
A rather silly attempt to spoke the wheels of the Yes movement was launched by a very anonymous and rather media-shy trio of unionists a few months ago who petitioned for a separate referendum for Shetland, Orkney and the Western Isles.
This was designed to show support for independence from Scotland was a possibility and therefore oil and gas revenues would continue to flow to Westminster.
It would require annexing parts of Scotland with England and had as much chance of succeeding as Darling telling the truth.
The petition was open to anyone anywhere in the world to sign and received massive publicity from the pro-unionist media.
It failed spectacularly with less than 1200 signatures, we're not sure as a percentage what this equates to out of a population of 5 billion.
We are interested even less.
The number of followers on this page is three times higher than the petition signatories so relax, Scotland in it's entirety is going Yes.
Boom Time
Another subject you are really interested in, apart from "That Cat", is the oil and gas boom we are currently experiencing around Shetland. At first we could not understand the high level of interest in oil-related posts but soon realised it was due to little or no media coverage in most parts of Scotland.
For those of us living here or in Aberdeen, and the thousands working offshore, we tend to think you are all hearing about what is happening.
We realise those in the industry are often unable to disclose details from within and therefore leave most of the investigating to Buster who guards his sources very closely and then takes all the credit!
You will see reference made to oil and gas fields in both the North Sea and the Atlantic and may even have put some weight on figures spouted by the Office of Budget Responsibility and Alistair Darling.
Get one thing clear. They are all utter rubbish. Lies and deceit. An exact copy of the fraud perpetuated on Scotland in 1979 when the true size and value was hidden, the McCrone report buried and only seeing the light of day after an FOI request.
Our 70's oil boom resulted in the largest oil handling port in Europe being built in Shetland although it was supposed to last only 30 years because the "oil was going to run out by 2000".
The oil terminal is not only still here but is being virtually rebuilt at a cost of £800 million to make it last until 2050 (and the rest). Nor is it going to be lonely, it has a new next door neighbour - Total's massive Shetland Gas Plant (google it, look at the photos and also Sullom Voe Oil Terminal). Another £800 million.
A few miles away you will see a small airport at Scatsta but the chances of you ever landing there are nil, it has reached saturation point and is full to capacity, despite expanding it's hangars, terminal building and brand new control tower. Fixed wing aircraft in, choppers out, something it's been doing for nearly 40 years.
Soon we may see yet another huge construction site with another gas plant to be built by Chevron for their Rosebank field, do not google that the figures are too big to take in. The investment billions.
We have not mentioned Clair Ridge, BP's wee Atlantic margin field, around 85 square miles it was found in 1977. All you need to know it is being developed now and contains 8 billion barrels of the black gold. One field containing more than the entire reserves Darling claimed were left.
Some of you may be a wee bit confused when we print these oil field discoveries as "news", but it is not when they were discovered it is when they are being developed that's news, which is NOW!
Is half the oil and gas from the North Sea gone yet? Nope although it was supposed to have by 2003. Sir Ian Wood (Wood Group boss) said around £200 billion of oil and gas reserves could be extracted from the North Sea still. That's known reserves.
Looking west, we sea oil and gas fields so large, and stretching from Greenland to West Africa, holding unknown quantities, that 100 years of oil is probably a conservative estimate.
But Scotland will be a world leader in renewable energy long before that so much of it will not even be needed.
We are upgrading the terminal buildings, runways and hangars at our other airport at Sumburgh, just have a look for the passenger figures here. The car parking was trebled in size a few years ago but already overspill areas have been needed.
Lerwick Harbour has expanded to cope with the large increase in oil-related traffic and has opened new quays and lay-down areas - which immediately fill up. We now have six liners and barges with 2,000 workers- building oil and gas infrastructure - on board as living accommodation since all hotels are full.
We'll keep bringing you the news, you keep telling Scotland how big it really is and we'll all be beautiful and Yes next month.
