Scotland

[REDWOOD]

Would Scotland be sustainable on it's oil and gas reserves if it went independant

 

[mbc]

Would Scotland be sustainable on it's oil and gas reserves if it went independant

I think what oil or gas they have left isnt the most important issue.
The vast human resource is, if these industrious, innovative and talented people have the self confidence to go it alone as an independent nation, I'm sure they'll thrive.
By all accounts what the future holds is less provincial nationalism and more of a continental approach, the world is definitely getting smaller in terms of travel times and ease of communication, so smaller devolved units in a wider Europe makes sense.
I look forward to the referendum with a bit of trepidation, as one of the consequences of them going their own way if they were to vote "yes", would be the rest of Britain would be more likely to be stuck with the bloody tories in perpetuity robbing the poor to make the super rich richer.

 

[user 6228]

Would Scotland be sustainable on it's oil and gas reserves if it went independant

The act of Union 1707 was a financial bail out of the Scottish banks
in return for them not being able to side with the French.

If they want independence they can have it.

But it must be the full monty:

No half measures. No pound, no army, no navy no airforce, no money, no preference for defence contracts, no aid,
passports and customs at the border. And all Scottish nationals will require a work permit as they will not be part of the European Union, unless they have been resident in England wales and Northern Ireland for a minimum of say 4 years and are in employment,retired or in full time education.

They can no have their piece and eat it.

 

[roche]

Actually, I think everyone is missing the real question - Should the UK declare independence from London? If Scotland does become independent, I can see England wanting to join it - but without Westminster...In which case the future of Scotland might be rather more certain.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Yes. Perhaps the rUK should be having a referendum

 

[user 6228]

Actually, I think everyone is missing the real question - Should the UK declare independence from London? If Scotland does become independent, I can see England wanting to join it - but without Westminster...In which case the future of Scotland might be rather more certain.

I Think the "home counties" (dreadful term) including Berkshire would remain with London.

 

[madasafish]

I write as an exiled Scot.

When I return to Scotland, I am struck by the sense of entitlement and the sheer ill-health of much of the urban population (life expectancies in parts of Glasgow would shame Iraq) and the political attitudes which are reminiscent of the worst of the 1970s ..

I would support independence for them as the flood of emigrants willing to work hard would improve the economy of England as would the repatriation of much commerce and industry..

And on a political note, it would remove a bunch of Scottish MPs who decide things for England that English MPs cannot decide for Scotland.

 

[victor meldrew]

Europe is trying to combine nations whilst existing kingdoms/alliances are busily tearing themselves apart!
Maybe the old adage "divide and conquer " is at work ,the ultimate aim being to federalise Europe?
VM


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[domino]

I live in London and would like to see an independent Scotland, it would be good for Scotland and England.

I'm not sure if the idea Scotland would float off into the sunset on a lake of oil money is that realistic. For a start you'd have to assume that any negotiations would include a division of those assets. I've also noticed that some like to lump all of the gas and oil revenues into one lump. There is a pretty even slip with oil fields being off the coast of Scotland whereas the majority of gas fields are between the English and Dutch coasts.

 

[madasafish]

I live in London and would like to see an independent Scotland, it would be good for Scotland and England.

I'm not sure if the idea Scotland would float off into the sunset on a lake of oil money is that realistic. For a start you'd have to assume that any negotiations would include a division of those assets. I've also noticed that some like to lump all of the gas and oil revenues into one lump. There is a pretty even slip with oil fields being off the coast of Scotland whereas the majority of gas fields are between the English and Dutch coasts.

Any suggestion that you might bring reason into the debate will be fiercely opposed by the SNP...

 

[mbc]

I write as an exiled Scot.

When I return to Scotland, I am struck by the sense of entitlement .

This sense of entitlement attitude is noticeable in many populations world wide where a peoples own powers of self determination have been taken away from them and they are governed by people with very different priorities living in different realities a long way away from them.
The answer IMHO has to be to right historical wrongs by boosting collective self confidence sufficiently so that people will be able to govern themselves, or at least be governed by people they feel sufficiently connected with that they feel they can determine their own outcomes to a certain extent. The "entitlement" culture would surely evaporate and with a bit of a say in their own future this might encourage healthier lifestyles and brighter futures all round

 

[pargyle]

I think what oil or gas they have left isnt the most important issue.
The vast human resource is, if these industrious, innovative and talented people have the self confidence to go it alone as an independent nation, I'm sure they'll thrive.
By all accounts what the future holds is less provincial nationalism and more of a continental approach, the world is definitely getting smaller in terms of travel times and ease of communication, so smaller devolved units in a wider Europe makes sense.
I look forward to the referendum with a bit of trepidation, as one of the consequences of them going their own way if they were to vote "yes", would be the rest of Britain would be more likely to be stuck with the bloody tories in perpetuity robbing the poor to make the super rich richer.

If Scotland is such a great place with talented, industrious and innovative people ... why have most of them left (including my ancestors !) to settle somewhere other than Scotland ?

Personally, I think a separate, independent, Scotland would not be good for the Scots or the rest of the UK for that matter, the population tax base is not big enough to support the existing infrastructure (it's a big country) and you only have to look at the geographic spread of where the populace resides to realise that areas like the Highlands and Islands would struggle to find the necessary funds, from within their local populace, to maintain services.

