Cameron’s Prime Aberdeen Angus Bullshit 158

 in Uncategorized by

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!!

 

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

158 thoughts on “Cameron’s Prime Aberdeen Angus Bullshit”

1 2 3 4 … 6
  • Anon

    News just in: Aberdeen polling 65% “No”, just 17% “Yes”. And that’s in the Oil Capital of Europe.

  • Kempe

    The $1.2 to $2.4 trillion is the wholesale value and does not take into consideration the costs of extraction which will steadily increase as the the reserves diminish over time (currently 4-5% per year). What happens with declining oil fields is that as profits fall the big companies with high overheads pull out and smaller outfits take over. Shell has already announced the sale of some of it’s North Sea assets and others will follow.

    Due to an international agreement on decommissioning drawn up after the Brent Spar fiasco North Sea production platforms have to be removed in their entirety and the wells plugged 3m below the seabed. It’s a hugely complex, expensive and dangerous operation which the smaller operators would struggle to finance. The choice is to subsidise decommissioning or see an earlier end to oil and gas production in the North Sea.

    Perhaps an independent Scotland would be better off not relying on a polluting industry for it’s prosperity anyway.

  • fred

    It wouldn’t surprise me if Cameron was talking bullshit, doubt he would know the truth if it jumped up and bit him.

    I’d be surprised if Salmond wasn’t talking bullshit, he seldom does anything else.

    Abdalla Salem el-Badri doesn’t have an axe to grind either way and he’s not optomistic.

  • mark golding

    “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 platform(s)…

    Likewise Cameron’s plan for hydraulic fracturing does not cost-in decommissioning of wells and protection of groudwater from migrating contaminates leaking through fractures caused by explosives, hydraulic pressure and natural cracks, fissures and interconnecting pore spaces.

    Clearly, unlike the US where landowners benefit financially from fracturing projects, in the UK much fewer or no local people have any vested interest in the success of fracking. Financial benefit goes to board members, banks and kick-backs to politicians with vested interests.

    Given the West’s desperation for something – anything – to rescue us from our economic malaise, even the most determined environmentalists won’t stop the shale juggernaut until evidence emerges of very serious damage indeed to human health and welfare.

    Research:

    http://www.co-operative.coop/Corporate/Fracking/Shale%20gas%20update%20-%20full%20report.pdf

  • glenn_uk

    Question is, who will Scotland expect to defend it, when the Americans start bombing Scotland to get its oil?

  • Someone

    “David Cameron is peddling bullshit of the premium Aberdeen Angus kind today”

    “If You Can’t Dazzle Them With Brilliance, Baffle Them With Bull.”

    WC Fields

  • Muscleguy

    @Someone
    I am a republican but I think that the next monarch should come up here for a coronation. I also think it should be in the open at Boot Hill regardless of the weather. Since we have no established church and Sectarianism is such a problem I think he should be crowned by the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament since the people are sovereign here in Scotland.

    I’m not sure such will be acceptable and the outrage Doon Sooth at our treatment of our ane monarch will together do good for the Scottish Republican cause. Politics is the art of the possible. A referendum on the monarchy immediately post Independence would likely be lost, we need to be canny and play a slightly longer game.

    I also hope Charlie is the next monarch. He will rub us Scots up the wrong way while thinking he is being ‘with us’. It’ll be wonderful.

  • Pete

    Speaking as an Englishman (more or less) I hope the Scots do vote for independence, as I believe they will. This is for five reasons.

    1)I value courage as the human virtue without which the other virtues are ineffectual. The no campaign seems to appeal mainly to fear and lack of confidence in Scots capacity to survive as an independent country.

    2)Having two states on one island will create a sort of controlled experiment, or as near as one can get to that in politics/economics. If Scotland, as seems likely, maintains a somewhat different version of capitalism, with much more government direction of industry and finance, we will be able to compare the results, which I think will be in Scotland’s favour. A more prosperous, recession-proof Scotland will offer an example to England of how much better things could be.

    3) Contrary to a previous poster, the SNP are not at all a “blood and soil” racial nationalist movement. There are many varieties of Nationalism just as their are many varieties of Socialism, from the Green Party to Josef Stalin. An independent Scotland will demonstrate that Nationalist government is entirely compatible with a peaceful and tolerant society. In fact, I would say that confidence in one’s own national culture is necessary before a generous appreciation of other cultures can be achieved.

    4) In fact, division into seperate states and cultures is the best safeguard against Imperial tyranny, and thus facilitates progress by allowing dissident opinions to survive and flourish. For example, if Europe had been one country in the 16th Century, the Roman Church would have retained its stranglehold on the human mind and the 18th Century Enlightenment, the Industrial and Agricultural Revolutions, and all subsequent developments would not have happened.

    5) This one’s a long shot, but losing their loyal regiments of Scots Labour MPs may possibly force the UK Labour Party to a complete reappraisal of their policies and attitudes, possibly emerging as a genuinely progressive party and shedding all trace of the disastrous NuLab experiment.

