Cameron’s Prime Aberdeen Angus Bullshit 158


David Cameron is peddling bullshit of the premium Aberdeen Angus kind today.  At today’s oil prices, recoverable North Sea oil is worth a minimum of 1.2 trillion and a maximum of 2.4 trillion dollars.   Cameron is claiming that potential will not be released without government subsidy of 24 billion dollars, and that only the UK government’s “broad shoulders” can raise this.

It is nauseous to dive into such bulllshit to analyse it.  To knock a few noughts off, Cameron is saying that it is impossible to raise £10 investment if you have a guaranteed return of £5,000 and possibly £10,000.  Salmond’s counter that Norway manages these things is perfectly valid.

Am I the only one who wonders why the taxpayer, under Cameron’s plan, the taxpayer – ie you and me – should fund $20 billion to decommission oil platforms when the oil companies made, at today’s values, over $400 billion in straight profit from those platforms?  That payment to the oil companies constitutes 83% of the money from the UK which Cameron claims an independent Scotland would miss out on.  The money would not actually go to Scotland at all – it would go to British Gas, BP, Shell, Exxon and other such needy people, to compensate them for polluting us (sic!).

Finally, the taxation revenue to Scotland from the oil and gas after independence will be a minimum of $240 billion and a maximum of $500 billion more to the Scottish taxpayer if Scotland were independent, than the share Scotland will get within the UK.  Purely in terms of government revenue, Scotland will still be at least US 216 billion better off in taxes even if it pays the precious 24 billion Cameron is harping on about today.

Finally, the Cabinet is in Aberdeen and discussing vital revenue and investment questions, but where are they hiding George Osborne?  Have they hidden him behind a curtain with a bucket on his head?  Come on, we want George! Bring out your Family Trust Fund Public Schoolboys!!

 


158 thoughts on “Cameron’s Prime Aberdeen Angus Bullshit

1 2 3 6
  • Ba'al Zevul (Etc)

    Possibly like yourself, I was under the impression that production licenses were granted on the basis that the company would be responsible for the cost of decommissioning when the well ran dry. Anyone know? However, our fiscally aware and (some-) taxpayer – friendly government introduced tax breaks for decommissioning and a Brown Field Allowance for companies redeveloping existing prospects.
    I’m not sure where Cameron gets his £24Bn figure: the industry spent ~£10Bn in 2013 alone on decommissioning, and if Cameron’s generous promise is amortised over the expected life of the N.Sea fields, it’s quite a small annual proportion of the cost – one which the companies could be expected to bear themselves.

  • Anon

    Hi Craig, what would your position be should Orkney and Shetland seek independence from an independent Scotland?

  • Someone

    “The money would not actually go to Scotland at all – it would go to British Gas, BP, Shell, Exxon and other such needy people, to compensate them for polluting us (sic!).”

    That would also be the case if Scotland votes YES for independence!!!.

  • Clark

    Craig wrote:

    At today’s oil prices, recoverable North Sea oil is worth a minimum of 1.2 trillion and a maximum of 2.4 trillion dollars

    That’s at today’s prices. But oil will continue to become more expensive as other reserves become depleted.

    Scotland, escape Westminster’s sweaty grip while you can. You won’t get another chance. You can always bargain later, from a position of strength, if you have self-determination.

  • Clark

    Someone 2:16 pm:
    blockquote>That would also be the case if Scotland votes YES for independence!!!.

    Not necessarily. With the power in Scotland’s own hands, the oil could be left in the ground (or extracted more slowly) where it would be a highly valuable appreciating investment.

    It’s the rate of extraction that affect global warming. That oil is not going to fall in value. Slower extraction is the better long-term strategy, in terms of both money-value and humanity’s future.

  • craig Post author

    Anon

    That is an ancient unionist canard. My position would be that Orkney and Shetland were entitled to a democratic choice on the matter. But there has in fact been no evidence of a serious desire by the people of Orkney and Shetland to leave Scotland.

  • craig Post author

    Incidentally an independent Scotland minus Orkney and Shetland would still have a great deal more oil revenue than it gets within the UK.

  • Someone

    Clark 24 Feb, 2014 – 2:23 pm

    Wake up!, if Scotland votes for independence it will hold an election, I think I am on safe ground by saying that election will be won by NuLabour or the SNP….Both are (far right)right wing parties!.

  • Clark

    Someone, 2:36 pm; I’m awake, thank you. I spoke to people all over Scotland, and an electorally significant proportion of them are supporting the SNP to gain independence, but intend vote otherwise in post-referendum elections. Remember that Scotland has a proportional representation system.

  • Anon

    Craig, there has been no serious desire to leave the UK. Leaving Scotland is an entirely different matter, and there are noises that the proud people of those Islands might wish to free themselves from the oppressive yoke of the Glasgow Raj and take all that lovely Kraken oil with them!

  • Anon

    Like Craig I’m not Scottish and couldn’t give two hoots wich way the Scots vote, but I can see two possible outcomes:

    The Scots vote No and the Nat Socs blame the English.

    The Scots vote Yes and the Nat Socs blame the subsequent disaster on the English.

  • PI3GUB

    Well put Craig, essential reading as ever.

    Once Scotland has seen the light and voted overwhelmingly to self-govern, there will be an opening for an experienced operator in the new Scottish Foreign Office.
    Hardeep Singh Kohli has already agreed to be Secretary for England.
    We can’t promise a huge expenses budget, numerous letterhead chairmanships or ermine but you will make history come alive for our children, fancy it?

