Talking-up Scotland

While 57% of EU migrants in Scotland voted No in 2014, much has changed since then. The First Minister’s strong support for their right to stay after Brexit compared with the UK Tories’ frankly nauseating desire to use them as a bargaining chip in negotiations seems likely to have shifted their views strongly based at least on self-interest.

A new comment piece from the Scottish Centre on European Relations offers convincing evidence that EU voters could swing the result in favour of Yes next time. Despite a fall in support for the SNP before the last general election, support for independence remains solid with the result too close to call. The Centre estimates there will be around 250 000 eligible EU voters by 2020. The Centre points out that if they had all voted Yes even in 2014 that would have produced a 51% win for Yes.

Remember the gap was only 384 000 in 2014 so, in addition to the above, I’d add some other factors likely to add to their argument and make Yes even more likely in 2020.

• Around 200 000 additional new voters who had been too young in 2014. The young are heavily in favour of Yes.
• The deaths of a large number of older voters more likely to vote No.
• The damaging consequences of a Brexit deal which will not be kind to the UK.
• The growth in the Scottish economy evidenced in several of my earlier pieces.
• The recovery of oil and gas prices also reported here.
• The massive growth in renewable energy generation.
• Continued improvements in health indicators as the Scottish NHS increasingly outperforms its southern neighbour.
• The more balanced coverage offered by STV this time around as they continue to recognise it makes good business sense to do so.
• The continuing decline of BBC Scotland’s influence.
• The increased influence of Yes-oriented social media.

I might even put money on it if only Nicola will call one.

https://www.scer.scot/database/ident-3215

 

SNP pressure on the UK government led them to introduce a new rule obliging all companies to have a ‘named person of significant control’ thus quickly reducing the number of these dodgy businesses from 116 to only 7 by June 23 when the rule came into force. It may be none by now. There had been 131 the week before. Strangely the rule is not enforced in England where the number has increased. Tory interests?

‘Shell companies’ are money-laundering outfits that had become an embarrassment to Scotland due to the lack of legislation requiring them to be really based here and open to investigation. Here’s a definition:

‘Tax evasion and false accounting practices constitute common types of money laundering. Often, criminals achieve these objectives through the use of shell companies, holding companies, and offshore accounts. A shell company is an incorporated company that possesses no significant assets and does not perform any significant operations. To launder money, the shell company purports to perform some service that would reasonably require its customers to often pay with cash. Cash transactions increase the anonymity of customers and therefore decrease the government’s ability to trace the initial recipient of the dirty money. Money launderers commonly select beauty salons and plumbing services as shell companies. The launderer then deposits the money with the shell company, which deposits it into its accounts. The company then creates fake invoices and receipts to account for the cash. Such transactions create the appearance of propriety and clean money. The shell company can then make withdrawals and either return the money to the initial criminal or pass the money on to further shell companies before returning it to further cloud who first deposited the money.’

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/money_laundering

(c) carbonbrief.org (Shell payments to the UK)

NOTE: I’m reposting this in the light of the news today from the Business for Scotland reported in the Sunday Herald:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15483952.Revealed__Westminster_and_the_big_lie_about_Scotland_s_oil/

According to Goldman Sachs, in Oil and Gas People:

‘Oil majors are raking in more cash now than they did in the heyday of $100 oil, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Integrated giants like BP Plc and Royal Dutch Shell Plc have adapted to lower prices by cutting costs and improving operations, analysts at the bank including Michele Della Vigna said in a research note Wednesday. European majors made more cash during the first half of this year, when Brent averaged $52/bbl, than they did in the first half of 2014 when prices were $109.’

https://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/14814/who-needs-100-oil-majors-seen-making-more-cash-at-50-goldman-says/

Why then are we not hearing of a flow of revenue to the UK treasury in 2017, as we did of the single year of losses in 2016? I think the answer is simple. They’re not being taxed and the Unionist media are not interested. Indeed, they’re often being subsidised. See this from ‘The UK’s North Sea oil revenues: Giving it away?’, August 2016 report, from taxjustice.net:

‘New analysis of the UK’s North Sea oil and gas suggests that the combination of tax giveaways by the government, and aggressive avoidance by multinationals, means that the country may actually be subsidising the extraction of its natural resources. A new report published today by the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) sets out a series of shocking statistics on the UK’s failure to obtain an appropriate share of its own resource wealth. Among them, these stand out:

• In 2014, UK consumers paid 6 times more tax on petrol, excluding VAT, than the North Sea oil and gas industry paid on all taxes related to production.
• Chevron’s effective tax rate in 2014 on earnings from North Sea production was 5.4%; statutory tax rates (of various types) on oil and gas should have totalled 61-82%.
• In 2014, 3 (Shell, BP & Total) of the top 4 North Sea producers produced more than £4.3 billion worth of oil and gas and received over £300 million in net tax refunds.

The ITF argue that while the oil sector has successfully lobbied for and won huge tax breaks from the UK government, the companies involved continued to pursue aggressive tax avoidance as standard practice. The Chevron report (see graphic for UK structure, click to enlarge) provides a detailed case study of tax dodging tactics which are replicated by others, particularly Nexen – on which the Times had a frontpage splash yesterday, using ITF analysis to show that the Chinese government-backed company received tax credits of £2 billion.’

http://www.taxjustice.net/2016/08/25/uks-north-sea-oil-revenues-giving-away/

Now remember, prices were still relatively high in 2014. It seems a little paranoid to think the UK government would have allowed this to destroy the case for Scottish independence based on oil wealth but not impossible. I suppose there are other reasons which are more subtle in the form of the effects of interlocking elites so well described by Noam Chomsky. Those at the top in the corporations, in the media, in the financial world, in the academic economics professoriate, in the civil service and of course in the Conservative party have shared interests, shared social and educational backgrounds and so acting in their own interests they act in the interests of the corporations. There’s an obvious parallel in the aggressive pursuit of benefit fraud and the cosy deals done with corporate tax avoiders. Either way, Scottish North Sea oil is highly profitable, it’s not being taxed and we’re not hearing of this in the Unionist media. Don’t think the Chinese (Chevron) case spoils the theory. The Chinese elite is being educated by us! See:

http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2014/10/letter-beijing-inside-private-schools-educating-china-s-elite

Am I paranoid? Here are Shell’s payments in 2015. Look at the Norway figure!