I am sorry to say it shows how many people really understand how companies work with investment. Oil is only being search etc because of the lower tax that Government has given to them. Please remember the oil is in area of Scotland however it is private companies that are drilling with most of investors money. Any Government raises the price of tax will have be very sensibly good example power station are only going to be built in UK from french companies they will be heavy subsidies this comes from tax payers if this was not going to happen then you would not have much interest as the cost to build would be far too much for any investors to invest in. The only really country's that are doing really well from Oil are the ones live in the desert :D
I am sorry to say it shows how many people really understand how companies work with investment. Oil is only being search etc because of the lower tax that Government has given to them. Please remember the oil is in area of Scotland however it is private companies that are drilling with most of investors money. Any Government raises the price of tax will have be very sensibly good example power station are only going to be built in UK from french companies they will be heavy subsidies this comes from tax payers if this was not going to happen then you would not have much interest as the cost to build would be far too much for any investors to invest in. The only really country's that are doing really well from Oil are the ones live in the desert :D
I'd be inclined to think that what any company wants, whatever their business, is consistency and fairness in taxation policy....and no "windfall raids" because the country has drastically cocked-up its income calculations, and the captive company is an easy cash cow to help save the Government's face..and borrowing levels.
I agree with what you say but sad fact When you want to make money and you take risk you want as much pennies in your pocket and most regret money taken out to prop up miss leading facts about how we can live on oil. Scottish Government leads us to Norway making sample what Scotland can be however what they do not tell you Norway is not part of EU unlike Government who would want to make Scotland part of the EU this has had many problems including Northern Ireland Spain and so on. They also tell us we can be like New Zealand I wonder if New Zealand has free hospitals treatment out there? All sounds great but the true question should be if Yes wins what really Scotland be better off I really doubt this none of your electricity bills will come down or your tax so what's the point.
The YES campaign are indeed saying we can be like Norway, they are indeed saying that we can be like New Zealand, or France or Germany or Whichever the hell country we want or indeed we can take advice, examples and experiences from all these countries and be exactly who we want to be as an Independent Scotland. WE choose.
There is potential for your electricity bills to ocme down and even for your tax to come down and there is potential for your electricity bills to rise and your tax to rise. Just as there is in the UK.
The point Scout is that in an Independent Scotland we choose. So, we get to choose, to vote on energy policy and taxation policy and decide for ourselves whether taxes and Electric bills should rise or not. We cant do that now.
Snip
The point Scout is that in an Independent Scotland we choose.
The question on the 18th is glaringly simple - "Should Scotland be an independent country?"
We, each of us, need to ask ourselves that question only. Nowhere on the ballot paper will there be any mention of currency, NHS, benefits, austerity, oil, or anything else. All of these other issues can be clarified/negotiated after the 18th.
NOBODY can predict the outcome of any post-referendum discussions, either way.
Everything that is being said by both camps vis a vis post-referendum is smoke and mirrors.
Answer the question and nothing else - "you know it makes sense".
Yes but if we do want to be like Norway or New Zealand then we would have to follow why are they so call better off as I say Norway is not part of EU that speaks for it's self however SNP would like to be still part of EU. New Zealand and Norway or any other country you speak about does not have free NHS other then like we do Union as together this will change may not be over night but will in future Then people not looking at the bigger picture what people thinking of Scotland wanting to do this around parts of the world. China which is now big investor for Scotland would not like this in fact I know this for a fact. China would and may well pull out of lot of deals in Scotland as they do not like break up of country. You may well say this would not effect Scotland but business in Scotland it would.
We don't have to FOLLOW anybody Scout - we can do what we want, we can look around us at all sorts of countries for inspiration and and aspire to the best of those countries whilst choosing our own way. Remember this isnt about any of those countries. Its about Scotland. As for China - if deals are signed then they are signed and they will have to pay a penalty for pulling out. If they have deals with Scotland its because Scotland is the best option for those deals - why would that change? There is no evidence that businesses are failing to invest in Scotland or pulling out of deals in Scotland because of the prospect of independence. Scotland remains successful inm acheiving inward investment - in fact Glasgow has been hailed as the most successful city for inward investment in Scotland.
There is also some interesting information that I have just stumbled on. This concerns credit ratings and mortgage payments and bills. Lets see if I can share it with you guys
The UK government recently boiled down its case against independence to five points the most misleading was point 4.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/point4.jpg (http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/point4.jpg)
The claim rests on the assertion that the UK government pays a lower interest rate on its massive borrowing than it says an independent Scotland would. This is a fundamentally dubious claim – Ireland, with a supposedly bankrupt economy, actually pays a lower rate than the UK, and has done since May this year. Of the 28 EU member nations, the UK’s borrowing rate (or technically speaking, the yield on 10-year government bonds) is slap bang in the middle, in 15th place.
What’s more alarming, though, is the direction those rates are travelling in. The European Central Bank compiles data on movement in the rates since July 2013, and it makes startling reading.
