Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

elantan

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Okay. I'll check in again in forty years, when you get your next referendum. Which 'll be No again.

Keep telling yerself that while we work away ... And one day will wake up and it will have happened

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

What do YOU think the SNP should do re fracking ? Yay or Nae ?

I think fracking is being held hostage by the SNP for political gains rather than the good of the country.

A vital energy source for the nation is being abused in an effort to create division and controversy.

Sturgeon knows full well that fracking has been used in 200+ onshore wells in the UK for decades without any material harm being done. And that our environmental standards for exploration are an order of magnitude more tight than those in the US. But is callously exploiting the situation in her very own version of 'Project Fear' so long as Scotland can rely upon the English subsidy while cynically blaming everything on Westminster.

If Scotland ever got Indy the central belt would be fracked until the pips squeaked in a desperate attempt to cover the financial shortfall.

That the SNP are happy to try and make it a political game for now shows no integrity whatsoever.

.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I think fracking is being held hostage by the SNP for political gains rather than the good of the country.

A vital energy source for the nation is being abused in an effort to create division and controversy.

Sturgeon knows full well that fracking has been used in 200+ onshore wells in the UK for decades without any material harm being done. And that our environmental standards for exploration are an order of magnitude more tight than those in the US. But is callously exploiting the situation in her very own version of 'Project Fear' so long as Scotland can rely upon the English subsidy while cynically blaming everything on Westminster.

If Scotland ever got Indy the central belt would be fracked until the pips squeaked in a desperate attempt to cover the financial shortfall.

That the SNP are happy to try and make it a political game for now shows no integrity whatsoever.

.

Well to be absolutely fair.. I doubt Scottish Labour, Lib Dems, Tories or Greens will be gung ho and loudly highlighting major policies for fracking in Scotland either in their manifestos when next May comes around. Do you ? So the SNP won't be alone there in their 'lack of integrity'. They'll all sing from the same hymn sheet on that one... or just not mention it at all ( Tories ).

Its not a vote winner I'm afraid. Not for any Scottish party at the moment as things stand. And you know it fine well too Hamish.

If Scotland ever got Indy the central belt would be fracked until the pips squeaked in a desperate attempt to cover the financial shortfall.

Mabye best saving it all till that happens then. Then Holyrood could reap any financial benefits rather than Westminster using it to subsidise things like help/right to buy in London or HS2, or whatever wheeze the Tories pull out of the hat leading up to the next election etc. No point doing it now. Not when so many powers and revenues are not within Scottish government control. And in fact are in Tory hands for the next five years. Fracking then handing the profits over to the Tories.... Hmmmmm... Not a particularly tempting prospect for many in Scotland I would assume, other than the 14% that voted for them.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Mabye best saving it all till that happens then. Then Holyrood could reap any financial benefits rather than Westminster using it to subsidise things like help/right to buy in London or HS2, or whatever wheeze the Tories pull out of the hat leading up to the next election etc. No point doing it now. Not when so many powers and revenues are not within Scottish government control. And in fact are in Tory hands for the next five years. Fracking then handing the profits over to the Tories.... Hmmmmm... Not a particularly tempting prospect for many in Scotland I would assume, other than the 14% that voted for them.

the straight racism once again shows through

.string.

CLAPTON wrote: »

the straight racism once again shows through

Yes, Project Whinge is in full blather.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Mabye best saving it all till that happens then. Then Holyrood could reap any financial benefits rather than Westminster using it to subsidise things like help/right to buy in London or HS2, or whatever wheeze the Tories pull out of the hat leading up to the next election etc. No point doing it now. Not when so many powers and revenues are not within Scottish government control. And in fact are in Tory hands for the next five years. Fracking then handing the profits over to the Tories.... Hmmmmm... Not a particularly tempting prospect for many in Scotland I would assume, other than the 14% that voted for them.

Maybe it'd be better to get it out of the ground while you can. The Saudi oil minister reckons oil output will be effectively 0 by 2050.

Of course if Scotland doesn't replace North Sea oil output with something else, be it whisky sales, Coal Seam Gas, tourism or a money tree, then Scotland will become ever more dependent on English taxation to keep the whole shebang going.

