Devolve Oil Revenue?

[renton]

A commitment to commonsense realism is all you need here.

Yes around this time there was hardship but the reality is that the UK has faced hardship prior to this and in that century too – the great depression, the world wars, post war economic realities etc. The differential here is that parallel to this hardship there was a serious economic lever discovered off the coast of Scotland circa 1970 to the benefit of us all.

I think that we can all agree that movements require political appeal and yes, you’re right, there was deindustrialisation around 1970 but it was UK wide and all of the UK was feeling the pinch. The fact that the SNP at the time chose to run a campaign “Its Scotland’s Oil” just smacks of further evidence of cnutish chav behaviour….nothing seems to have changed! Prior to this nationalist push the appeal ddn’t exist and even with this it is still not enough, as much as that irks the few.

There isn’t any doubt that Salmond pushed North Sea resources, and the money they generate, as a rationale to split e.g. an economic engine to drive an independent Scotland. I just find the notion rationale rather crass. I imagine it would be like having a husband/wife who wins some money on the lottery and then fucks you off! Thankfully most didn’t buy into this but the fact that some did, and hearing Salmond and Sturgeon standing on public platforms going on about how much money they give to WM and get scraps back really distasteful. As I’ve mentioned, there’s no admission of the state Scotland was in prior to the Union against how far we have come together….it is all about nationalistic bigotry and greed from those types.

Actualy, the north sea oil hasn't really benefited anyone. The fact that it's a major natural resource in our sector is neither here, nor there. The SNP would've been crazy not to promote oil as something Scotland could benefit from, in the same way they push renewable energy, or revitalised democracy.

it isn't, in this day and age the 'engine' of our economy. It was and remains a bonus to any notional seperate economy. Interestingly, had the British government wanted to set up an oil fund in the 70s, it's likely north sea oil would now be beneiftting us all to a great degree, instead it was squandered. That makes the issue of north sea oil both an economic and political issue.

as for the push not existing prior to oil discovery? Large scale extraction didn't really start untl the late 70s/early 80s. No one knew, when Winnie Ewing was elected what kind of oil resources would be available. So, the SNP were electable before there was an oil boom. If anything the gradual push towards a stronger SNP probably came as a reaction to those early post year wars when British victory in the war, and the new Labour government in Westminster marginalised Scottish identity, at a time when it really was referred to North Britain. The impetus for a larger SNP presence did come from the deindustrialisation of the UK and the dwindling of the revenue streams that had made the Union profitable to Scotland. It was never scotland making a cynical land grab for one resource. To suggest that my or others politics are based on that is frankly insulting. I realise that parts of England have been shafted as well, and as soon as they want to try and so something about that, I'll happily support them - hwoever, they all seem happy to trade being shafted by one set of idiots for the next, not my fault, and not my problem. In the meantime I'll support anyone pushing a proper set of devolved powers to Scotland.

Funny you should mention 'the state' Scotland was in when the Union came along, as I presume you think that the Union swept in to protect poor broken Scotland and it's feckless population. This historical narrative tends to skip out the bits where Our southern neighbours prosecuted a ruthless and successful economic blockade against Scotland in the years running up to the Union as part of an overall strategy to secure the hanovarian succession. othing wrong with that, them's the breaks and England di what it fel it needed to do, but lets drop the historical revisionism.

[bowmore]

Why? The Orkneys and Shetlands are part of Scotland. It's as simple as that.

PLUS comparing the Falklands to the Orkneys and Shetland is a bit of a joke really.

So people shouldn't be able to choose?

Surely this referendum has shown that people are only a part of something for as long as they choose to be. Hypothetically speaking if it had been a Yes win and the Shetland did not want to leave the UK and demanded a their own referendum as such, would you deny them their right to choose and possibly send in the troops if need be?

[Crùbag]

So people shouldn't be able to choose?

Surely this referendum has shown that people are only a part of something for as long as they choose to be. Hypothetically speaking if it had been a Yes win and the Shetland did not want to leave the UK and demanded a their own referendum as such, would you deny them their right to choose and possibly send in the troops if need be?

Shetland is part of Scotland and some 60% of Shetlanders see themselves as Scottish and not British according to the 2011 census.

Plus, hasnt Britain learned anything from partitioning nations?

[boabinoban]

So people shouldn't be able to choose?

Surely this referendum has shown that people are only a part of something for as long as they choose to be. Hypothetically speaking if it had been a Yes win and the Shetland did not want to leave the UK and demanded a their own referendum as such, would you deny them their right to choose and possibly send in the troops if need be?

Do you actually work for the tory party?