Belgium: DOWN 37%
Germany: DOWN 29%
Ireland: DOWN 43%
Greece: DOWN 42%
Spain: DOWN 43%
France: DOWN 30%
Cyprus: n/c
Latvia: DOWN 26%
Luxembourg: DOWN 38%
Malta: DOWN 17%
Netherlands: DOWN 31%
Austria: DOWN 29%
Portugal: DOWN 46%
Slovenia: DOWN 52%
Slovakia: DOWN 34%
Bulgaria: DOWN 2%
Czech Rep: DOWN 33%
Denmark: DOWN 30%
Croatia: DOWN 24%
Lithuania: DOWN 18%
Hungary: DOWN 25%
Poland: DOWN 16%
Romania: DOWN 21%
Sweden: DOWN 26%
United Kingdom: UP 11%
Did you spot the odd one out, readers? The UK is the only country in the entire EU where the cost of government borrowing is going up, not down. Two of the nine members of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee, ended three years of unanimous 9-0 votes to keep the Bank’s base rate at the historic record low of 0.5%.
A hike in interest rates is coming sooner rather than later. The MPC set a target in 2013 of unemployment falling below 7% before it would increase the base rate, but in January was said to have lowered the rate, because falling unemployment was having a less beneficial impact on the economy than previously thought.
unemployment now stands at 6.6%, and the pressure on the Bank to raise the base rate is growing.
An independent Scotland in a currency union with the rest of the UK would of course suffer from any increase along with everyone else. The upward trajectory of UK borrowing costs actually serves mainly to increase the attractiveness of the various alternative currency options. But the notion that the “safety and security” of the Union provides a safe haven from mortgage and loan cost increases was a lie to start with, and is becoming more untrue with every passing month.
We don't have to FOLLOW anybody Scout - we can do what we want, we can look around us at all sorts of countries for inspiration and and aspire to the best of those countries whilst choosing our own way. Remember this isnt about any of those countries. Its about Scotland. As for China - if deals are signed then they are signed and they will have to pay a penalty for pulling out. If they have deals with Scotland its because Scotland is the best option for those deals - why would that change? There is no evidence that businesses are failing to invest in Scotland or pulling out of deals in Scotland because of the prospect of independence. Scotland remains successful inm acheiving inward investment - in fact Glasgow has been hailed as the most successful city for inward investment in Scotland.
There is also some interesting information that I have just stumbled on. This concerns credit ratings and mortgage payments and bills. Lets see if I can share it with you guys
The UK government recently boiled down its case against independence to five points the most misleading was point 4.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/point4.jpg (http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/point4.jpg)
The claim rests on the assertion that the UK government pays a lower interest rate on its massive borrowing than it says an independent Scotland would. This is a fundamentally dubious claim – Ireland, with a supposedly bankrupt economy, actually pays a lower rate than the UK, and has done since May this year. Of the 28 EU member nations, the UK’s borrowing rate (or technically speaking, the yield on 10-year government bonds) is slap bang in the middle, in 15th place.
What’s more alarming, though, is the direction those rates are travelling in. The European Central Bank compiles data on movement in the rates since July 2013, and it makes startling reading.
Belgium: DOWN 37%
Germany: DOWN 29%
Ireland: DOWN 43%
Greece: DOWN 42%
Spain: DOWN 43%
France: DOWN 30%
Cyprus: n/c
Latvia: DOWN 26%
Luxembourg: DOWN 38%
Malta: DOWN 17%
Netherlands: DOWN 31%
Austria: DOWN 29%
Portugal: DOWN 46%
Slovenia: DOWN 52%
Slovakia: DOWN 34%
Bulgaria: DOWN 2%
Czech Rep: DOWN 33%
Denmark: DOWN 30%
Croatia: DOWN 24%
Lithuania: DOWN 18%
Hungary: DOWN 25%
Poland: DOWN 16%
Romania: DOWN 21%
Sweden: DOWN 26%
United Kingdom: UP 11%
Did you spot the odd one out, readers? The UK is the only country in the entire EU where the cost of government borrowing is going up, not down. Two of the nine members of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee, ended three years of unanimous 9-0 votes to keep the Bank’s base rate at the historic record low of 0.5%.
A hike in interest rates is coming sooner rather than later. The MPC set a target in 2013 of unemployment falling below 7% before it would increase the base rate, but in January was said to have lowered the rate, because falling unemployment was having a less beneficial impact on the economy than previously thought.
unemployment now stands at 6.6%, and the pressure on the Bank to raise the base rate is growing.
