Lochy

Must be to pay back the millions in north sea oil money scotland has fed down to the south east of england for more than 30 years. Or has no-one read the Gavin McCrone report down there form 1975?

Mitzyboy

Ahhhh of course I didn't realise the North Sea was Scottish waters

And you keep sending down all your crap politicians

I gotta admit I missed the McCrone report

silverchick

come on lets not turn this into a slanging match!! there are inequalities on both sides, we have to pay for our prescriptions, and you get yours free soon i believe, also university fees? But there you are, thats the injustice of politics, there are winners and losers in many areas, in both countries.

Lochy

Yes, 90% of the UKs oil and gas reserves fall within Scotland's waters.

Maybe you'd like to read about the McCrone report before making a comment about tax money going to Scotland. You can find what the independent said about it here…

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/thi...icle331945.ece

Or to summarise…

“It was a document that could have changed the course of Scottish history. Nineteen pages long, Written in an elegant, understated academic hand by the leading Scottish economist Gavin McCrone, presented to the Cabinet office in April 1975 and subsequently buried in a Westminster vault for thirty years. It revealed how North Sea oil could have made an independent Scotland as prosperous as Switzerland… An independent Scotland's budget surpluses as a result of the oil boom, wrote Professor McCrone, would be so large as to be "embarrassing". Scotland's currency "would become the hardest in Europe, with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian Kronor."

Wonder where all that money went!!!??

rugbymatt

and Scotland absorbs more benefit money than any other part of the UK, and far more than the oil revenues.

A Scottish homeland can never be, there just isn't the revenue and industry to make it.

Oh and the oil is also owned by various multinationals, including the Americans.

In reference to Golden Brown he wasn't elected, Tory Bliar was, he was the face of the party, GB was a back voice, a hidden face, people are fickle in that they vote for people they like, and they liked the way Tory Bliar looked, thus they voted for him. He promised the public he would be there for another term yet again he lied and allowed a TOTALLY different politician through the gates.

Lochy

Wasn’t planning on getting caught up in a discussion on Scottish nationalism / independence. Happy to if you want to, but will leave it aside because it’s irrelevant to the point I was trying to make

I was simply coming back on two comments that were made. Firstly a complaint that the new prime minister was Scottish and no-one in England had voted for him. How ironic after the years that Scotland has voted for party and got another, run by English Prime Ministers. He’s the new leader of the party that was voted in both Scotland and England to run the country. Why is it a problem he’s Scottish?

Secondly, what has happened with the McCrone report is shocking. It stated that an independent Scotland would become one of europe’s richest country, if not the richest. The advice of the report, which was to invest in the Scottish economy to counter any surge in national feeling caused by this. But basically, to SHARE the money. Instead the labour gov’t suppressed the report channelling all the money to Westminster and putting scotland’s economy into reverse.

So, here’s what they achieved. After 300 years of union, when Scotland and England got along basically well, there is now resentment. The Scots are rightly aggrieved of the state of Scotland’s economy and the high level of poverty. Doubly so that a report suggesting it shouldn't be that way was hidden by successive governments for 30 years. To try and defend the indefensible, the labour gov’t is now spreading the lie that Scotland is better off due to the subsidies. And as a result has generated bitterness in England where we are painted as subsidy junkies.

How unlike the labour party to use spin and spread lies to divert attention from the real issues. Amazed so many people are buying it.

rugbymatt

Not sure where he got his info from them because I cant see how it can be.

It isnt just England that benefits from the oil reserves, and since higher education is just one of those cases where Scotland differs from the rest of the Uk lets not even go there.

Oil aside because since Scotland isnt a sovereign country it is fairly irrelevant, Scotland has more spending from Whitehall on health alone.

rugbymatt

A couple of things I forgot to say, the McCrone report was in the '70's, and Scotland has changed a touch since then, I never said anything about him being a Scot and please, the latent racism in Scotland towards the English is so lame, Europe is being drawn together and Scotland wants to rip itself away.