You wouldn't have to redraw the constitutional map of Scotland if it were to vote for independence. This is just mischief making and nonsense. You are basically saying that Scotland isn't a country, which is 100% wrong. These islands are part of Scotland. Again the question would be asked where does this form of devolution stop? Streets voting independent from town councils? It's a ridiculous argument borne out of mischief making and should be ignored.

[bowmore]

Actualy, the north sea oil hasn't really benefited anyone. The fact that it's a major natural resource in our sector is neither here, nor there. The SNP would've been crazy not to promote oil as something Scotland could benefit from, in the same way they push renewable energy, or revitalised democracy.

it isn't, in this day and age the 'engine' of our economy. It was and remains a bonus to any notional seperate economy. Interestingly, had the British government wanted to set up an oil fund in the 70s, it's likely north sea oil would now be beneiftting us all to a great degree, instead it was squandered. That makes the issue of north sea oil both an economic and political issue.

as for the push not existing prior to oil discovery? Large scale extraction didn't really start untl the late 70s/early 80s. No one knew, when Winnie Ewing was elected what kind of oil resources would be available. So, the SNP were electable before there was an oil boom. If anything the gradual push towards a stronger SNP probably came as a reaction to those early post year wars when British victory in the war, and the new Labour government in Westminster marginalised Scottish identity, at a time when it really was referred to North Britain. The impetus for a larger SNP presence did come from the deindustrialisation of the UK and the dwindling of the revenue streams that had made the Union profitable to Scotland. It was never scotland making a cynical land grab for one resource. To suggest that my or others politics are based on that is frankly insulting. I realise that parts of England have been shafted as well, and as soon as they want to try and so something about that, I'll happily support them - hwoever, they all seem happy to trade being shafted by one set of idiots for the next, not my fault, and not my problem. In the meantime I'll support anyone pushing a proper set of devolved powers to Scotland.

Funny you should mention 'the state' Scotland was in when the Union came along, as I presume you think that the Union swept in to protect poor broken Scotland and it's feckless population. This historical narrative tends to skip out the bits where Our southern neighbours prosecuted a ruthless and successful economic blockade against Scotland in the years running up to the Union as part of an overall strategy to secure the hanovarian succession. othing wrong with that, them's the breaks and England di what it fel it needed to do, but lets drop the historical revisionism.

I would agree that oil is not the engine of the Scottish economy and as such take offense at the way that the SNP try to position it as such. It is the SNP who have made a 'political land grab' for oil thus "Its Our Oil" campaign being the starting point of what we see today!

Agreed there is always a strategic intent in business and politics but If Scottish colonialsim and the adventure to Panama had been successful I doubt that we would be having this conversation, ergo my point

[renton]

I would agree that oil is not the engine of the Scottish economy and as such take offense at the way that the SNP try to position it as such. It is the SNP who have made a 'political land grab' for oil thus "Its Our Oil" campaign being the starting point of what we see today!

Agreed there is always a strategic intent in business and politics but If Scottish colonialsim and the adventure to Panama had been successful I doubt that we would be having this conversation, ergo my point

The SNP do not position it as such 'a welcome bonus' is all they call it. Whatever the SNP's 'land grab' for it is, I'm far more offended by Westminster's short termist pissing it up against a wall to cover a series of socially destructive policies that have led us to the unbalanced economy we have now. They fucked it up, royally, on both sides of the lobby. Made an absolute arse of that, and everything else.

As to your second point, Even a succesful colony at darien would not have offset the Navigations and Aliens acts passed by the then Enhlish government at Westminster, designed as they were to punish Scottish lords and merchant classes trading with the American colonies.

[bowmore]

Do you actually work for the tory party?

You wouldn't have to redraw the constitutional map of Scotland if it were to vote for independence. This is just mischief making and nonsense. You are basically saying that Scotland isn't a country, which is 100% wrong. These islands are part of Scotland. Again the question would be asked where does this form of devolution stop? Streets voting independent from town councils? It's a ridiculous argument borne out of mischief making and should be ignored.

Is the UK a country? If yes, well, you know where that leads us. If no, well what if you perceive yourself to be British and a part of the UK but live in Scotland? More so, what if this is the major perception?

[boabinoban]

I would agree that oil is not the engine of the Scottish economy and as such take offense at the way that the SNP try to position it as such. It is the SNP who have made a 'political land grab' for oil thus "Its Our Oil" campaign being the starting point of what we see today!