In blowing the referendum as badly as they did, it wasn't even close, the SNP lost their last chance for the foreseeable future to gain independence. As taxes from the North Sea inexorably fall towards zero the economic argument becomes harder and harder to be credible, and that's from a position where the SNP admit that they lied about the economics of independence.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

.string. wrote: »

.... A few posts ago Shakey suggested using Google on this and so, being a cooperative type, I tried SNP fracking; the result gives a series of accounts of confused/misleading SNP messages on the subject.

Not that I expect anything of acknowledgement from the SNP Collective here that it is (another) tricky issue for the SNP.

The enforced SNP maximum appears to be:

See no evil (of the SNP), hear no evil (of the SNP) and speak no evil (of the SNP).

What on earth are you wittering on about string ? Google and SNP only ever throw up stories from the 99% of newspapers and media that want to 'get something on them'. Fracking hasn't been banned, nor given the go-ahead as I've stated. The UK government is issuing licences ( reserved), but the Scottish Govt is withholding planning permission ( devolved) currently.

Of course it's confusing. You've got posters above incensed by the idea that 'Sturgeon' will lose 1000's of Scottish oil jobs if the SNP don't give the go ahead. And others stating that the SNP will rue the day if they give the go-ahead. And that's confusing too.

What do YOU think the SNP should do re fracking ? Yay or Nae ?

In your first paragraph; the paranoia in it proves my point about the SNP "maxim". You simply can't bring yourself to admit that there can be anything wrong at all with SNP policies can you Shakey. When, or rather IF you do, I shall take your remarks (a little) more seriously.

What do I think the SNP should do on fracking? Obviously that it should behave like a responsible regional government and base their policies on fact rather than dither.

It is sensible that the deposits of shale gas are investigated. Some sites will be suitable, others not. When that is known the decision can be taken for each on it's merits. That should be the policy with clear scientific guidance to the public on the facts, rather than letting gossip rule your policy.

To have a blanket dither, either simplistically to accept fracking or to ban fracking, and with the intention to jump in whatever decision is best for the SNP, rather than best for the country is typical of the political cynicism that we have come to associate with the SNP and it's Collective.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...

Its not a vote winner I'm afraid. Not for any Scottish party at the moment as things stand. And you know it fine well too Hamish.
...

Long term energy security *is* a vote winner.

Quality jobs and regeneration of regions *is* a vote winner.

Generating gas product to bolster our exports *is* a vote winner.

Not doing anything, but blaming others in London for our ills might be a short term vote winner, but it does nothing long term.

If the argument you present Shakey had been around in the 60s and 70s then there would have been no development of the oil rigs in the North Sea; well...the environmental risks would have ruled against wouldn't they.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Maybe it'd be better to get it out of the ground while you can. The Saudi oil minister reckons oil output will be effectively 0 by 2050.

Of course if Scotland doesn't replace North Sea oil output with something else, be it whisky sales, Coal Seam Gas, tourism or a money tree, then Scotland will become ever more dependent on English taxation to keep the whole shebang going.

In blowing the referendum as badly as they did, it wasn't even close, the SNP lost their last chance for the foreseeable future to gain independence. As taxes from the North Sea inexorably fall towards zero the economic argument becomes harder and harder to be credible, and that's from a position where the SNP admit that they lied about the economics of independence.

Well its going to run out eventually anyway. And who knows what new technology is round the corner re energy. We didn't have internet or mobile phones not long ago..

And believe me, when the oil does run out, Scotland will get the boot from the UK so fast our eyes will be watering. We'll be shown the door. So I wouldn't worry too much about English taxes.

I'm not going to argue with you over votes in the ref. The Yes campaign did remarkably well considering the polls were sitting around 25-30% for decades beforehand.. and indeed in most of the run up to the day itself. Just not enough this time round. And for a party that you keep insisting are failures... *see 2011, 2015 and the polls for 2016.

Its about time you took the SNP for what they really are. A normal, successful political party that have an economic and a core policy you don't happen to agree with. It really is as simple as that. All this talk about liars, and deception and everything else folks like you and string throw about is complete nonsense. Especially in comparison to the other political parties who could equally be accused of the same ( see George Osborne and poverty figures being 'redefined' as they look too bad )... The SNP aren't perfect by any means. But honestly, try and leave the caricatures/liars and evil 'cult' descriptions alone. They make you look a little silly.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

the straight racism once again shows through

Since when was it 'racism' to not really want to see any hypothetical profits from fracking in Scotland, to be decided where 'best spent' by the Tories in Westminster ?