Relying upon North Sea Gas and Oil, as a panacea, is a very risky proposition. Under the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea Principle of Equidistance a large proportion of the most productive North Sea Oil fields would remain under England's jurisduction, if Scotland were independent, as the dividing line between Scottish maritime areas and England's heads in a line more or less North East from Berwick on Tweed towards Norway .. not East towards Denmark. Look at the oil and gas reserves within that sector compared to England's sector ...

Indeed, if Alex Salmond's unrealistic proposed 'grabbing' of all the sea areas containing oil (on a distance from coastline/continental shelf basis) around Scotland were ratified, then Northern Ireland would almost certainly lay claim to some of the potential oil bearing maritime locations to the West of Scotlands coast line ... I think it would be a completely acrimonious debate in view of the potential revenue.

The risks to the existing Financial Services industry based in Scotland (and worth billions to the UK economy), should they become independent, are huge ... without the backing of the Bank of England and an independent Scottish currency a number of major players in the banking sector have already said that they would have to relocate offices (and the transactions that currently occur in Glasgow and Edinburgh) to England in order to continue to secure their lending through the Bank of England. Without this service industry in Scotland there will be fewer jobs and even less taxation opportunities.

And what becomes of our armed forces ... do we simply give the Scots the Scottish regiments ... or do we repatriate every Scottish soldier, sailor or airman with a proportion of the equipment ? Total nightmare ?

A strong and mutually focused United Kingdom is a force to be reckoned with (and has been many times in the past), Scotland, as a nation, has contributed far in excess of its size in all respects and I think that this referendum should be a wake up call to the rest of the UK to address some of the issues which appear to leave some Scots feeling disenfranchised ... but I sincerely hope that the majority of the Scottish population will see the good sense of remaining an integral part of Great Britain.

The devolved Governments are a good thing that address a lot of regional issues and I'm in favour of extending the powers they currently have to the point where Scotland and Wales, effectively, control their own destiny - but still remain within the United Kingdom.

The British Commonwealth has been an equally remarkable entity which we seem to be setting aside in favour of an ever closer relationship with 'European' countries who (IMO) seem always to get the better end of the deal. I'm not anti Europe or anti Scotland ... I'm more pro-Great Britain.

 

[mbc]

The relevance of oil is more in the power of BP to discourage yes voters than the significance of any reserves, which are something of a busted flush by now.

 

[pargyle]

The relevance of oil is more in the power of BP to discourage yes voters than the significance of any reserves, which are something of a busted flush by now.

That's what I thought but there are some revised estimates based on both new extraction techology, west of shetland oil fields and deeper reserves that indicate there could still be the potential for up 24 billion barrels available. That level of reserves, at our present extraction rates, would take it well in the 2050's ... by which time the both most of largely uninhabited Scotland and the north sea will be covered in windmills with any luck !

 

[Black Comb]

Well my pension is with standard life so in the absence of any certainty on currency, tax position, etc. I will be pulling it out and putting it into an English registered company before the vote. (SL have this morning issued a statement about these potential problems).
I just can't take the risk. I do not trust politicians in general and Salmond in particular as he has stated he will default on the debt. Not a man of integrity then.

Personally apart from the Jacobite rebellion (where both sides did plenty of killing) I cannot see what harm being part of the UK has ever done to the Scots.
In return we lately have had Blair (scottish) and Brown (very Scottish) who wrecked our economy and spent, spent and spent again for which we are all paying. Never mind the fudge they created which allows Scottish MP's to vote on English matters but not vice versa.

Strange how about 2 million voters can cause such a potential mess for the remaining 61 million (UK pop. 63 million, Scotland 5 million, roughly 2 million Scots in favour at the moment).

 

[alanf]

There are plenty of examples of countries of about that size (population and land area) being viable. To take examples at about that latitude, Denmark has 5 point something million, Republic of Ireland 4 point something. RoI even has a similar population density.

If the vote was for independence there would be some sort of fast track to EU membership. For at least a few years there will be a currency tied to the pound, probably something like the RoI Punt between the 1920s and 70s. If movement between Scotland and RoI won't need a passport, and RoI to NI stays as it is, then defacto you won't need one Scotland to NI, and therefore England and Wales.

There are a lot in entrenched positions being taken but I can't really see that it makes a massive difference either way for Scots. And it makes even less of a difference for English or Welsh, since their governance has been in the possession of the city financiers for some time. All the playground warnings of no access to the BBC and we'll take our currency ball home are just playground huffs. They do no more than confirm politicians as the least suitable people to be in charge of anything.

 

[Black Comb]

I'm not saying it is not viable. Its just a small percentage of the population that are driving this. Not fair on the vast majority IMO.

 

[midnight sun]

Agree!

 

[mbc]

I'm not saying it is not viable. Its just a small percentage of the population that are driving this. Not fair on the vast majority IMO.

What if the vast majority of people in Europe want the UK to adopt the Euro ? It would only be a tiny percentage of the population of Europe putting a spanner in the works for the rest, non ?
(not saying I think the EU should dictate what currency we use, just pointing out the weak argument above)

 

[alanf]

I'm not saying it is not viable. Its just a small percentage of the population that are driving this. Not fair on the vast majority IMO.

YouGov questioned more than 2,500 people across Scotland, Wales and England.

Some 46% of those outside of Scotland asked to imagine waking up and finding the country independent from the rest of the UK said they "wouldn't mind", while 34% said they would be dismayed and 11% said they would be delighted.

I'd say the evidence is that it's a clear minority (of the rest of the UK) who want Scotland to remain in union. If the question was a more explicit "would you want to deny independence even if a majority of Scots voted for it?" you'd be well down in single figures.