1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Bye Bye and thanks for all the oil.

Discussion in 'Scotland - education news' started by lurk_much, May 6, 2011.

  1. lurk_much

    lurk_much Occasional commenter

    Congratulations.
    I hope you make a decent stab at being your own country.
    Good Luck.
     
  2. It's only their oil if the border does an abrupt right turn when it reaches the coast. If the border continued into the sea on the same plane that it cuts across the country, then much of the oil is English.

     
  3. The Continental Shelf Act 1964 defines the UK North Sea maritime area to the north of latitude 55 degrees north as being under the jurisdiction of Scots law. This means that 90% of the UK's oil resources are under Scottish jurisdiction.
    A more recent estimation by Kemp and Stephen in 1999 using the International Principal of equidistance as used by the United Nations to determine international maritime disputes may put this as high as 98% of oil resources being under Scottish jurisdiction.
     
  4. Thanks Stooshie, I didn't know that! So, it's totally true, that..... Scotland never gave up sovereignty to England, just its chance to claim a fair deal.... by law.... and it was always 'Scotland's Oil'! 7:84 Company were a great lot, and spoke sense long ago through 'the Black Black Oil'.
    There's some kind of 'oil fund', I hear. Scotland never really got a publically declared share of that, did they? Isn't that still due us?
     
  5. lurk_much

    lurk_much Occasional commenter

    It was probably for the best. You need to be careful around the English if you have buckets of oil. It makes us come over all militaristic. If you had been independent you might have been annexed.

     
  6. We'll see. There's a lot of water yet to come under this bridge.
    The pundit chatter around a pre-emptive strike by Westminster is a case in point. Cameron and Co at Westminster had better tread very carefully: in particular, they might take a look a look at Canada's experience in this, to see how the Canadian federal govt handled the independence movement and referendum in the province of Quebec (which was forcibly annexed by the English not long after Culloden under the command of General James Wolfe, who himself saw formative service that day at Drummossie Moor).
    Quebec separatism/nationalism died once Quebecers obtained the self-determination they needed within Canada. The Canadian federal govt stayed well clear, allowing Quebec to formulate the question (the question is absolutely key), and hold its referendum as, when, and how it wanted to according to law without interference.
    Whether the unionists here will be so circumspect remains to be seen, what with Lord Forsyth and his ilk already frothing at the mouth.
    It's going to be an interesting ride and my money is on Salmond directing it brilliantly.
     
  7. Oil facts and figures here, if you can stand all the axe-grinding that goes with it. I make no claim for this site's approach or accuracy, simply throw it in to the forum for interest's sake.
    http://www.oilofscotland.org/index.html
     
  8. Read this enlightening bit of disinformation, which is every bit as biased and engineered as the website I posted previously, only much more dangerous, because it comes from the horse's mouth at Westminster.....or maybe from some other part of the horse's anatomy....?
    Anyway, propaganda alert---get out your read-between-the-lines specs, folks! [​IMG]
    http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/files/Scotland%20and%20Oil%20-%20Background%20paper.pdf
     
  9. Crowbob

    Crowbob Established commenter

    If they become independent again, I would be worried that the English will say they have weapons of mass destruction. After all, they have those naval submarines...
    Invasion? To ensure national security!

     
  10. davieee

    davieee Occasional commenter

    As it currently stands the SNP policy is for an independent Scotland to be part of the EU, which on the face of it seems logical.

    However a major gripe of the SNP is that the believe interest rates are set by the BoE to suit the south east and that Scotland should set their own interest rates and make our own political decisions. They also reckon that they would keep the pound as the main currency. There is also a legal debate about whether or not an independent Scotland would actually gain entry into the EU although personally i'd wager there would not be too much (if any) of a problem in this regard. Even so new entrants to the EU and the Eurozone, an independent Scotland would effectively be one, have to adopt the Euro and adhere fully to the existing agreements. There are no opt outs or exemptions for new entrants.

    SNP supporters should remind themselves that less than 2 months ago the EU bank raised interest rates to suit the economies of France and Germany where the economy is growing faster than expected but is making a bad situation worse for countries such as Greece and Portugal.

    The issue of "oil" has been mentioned here also and again the SNP are being Janus faced. They think it is great when the price goes up as the additional revenues make an independent Scotland appear more financially viable. This is not mentioned when it sends the price of fuel through the roof (even more for people in rural areas).

    Further if an independent Scotland would be so fantastically rich, then the SNP should tell us how much we should expect to be paying into the EU. Ask any braveheart and they'll tell you they don't want to subsidise the UK but they appear to be willing to do the same for they EU.

    By and large, the SNP is parochial, anti English (some would argue racist) and populated by people with massive chips on their shoulders whose aim is to take all the levers of government from Westminster and give them to Brussels and not Edinburgh.
     
  11. Freddie92

    Freddie92 New commenter

    The oil is 'owned' by the major oil companies who last time we checked were privately owned.
     
  12. sbf

    sbf

    Your right, the oil is owned by the government and is extracted under licence by the oil companies.
    Its the cost of the licence, corporation tax and VAT/fuel duty that makes the money.

     
  13. davieee

    davieee Occasional commenter

    I am not an international lawyer, far from it, but if articles in the media is anything to go by the general consensus seems to be that the UK would still exist but without Scotland and therefore wouls still be a part of the EU.

    no luck
     

Share This Page