An independent Scotland in a currency union with the rest of the UK would of course suffer from any increase along with everyone else. The upward trajectory of UK borrowing costs actually serves mainly to increase the attractiveness of the various alternative currency options. But the notion that the “safety and security” of the Union provides a safe haven from mortgage and loan cost increases was a lie to start with, and is becoming more untrue with every passing month.
Yes Northern Ireland housing market has collapsed Spain market. Greece so they would be spending less and borrowing would go down How many have been bailed out To number 4 any separate from Union would need to be paid for so cost of borrowing houses could well go up for Scotland interest rates again I will point out only 5 million live in Scotland most of tax will come from Business will pay tax and they will be hit a lot to pay for Scotland to separate. To China most contracts are for a time period and normally singed up again I thinking of what has already happen with Russia with Whisky they have stopped buying from Scotland that has lost a lot from this.
Russia hasnt stopped buying Scotch at all. In fact the industry says
While there is currently no official proposal for spirits to face an import ban, deteriorating relations between Russia and the EU could damage the recent strong growth seen in Russia by the whisky sector, which in turn has buoyed many of the major drinks groups’ recent results.
According to the Scotch Whisky Association, total exports to Russia are worth more than £130 million a year, making the country the seventh largest market for Scotch whisky in value terms.
In its year-end results last month, Diageo reported 4% growth in net sales to Russia, driven largely by whisky brands such as Bushmills and Bell’s. Meanwhile Pernod Ricard posted 6% growth in Russia during its last full financial year, driven mainly by Jameson and Ballantine’s
This article dates from the 7th August in http://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2014/08/russia-rift-threatens-drink-sector/
Another article states "Current sanctions are not affecting imports of Scotch Whisky. "
This is a threat to EU members and will either happen or not happen whether Scotland is Independent or not. If the suggestion is that Scotland will not be able to weather the reduction in sales which a ban on whisky would cause then you are right it would be a challenge especially as whisky sales to Russia have been steadily growing, however there are other growth areas and we will have to work to overcome the drop in income which that would generate. The ban on imports of Scotch to Russia is not going to topple the Economy of an independent Scotland nor is it going to send it into decline.
The point from the above post is that BORROWING costs in the countries above have fallen. The only place where borrowing costs are going up is the UK. That even with its top flight credit rating (?) the UK's cost of borrowing is going up whilst countries like Ireland are paying less for their borrowing.
I know this has nothing to do with Scotland trying to separate however it shows how small issues can get bigger at the moment being together is better to weather the problem separate would be huge finacely to Scotland. I would agree this would not make Scotland bankruptcy but you would not want many like this for it to happen
Scottish fishermen have warned of serious implications for the industry after Russia banned all imports of fish, meat and other foods from the EU.
President Vladimir Putin's order suggested a return to Russian consumer isolation not seen since the days of the Soviet Union.
Other industry bodies, including the Scottish Whisky Association, said they were concerned their products could be hit next.
The ban was ordered in retaliation against EU and US sanctions, designed to stop Russia-backed arms being funnelled into Ukraine.
But Putin's administration ordered tougher-than-expected clampdowns, leading to warnings they would hurt Russian consumers.
The move affects all 28 countries that make up the European Union, as well as the United States, Canada, Australia and Norway. The ban covers all meat, fish, poultry, dairy, fruit and vegetables, meaning Scottish salmon, mackerel, beef and even haggis are now off the menu in Russia. Alcohol is currently excluded, alongside tea, coffee, sugar and grains.
The sanctions, which began yesterday, are due to last for a year.
Scotland's exports to Russia are worth about £200 million a year, including £25m of whisky. Russia has also threatened to ban EU and US airlines from flying across its territories, a move that could significantly increase the duration and the cost of many flights.
Last month Downing Street warned UK businesses to prepare themselves for "pain" as the EU and US announced sanctions on doing business with Russia. At that stage the Prime Minister David Cameron warned the crackdown might not go far enough and might have to be extended.
Bertie Armstrong, the chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation, warned: "We are at this stage extremely concerned about the impact they will have on our mackerel fleet."
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said the action would "inevitably have an impact on some sectors of our economy, most notably for our fish exporters".
I know this has nothing to do with Scotland trying to separate however it shows how small issues can get bigger at the moment being together is better to weather the problem separate would be huge finacely to Scotland. I would agree this would not make Scotland bankruptcy but you would not want many like this for it to happen
Scottish fishermen have warned of serious implications for the industry after Russia banned all imports of fish, meat and other foods from the EU.