  • Richard

    The BBC were reporting Osborne as being in Singapore this morning. Of course Singapore is a small country that separated from its larger neighbour. It has no natural resources to speak of but is now one of the richest countries in the world. An interesting parallel perhaps?

  • A Node

    One thing is certain – we will be deliberately and comprehensively lied to. Both sides will claim anything which helps their cause and which they believe can’t be disproved until after the referendum.

    Since the “NO” campaign controls most of the media, their lies will be bigger, louder and sustained longer. Their campaign strategy will be to mislead and scare regardless of the truth. As the referendum date approaches, the lies will be come more outrageous. The only limiting factor will be whether a lie can be sustained till after the vote. It doesn’t matter if the deception becomes obvious afterwards.

    The “YES” campaign would like to do this too, but they don’t have the means so they will have to rely more on reasoned argument.

    Most people in Scotland will make their decision based upon false information. Most of that false information will have come from the “NO” side. If you are still undecided when the time comes, logic dictates you should vote “YES”.

  • fred

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

    Yes, Scotland is famous for being the only country in the world where every single inhabitant hasn’t a bigoted bone in their body.

    They’re so tolerant you can walk into any pub in Glasgow and start singing The Sash My Father Wore.

  • Jim280

    Craig always the best information and here you enter “elephant in room” territory. On R2, Jeremy Vine’s was amazed that Scotland could actually have a claim to North Sea oil and debated with a correspondent that this must be wrong.
    Can I briefly mention how informative your last blog was and Mary’s link to Democracynow. Finally as an observation on BBC journalism unless someone can find otherwise re individual privacy and the significant Apple SSL Gotofail story broken by Reuters I could find no mention on the BBC website. Staggering omission affecting the internet safety for any who still rely on the BBC around the world.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!

    “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.”
    ____________________

    Spot on, Richard. I do hope so. I would just replace the words “in the hope that” by “because” – there has been a substantial Conservative majority in England in every election since (I think) 1966.

    Also agree with the tenor of Someone’s observations – anyone who thinks that Scottish politicians and the characteristics of future political life in Scotland will be of a different order to UK ones is deluding himself, I fear.

  • nevermind

    “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”.

    having successfully answered the math captcha, I shall repeat my question to all knowing Independent campaigners here. What does this ‘desire’ encapsulate?
    I question the understanding of voters who as yet have not much raised the question of citizens rights or what it will mean for them to be and Independent citizen of Scotland.

    The debate is swooning round the issues of money, oil( more money) RBS and their lack of money (except for bonuses, and the stale issue over the monarchy, its Scopttish land holdings,( will these lands be seized) and given to the Scottish people, or will their leaders make a deal with Trump Trumpington, Lord of all wind turbines and Golf clubs.

    Buying the Queen out when the land was taken in the first place? would that be a nominal £1/2 Euro’s option?

  • nevermind

    Looking at Freds link, it very much looks like Scotland, in perpetum, loves party politics, it is wedded to it just as the Brits and the love for these unpopular and unprincipled rogues with their off shore ban accounts is far greater than their love for Independence and a new start.

    Predictability has stumped excitement.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!

    Fred

    “Looks a lot like business as normal to me too.”
    __________________

    And perhaps even more than normal, Fred. Richard suggested a parallel with Singapore a few posts back – and we all know what a liberal, open-minded and tolerant state Singapore is, don’t we….

  • Craig Evans

    Good to hear from you again Craig,

    I must say I am disappointed at some of the comments above about the forthcoming Scottish Independance referendum.

    Perhaps to help with breaking the triple lock of print, TV and Radio being waged against the Yes campaign , the SNP and Alex Salmond in particular, here are some useful websites:

    http://www.scottishindependencereferendum.info/index.html

    wingsoverscotland

    Best wishes,

    CraigE

  • Vronsky

    “News just in: Aberdeen polling 65% “No”, just 17% “Yes”. And that’s in the Oil Capital of Europe.”

    So why so worried when there’s nothing to worry about?

  • Craig Evans

    Vronsky,

    I think you’ll find that poll was over the whole of the North and North East, not just Aberdeen. Besides, it was a poll of 500 people so the veracity of the stats is open to question.

  • fred

    “Perhaps to help with breaking the triple lock of print, TV and Radio being waged against the Yes campaign , the SNP and Alex Salmond in particular, here are some useful websites:”

    Ah now it’s clearer.

    Seems anything even remotely negative said about independence is down to media bias, scaremongering and those lying bastards in the No campaign and you can’t believe a word of it.

    Everything said by Alex Salmond is the gospel truth a more honest man has never walked this earth.

    How reassuring.

  • A Node

    Fred says sarcastically:
    “Seems anything even remotely negative said about independence is down to media bias, scaremongering and those lying bastards in the No campaign and you can’t believe a word of it”

    Would you agree that the majority of the media is biased in favour of the NO campaign?

1 2 3 4 … 6

Comments are closed.