Mitzyboy

We're not



90% fall within UK waters ... The report having been written in the 70's when as Matt says, things were a little different than now

Lochy

Well he was a professor of economics who put together a report for the cabinet office – I assume he had fairly extensive sources! The results of the report are not being questioned. Indeed, if they were not correct, the results wouldn’t have been suppressed.

My comments have been in direct response to other comments in this forum, namely that there is a problem with great Britain having a Scottish prime minister (not by you) and a comment about “our tax money still going up there.” Point being that Westminster has received vast sums of money from oil that is Scottish and Scotland is receiving tax money that is English. So it goes both ways, and probably over the years, south more than north.

Lochy

Exactly, the McCrone report was in the 70s. That means there’s been 30 years of Westminster benefiting from the oil money. What country would Scotland be today is the report hadn’t been suppressed? Almost certainly not one that would need any of england’s taxes or where 25% of the population live in poverty.

It’s simply incorrect to say that an independent Scotland would draw away from Europe. In fact, Scotland would be more tightly joined to Europe as they would join the Euro, something Scotland is being prevented from doing because of Westminster policy.

silverchick

I think there is a somewhat unreasoned merging of 2 issues here - the Crone report and the West Lothian Question. This is of real importance for the very reasons Lochy states, that England is, primarily, a Conservative voting country and Scotland a Labour voting country (at the last election England gave the majority of its votes and seats to the Conservatives and Scotland to Labour). Whilst Lochy's perceives injustice over the years of Conservative rule he feels the Scottish Labour majority endured, at least the position was that the only UK parliament was accountable to a UK electorate - a parliament created, incidentally, by Scotland in 1707.

Now we have a situation where a Scottish MP, elected by a Scottish electorate, sits in a UK parliament and votes on issues that effect only the English electorate and, as such, is wholly unaccountable to those effected by his/her parliamentary actions. The Scottish electorate, who sent this MP to the UK parliament, also send an MP to the Scottish parliament who is accountable to them at the ballot box for whatever actions he or she takes in the Scottish parliament. It was the great Tam Dayell (surely one of the truest democrats to sit in any parliament for many years) who raised this point first (hence it being the West Lothian question - Tam's constituency). There would be nothing, per se, wrong in Gordon Brown being Prime Minister of the UK as a Scottish MP were it not for the above. It raises serious challenges to the whole democratic process that he will lead a government charged with the administration of issues in England over which he is powerless in his own constituency. If you cannot see that, Lochy, it may be that you are allowing a subjective attachment to, albeit, honestly held, Scottish grievances to cloud your judgement. The creation of the Scottish parliament was a long overdue and welcome act - the people of Scotland have been crying out for direct democratic representation, unheard, for too long. To deny that this process must, implicitly, lead to Scottish independance or a federal UK shows a lack of practical awareness. Thus the problems alluded to re prescription charges etc. The Labour government used its Scottish derived majority to enforce a system on the English state that materially disadvantages the English citizen - no more acceptable than, say, the Edinburgh City Council setting the council tax in Glasgow.

Those of you who know her will have realised that Silverchick's attention span does not allow her to write in more than 3 sentence posts and will see the hand of His Gingerness somewhere herein

Lochy

Basically I agree with you. I’d like to quote a bit of a hero of mine. Someone whose opinion I’ve read extensively for many years and have always found to be a humane and compassionate individual. To summarise in one sentence he says “It is an insult to a great nation to be ruled by people who are not part of its electorate.”

I don’t think any response I write to what you’ve written could be any more eloquent or to the point than his, so if you’re interested, you can read this at …

http://www.ianhamiltonqc.com/wordpre...s=west+lothian

rugbymatt

Bloody well said, was kind of what I was alluding to but written like that no one could possibly take exception and we couldn't have wound up Lochy.

Lochy

Shame we all seem to be agreeing now. How dull!!

Go on say something to get this going again...