President Vladimir Putin's order suggested a return to Russian consumer isolation not seen since the days of the Soviet Union.
Other industry bodies, including the Scottish Whisky Association, said they were concerned their products could be hit next.
The ban was ordered in retaliation against EU and US sanctions, designed to stop Russia-backed arms being funnelled into Ukraine.
But Putin's administration ordered tougher-than-expected clampdowns, leading to warnings they would hurt Russian consumers.
The move affects all 28 countries that make up the European Union, as well as the United States, Canada, Australia and Norway. The ban covers all meat, fish, poultry, dairy, fruit and vegetables, meaning Scottish salmon, mackerel, beef and even haggis are now off the menu in Russia. Alcohol is currently excluded, alongside tea, coffee, sugar and grains.
The sanctions, which began yesterday, are due to last for a year.
Scotland's exports to Russia are worth about £200 million a year, including £25m of whisky. Russia has also threatened to ban EU and US airlines from flying across its territories, a move that could significantly increase the duration and the cost of many flights.
Last month Downing Street warned UK businesses to prepare themselves for "pain" as the EU and US announced sanctions on doing business with Russia. At that stage the Prime Minister David Cameron warned the crackdown might not go far enough and might have to be extended.
Bertie Armstrong, the chief executive of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation, warned: "We are at this stage extremely concerned about the impact they will have on our mackerel fleet."
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said the action would "inevitably have an impact on some sectors of our economy, most notably for our fish exporters".
You are absolutely right to say that we need to be prepared for these things happening but Scout, and Im not being confrontaional here but I would really like to know hwo you think being part of the UK will help Scotland in dealing with these issues. You have said a couple of times that being together is better but I would like to know how you think it is better or what you think will be done better in the UK than will be done in an Independent scotland? It would really help.
Good question and I think this is why having differences is good idea in this world. Lets say it is like a cake when you cut half away it starts to get weaker and of course less of the cake left. This is the same as Union UK. All money is shared as one through out the country Scotland Ireland Wales England the more you cut the weaker it gets does this makes sense now. So I am not just saying Scotland would be the only one however they would be the biggest effected as the size of the area left to number of people live in it would add more of burden to people etc. What I look at is what is happening now with Scottish Government in power one of the boat yards in fact if I am correct the last is closing If Scottish Government was good they would not allow this to happen so being split would make it worse in my view.
Sir Ian Wood predicts there is 25 billion barrels left in the North Sea and $2500 billion of oil sales left to go. That is strange, he was trying to tell us the Scottish government had overstated oil reserves by 60% when in fact 25 billion barrels is what the Scottish government have stated is left. Weird.
What is he up to?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIIW6hg--AA
Rheghead You may well be right however there is one small part that is not being said these figures are what the companies make not the Tax that the Government receives. My point I have made the more Tax Government makes on Oil companies lets be clear they own the oil the less it will be of attractive for investors to keep drilling for oil. What you have also have shown how complex it is to predict the number of oil is out there. Is this a risk that most people are relying on to go separate.
Scotland is not reliant on oil to be able to afford to be independent. We have a varied and robust economy even without oil. The oil will either be a huge bonus or a really huge bonus depending on who you ask.
Squidge I am pleased to hear we are now on the same level when it comes to oil argument Yes it is bonus but should never be used to just keep Scotland going however that is not what SNP are saying. They say oil is the only thing that will make Scotland work by being separated. I also note SNP was going to Shetland I think this has backfired on them. As it now shows how much Alex has split the country already Shetland now says they do not want to be part of UK or Scotland. What ever happens on 18th you can be sure Alex has changed the views and the country for ever and investment will always be weary where to put their money in and what part well done SNP
That is absolutely NOT what The SNP are saying. They and the yes campaign and organisations like standard and poor have repeatedly said that even without oil Scotland can afford to be a prosperous independent country. Oil will however allow us to grow and invest in our economy, in our infrastructure and in an oil fund. There is also no evidence that companies are failing to invest or that Scotland won't attract business and investment. Scotland remains high on the scale if inward investment with Glasgow one of the leading examples of this in Europe. Your comments about Shetland also appear to be wide of the Mark. Yes Shetland have reported lively meetings with a wide range of opinions but only a very small number of people suggesting that Shetland would wNt to be totally independent. An independent poll showed less than 8% of the island population wanted this option.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.