Agreed there is always a strategic intent in business and politics but If Scottish colonialsim and the adventure to Panama had been successful I doubt that we would be having this conversation, ergo my point

But it would not be any kind of land grab if Scotland were to be independent. It's part of Scotland and that's it. Bringing colonialism into the argument is a non starter as Scotland did not colonise either Orkney or Shetland and has zero in common with the Darian Scheme.

[boabinoban]

Is the UK a country? If yes, well, you know where that leads us. If no, well what if you perceive yourself to be British and a part of the UK but live in Scotland? More so, what if this is the major perception?

No it's a union of countries. Scotland has its own education and legal system, which Orkney and Shetland are part of, and are part of the constitutional map. I perceive myself to be Scottish, while the term great Britain is more a geographical term than anything else. I can't believe that anyone can actually try to debate whether they are Scottish or not.

The referendum had one question: Should Scotland be an independent country. Not should Scotland be an independent country but then have the further option to devolve into smaller and smaller sections. The whole question is ridiculous.

[bowmore]

The SNP do not position it as such 'a welcome bonus' is all they call it. Whatever the SNP's 'land grab' for it is, I'm far more offended by Westminster's short termist pissing it up against a wall to cover a series of socially destructive policies that have led us to the unbalanced economy we have now. They fucked it up, royally, on both sides of the lobby. Made an absolute arse of that, and everything else.

As to your second point, Even a succesful colony at darien would not have offset the Navigations and Aliens acts passed by the then Enhlish government at Westminster, designed as they were to punish Scottish lords and merchant classes trading with the American colonies.

You must have seen different communications and read the undertones differently than me. Further to this "Its Our Oil" is quite a clear statement of intent - I'm sure you would agree to that?

With regards to Panama, we'll have to leave that one to read as suits, as I would say that if the venture had been a success, who knows what would have happened...not us, as it didn't because of a few factors such as Illness and those pesky Spaniards!

[bowmore]

No it's a union of countries. Scotland has its own education and legal system, which Orkney and Shetland are part of, and are part of the constitutional map. I perceive myself to be Scottish, while the term great Britain is more a geographical term than anything else. I can't believe that anyone can actually try to debate whether they are Scottish or not.

The referendum had one question: Should Scotland be an independent country. Not should Scotland be an independent country but then have the further option to devolve into smaller and smaller sections. The whole question is ridiculous.

And yet the votes have been cast, the outcome agreed and still there are those that wish to force their agenda upon the majority. It all kind of smacks of double standards i.e. it's ok, as long as it's my way.

The SNP are the ones who have opened this box, it'll be the generations to come that live with the consequences. But lets be positive and hope that they are of happy and prosperous days and not in a society that has been split in two by the bigotry of a political goal and by little Hitlers that cannot accept democracy.

[renton]

You must have seen different communications and read the undertones differently than me. Further to this "Its Our Oil" is quite a clear statement of intent - I'm sure you would agree to that?

With regards to Panama, we'll have to leave that one to read as suits, as I would say that if the venture had been a success, who knows what would have happened...not us, as it didn't because of a few factors such as Illness and those pesky Spaniards!

Any success in Panama would've taken years to come to fruition. In the meantime, the English were closing up their markets in the American colonies which ouwld've been catastrophic for Scotland's economy at the time. Whatever long term success Darien might have had was more than outweighed by the impovrishment of those Tobacco barons and Scottish lords with large English holdings, who would shortly vote Scotland's sovereignty away.

[boabinoban]

And yet the votes have been cast, the outcome agreed and still there are those that wish to force their agenda upon the majority. It all kind of smacks of double standards i.e. it's ok, as long as it's my way.

The SNP are the ones who have opened this box, it'll be the generations to come that live with the consequences. But lets be positive and hope that they are of happy and prosperous days and not in a society that has been split in two by the bigotry of a political goal and by little Hitlers that cannot accept democracy.

Utter nonsense. Offensive nonsense at that.

How can it be double standards? The vote was about Scotland, Orkney, Shetland and all. It's the No campaign that have stirred up this load of contrived nonsense. As I said before it was purely mischief making.

And yet again I will say you cannot call this referendum process democratic when the manipulation by the media and Westminster won the vote. That was not a victory for democracy. It was a victory for power and control only. The very point of the referendum was for the Scottish people to be allowed to choose whether Scotland would be happier and more prosperous with change. The point that the referendum took place makes it as plain as the nose on anyone's face that Scotland needs change. The No campaign, that will be forever remembered as the most divisive, negative, manipulative and deceitful campaign in Scottish history, made this choice impossible due to the fact that its main idea was to spread negativity and confusion, and with the sheer presence of the UK establishment's propaganda machine, the population buckled. Now it's going back to blissful ignorance.

