« Trossachs steamship saved | Main | Exit from Iraq »
January 29, 2005
Oil
Stuart Dickson had an excellent piece on Scotland’s oil and gas on ‘Independence’ yesterday.
I have been bemused by the Labour argument that Scotland’s finances would be destabilized if we received the money, because the receipts go up and down each year. This was the argument used by Hallwood and Macdonald at the Fraser of Allander Institute (16 September). Anyway this concern should be eliminated by the SNP proposal for a Norwegian-style oil fund.
I wonder how the Norwegians would react to the idea of their oil receipts going to Copenhagen, in return for Danish pocketmoney!
scottish-independence.blogspot.com/2005/01/scottish-oil-and-gas-to-last-until_28.html
Posted by Simon Holledge at January 29, 2005 12:30 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.skakagrall.com/cgi-bin/MT/mt-tb.cgi/232
Comments
-"I wonder how the Norwegians would react to the idea of their oil receipts going to Copenhagen, in return for Danish pocketmoney!"
Small point of information. In 1905 Norway gained her independence from Sweden, not Denmark; although she had been under the Danish crown for several centuries earlier in her history.
Posted by: Stuart Dickson at January 29, 2005 02:14 PM
Presumably the money going to Stockholm would be even worse - from the Norwegian perspective!
Posted by: Simon Holledge at January 29, 2005 04:31 PM
Not sure actually. The Norwegians pretend that they don't really like either the Swedes nor the Danes, but when push comes to shove the Scandinavians stick together and support each other. I would like to think that post-independence there would be renewed solidarity among the 6 nations of these isles: Scots, Manx, Irish, Cornish, Welsh and English. We have far more in common than separates us. But just as I do not live out of my sister's pocket, I would prefer us to each run our own household budget.
Posted by: Stuart Dickson at January 29, 2005 05:43 PM
We must recognize that the problem relationship in these islands is not Scotland/England, but Ireland/England. For that reason the notion of 'renewed solidarity' seems unlikely.
Unlike Scandinavia we have a religious divide and a border dispute. (As far as I know there are no border disputes remaining in Scandinavia.) We also have a potential problem with the British monarchy, which London would probably attempt to impose on any kind of larger political grouping.
Also, are you really suggesting a separate role for the Cornish and the Manx?
Posted by: Simon Holledge at January 30, 2005 03:16 PM
Simon,
I fear that you have misunderstood. I am not advocating some New Union. I am merely suggesting that post-independence we would be very wise to imitate the Nordic Council, with a Council of the Isles. A loose forum for discussion and occasional co-ordination of joint action. No role whatsoever for any symbolic heads of state, like a monarch.
The Manx and Cornish questions must be solved by the Manx and Cornish - it is none of my business. But equally, I would say that the UK government and its agents like the BBC should stop interfering too.
Incidentally, yes, there are one or two territorial frictions in the Nordic area (Ă…land, Karelia, Sami territories, Faeroes, Greenland). But nothing to remotely rival Irish/English problems.
Posted by: Stuart Dickson at January 30, 2005 09:48 PM
'Renewed solidarity' sounded like an alliance, but there is no disagreement. I would be all for something like the Nordic Council.
Scottish independence might well have a good influence on other relationships, moving some of our long standing political logjams out of the way. In a sense, this is already happening with devolution, with certain reforms being introduced in Scotland before England.
Posted by: Simon Holledge at January 30, 2005 10:52 PM