  • Someone

    Clark 24 Feb, 2014 – 2:42 pm

    If Scotland votes for independence we will ALL find out. Reminds me of all who had such high hopes in Barack Obama when he was elected, you would find that if Scotland votes for independence it will only be VERY slightly better off.

  • Clark

    There certainly is a “significant desire” for independence. My conversations across Scotland split roughly equally three ways; Yes, No, and Still Thinking Hard. There wasn’t a single “don’t care”.

  • Anon

    Clark, the threats, abuse and intimidation directed against “no” campaigners have been appalling. I listened to a Scottish “no” campaigner on the radio earlier who had to close down his Facebook account because of the abuse he was receiving – from his ‘friends’. The Nat Socs do come across as a nasty and unpleasant bunch (see Farage in Edinburgh). It’s such a pity to see many on this blog support blood and soil nationalism when we should all be living happily together in the EU, in a world with no borders, and with all the oil left in the ground because of global warming.

  • Richard

    Yes, Cameron is certainly a tit.

    I am really not a separatist (but then neither is Salmond, eh?) seeing the setting up of bits and bobs of parliaments across the country as depressingly petty and parochial. But then I’m one of the poor sods who has to fund the expense accounts and the paper-clip budget.

    Nevertheless, with friends like Cameron and Osbourne, who needs enemies.

    Is it possible that these two clowns actually want to provoke separatism (or at least Salmond’s model of European Federalism) in the hope that it will guarantee them a Con Majority south of the border? Just a thought.

  • Anon

    Someone, your posts have been spot on. This dream of a little progressive utopia in Scotland will receive a rough awakening if Scotland votes yes. My prediction is a lurch to the right as the realities of separation from the English teet begin to kick in.

  • Clark

    Anon, speaking with my posh, plummy English accent (thanks, Mum) all across Scotland, I encountered no anti-English racism whatsoever. I was warmly welcomed everywhere.

    Yes, a world without borders is also my hope for the more distant future. Escaping Westminster’s clutches would be a great step on the path into a bigger world for Scotland.

  • Clark

    Anon, 2:47 pm

    “I’m not Scottish and couldn’t give two hoots wich way the Scots vote”

    For someone who claims not to care, you post a lot of anti-independence comments on this thread.

  • Someone

    Clark 24 Feb, 2014 – 2:54 pm

    I hear that some in the “those who rule us” are talking about having a scottish coronation of the scottish monarch, if that doesn’t tell you that the (so called) new Scotland will be just as diseased as the system that went before then nothing will!.

  • Clark

    Anon, 3:13 pm

    “My prediction is a lurch to the right as the realities of separation from the English teet begin to kick in”

    The conversations I had indicate the exact opposite. It was the Conservative supporters who opposed independence. Those who supported independence were looking to escape the Rightward bias of Westminster. Socialist outlook is strong in Scotland.

    “Teet”? And you claim not to care? You seem exactly the sort of person Scots want to free themselves from.

  • Anon

    Clark

    “all across Scotland, I encountered no anti-English racism whatsoever. I was warmly welcomed everywhere.”

    “Racism” is a bit of a strong word here but you will note I was talking about abuse towards Scottish “no” campaigners and a visiting party leader, not the English.

    “Yes, a world without borders is also my hope for the more distant future. Escaping Westminster’s clutches would be a great step on the path into a bigger world for Scotland.”

    That’s beautiful, but the reality is globalization and Scotland as a minor province of the EU.

  • Ba'al Zevul (Etc)

    The entire rest of the UK acts as a one-way-valve for money heading to the Home Counties and London. The argument doesn’t stop with Scotland. If successive Westminster governments had been more savvy, the SNP would still be a fringe party. As it is, rampant social inequality is doing Salmond’s work splendidly, and Yorkshire may be next….

    And Clark – ditto on anti-English sentiment. Lived in Scotland for 30 years – not a peep. Was in the SNP for a bit, too.

  • Ben

    Dear friend; I am Kitshe Ombul, heir to 24 million dollars, but the bureaucracy of Nigeria insists I employ a trustee from outside my country to close the estate matter. Such trustee would pay the fee through my auspices in amount of $2500. If you agree to act in this capacity, you would recieve commission of 5 percent. Please wire money to…………

  • Yonatan

    Clark wrote:

    “That’s at today’s prices. But oil will continue to become more expensive as other reserves become depleted.

    Scotland, escape Westminster’s sweaty grip while you can. You won’t get another chance. You can always bargain later, from a position of strength, if you have self-determination.”

    Not if the UK signs up to TPP (or its equivalent) beforehand. These fast track treaties effectively guarantee corporate right to profit, amongst other things. Any corporation that thinks it is deleteriously affected by any government can sue said government in a special court. Said court is populated by corporate lawyers, so a government win would be about as likely as an honest politician. Once other joy about the treaty – once signed up to by any country, that country can only leave if all other countries decide to leave. Which is about as likely as …. It is also the end of self-determination.

    Perhaps Mr Murray could use his experience as a diplomat to go over the TPP (and its equivalents) and its implications?

  • Anon

    Clark, it doesn’t bother me either way which way Scotland votes and it’s a matter for Scots to decide. I do, however, have the right to make observations.

    “The conversations I had indicate the exact opposite. It was the Conservative supporters who opposed independence. Those who supported independence were looking to escape the Rightward bias of Westminster. Socialist outlook is strong in Scotland.”

    You know why Scotland has a strong socialist outlook? Because of the availability of other people’s money. Do you not see how the economic realities of independence will change that? And if it doesn’t change it, can you forsee what Scotland will look like in a few decades’ time?

1 2 3 6

Comments are closed.