This country is getting more and more like America every day and watching this happen and feeling powerless to prevent it makes me want to go back to this ignorance that I too had before, but nothing short of death or a frontal lobotomy could make that happen.

[bowmore]

Any success in Panama would've taken years to come to fruition. In the meantime, the English were closing up their markets in the American colonies which ouwld've been catastrophic for Scotland's economy at the time. Whatever long term success Darien might have had was more than outweighed by the impovrishment of those Tobacco barons and Scottish lords with large English holdings, who would shortly vote Scotland's sovereignty away.

Hypothetically speaking that is. As I say, you might be right, you might be wrong but what we can say, with a high degree of certainty is that the union has been a great success. Long may it continue to be so.

[Anonapersona]

Hypothetically speaking that is. As I say, you might be right, you might be wrong but what we can say, with a high degree of certainty is that the union has been a great success. Long may it continue to be so.

Every time you bring up the success of the union, it's in past tense. Decades. Centuries.

[boabinoban]

Hypothetically speaking that is. As I say, you might be right, you might be wrong but what we can say, with a high degree of certainty is that the union has been a great success. Long may it continue to be so.

Success in a control sense, maybe. We were shafted into this 'union' in the first place. Bribed at the top, shafted at the bottom (oo-er). It's all about London and every single thing else comes second. We are there to provide for London. f**k that.

[bowmore]

Utter nonsense. Offensive nonsense at that.

How can it be double standards? The vote was about Scotland, Orkney, Shetland and all. It's the No campaign that have stirred up this load of contrived nonsense. As I said before it was purely mischief making.

And yet again I will say you cannot call this referendum process democratic when the manipulation by the media and Westminster won the vote. That was not a victory for democracy. It was a victory for power and control only. The very point of the referendum was for the Scottish people to be allowed to choose whether Scotland would be happier and more prosperous with change. The point that the referendum took place makes it as plain as the nose on anyone's face that Scotland needs change. The No campaign, that will be forever remembered as the most divisive, negative, manipulative and deceitful campaign in Scottish history, made this choice impossible due to the fact that its main idea was to spread negativity and confusion, and with the sheer presence of the UK establishment's propaganda machine, the population buckled. Now it's going back to blissful ignorance.

This country is getting more and more like America every day and watching this happen and feeling powerless to prevent it makes me want to go back to this ignorance that I too had before, but nothing short of death or a frontal lobotomy could make that happen.

So those that voted no are now protesting in the streets because they have been duped? Or they don't know as it is only the informed Yes voters who know!

The UK does need change and most of your countrymen wish to be a part of this. The only problem here is that you won't accept reality.

personally speaking, I know it must be hard to have invested so much passion into something but the longer that you allow yourselves to listen to the divisive voices that are stoking the fires the longer this pain will be dragged out for. Can we not change the UK for the better as a people united?

[bowmore]

Every time you bring up the success of the union, it's in past tense. Decades. Centuries.

Yep, we've got it bad here.

[boabinoban]

So those that voted no are now protesting in the streets because they have been duped? Or they don't know as it is only the informed Yes voters who know!

The UK does need change and most of your countrymen wish to be a part of this. The only problem here is that you won't accept reality.

personally speaking, I know it must be hard to have invested so much passion into something but the longer that you allow yourselves to listen to the divisive voices that are stoking the fires the longer this pain will be dragged out for. Can we not change the UK for the better as a people united?

Like I've said i'm finding it incredibly difficult to reconcile differences with a state machine that is only in place to control us. That's what this referendum has done for me. It has awakened me to accept that this is not a true democracy, but a controlling machine that if you dare to question tries to stamp it out, and the referendum showed that it will do absolutely everything in its power to keep that power.

I'm asking you a genuine question: How can I reconcile my differences when I see the UK for what it is? Will you try and say that I'm wrong in this? Are you going to trot out a witty line about a tin foil hat?

[bowmore]

Success in a control sense, maybe. We were shafted into this 'union' in the first place. Bribed at the top, shafted at the bottom (oo-er). It's all about London and every single thing else comes second. We are there to provide for London. f**k that.

You'll possibly dismiss what I am going to say but it is the same almost everyone in the UK. The real reason we know is this medium that we are talking on now. Now we all have a voice. It's WM, the distibution of wealth, a lack of local say, all common themes. The thing is that the gov's know this, I mean look at Putin wanting to shut the web down in Russia

You need to get together and work. I'd say the rest of the UK needs to follow suit. Will it happen...not if the in fighting is where the energy is going.