© ALAMY

Well-Safe Solutions, set up by North Sea veterans, expect to create 400 jobs by 2020 as the decommissioning market grows from £800 million in 2014 to £1.1billion in 2015. That’s a 37.5% increase in one year and the market is expected to be worth £17.6 billion by 2025, so you see where their confidence comes from.

 

I can’t see any details of their pioneering new approach. I don’t suppose they would want their competitors to know but they claim it cuts their costs by 30% over previous methods.

https://www.fircroft.com/blogs/hundreds-of-jobs-to-be-created-by-new-north-sea-decommissioning-firm-72164101152

© walkhighlands.co.uk

Spending by the thousands of Scots and visitors when they, for example, walk and stop off along the West Highland Way or when they stay overnight before and/or after bagging Munroes has now reached an impressive £1.26 billion for the Scottish economy. See this from the Scottish Business News Network:

‘The research by VisitScotland found that in 2015, 4 million trips by visitors from the UK included walking as an activity, with figures broken down into short walks (up to 2 miles) and long walks (minimum of 2 miles). The latter increased by almost a fifth (18%) on the previous year.’

If you want more detail including how well Rouken Glen did and to see a fine video of our landscape go to the full report, below:

https://sbnn.co.uk/2017/08/03/new-research-shows-scottish-walking-tourism-worth-1-2bn/

Footnote: See those ticks? There not mine. I’ve done precisely none of those walks. I’ve done a handful of Munroes but………….ALL of the Galloway hills and some of them repeatedly, so there.

(c) eastvantage.com

I’ve already reported the numerous signs of growth which we must at least in part credit the Scottish Government for. If it was shrinking we’d soon see them blamed. As you know, we have falling unemployment compared to rUK, increased employment, economic growth rate four times that of rUK, amongst the lowest youth and female unemployment in Europe, business confidence growing, massive oil finds and recently:

‘Staggering’ 175% increase in Edinburgh office take-up is further evidence of booming Scottish economy

Now we see that the demand for increased office space across the whole country. So, it’s not just Edinburgh and Aberdeen and thus wider evidence of good health in the Scottish economy as a whole. Businesses need more office space for more staff. See this from the Scottish Business Review Network:

‘Property consultancy CBRE’s H1 2017 Office Market View report has shown an improvement in demand for office space across Scotland in the first half of the year, with the strongest six months of take-up ever recorded by CBRE in Edinburgh.’

https://sbnn.co.uk/2017/08/03/demand-office-space-strengthens-first-half-2017/

© strath.ac.uk

As you know, the prospect of reliable 100% electricity generation by 2030 is now a real likelihood. See:

Scotland’s energy 100% renewable by 2030?

By 2030 when Scotland should be able to power all its homes and industry with renewables energy, all of the fossil-fuel job losses could be replaced there.

Offshore windfarms, like the currently under-construction Beatrice field in the Moray Firth, have particular advantages. Stanford University has summarised them:

1. The first and most immediately compelling advantage of floating offshore wind is access to incredible wind resource over deep waters. Currently we can only access a small fraction of the offshore wind resource worldwide due to depth constraints.
2. Offshore wind is recognized for its proximity to load centers but often still encounters significant NIMBY (“Not In My Back Yard”) resistance. Population centers tend to cluster near the coastlines, so offshore wind minimizes the distance from generation to load centers, without competing for valuable land. Opponents argue, however, that turbines negatively impact the skyline (visual pollution) or result in disruptive noise. Floating turbines address these concerns by allowing wind farms to be pushed farther offshore and out of sight.
3. Finally, there are also several manufacturing advantages to floating platforms, such as using less material in construction and reducing the need for specialty marine engineering expertise. One major cost driver for conventional offshore wind are the heavy lift vessels required to erect the turbine. Very expensive special purpose ships are required to transport the parts on site and perform the assembly. Floating turbine platforms, however, are designed to be assembled in port and towed into position using simple barges or tugboats. This can result in major cost savings and greatly increased flexibility in construction.

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph240/pratt1/

Presumably recognising these particular advantages of offshore wind farms, the Scottish Government has invested a further £1.5 million (as last year) to further develop the technology in the form of the Carbon Trust’s Offshore Wind Accelerator (OWA) programme – which brings together developers in a bid to make offshore wind an even more affordable source of power. This comes on top of £43 million already invested in numerous other renewable energy projects this year:

https://thoughtcontrolscotland.com/2017/05/11/as-scotland-heads-for-100-renewables-energy-production-by-2030-the-snp-scottish-government-invests-another-43m-for-low-carbon-infrastructure-projects-to-help-make-it-happen/

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/offshore-wind-power-project-receives-15m-funding-boost-11364200718496

© businessinsider.com

Here’s the Scotsman headline:

‘Scottish independence ‘would be terrible’ says Donald Trump’

Needless to say, he was less than clear on his reasoning other than thinking that renaming the ‘British Open’ the ‘Scottish Open’ would be some kind of disaster?

On the 2014 Referendum, he said:

‘It would be terrible. They just went through hell.’

I know Kezia looks as if she did but I don’t remember it being hellish. Wasn’t it a vibrant demonstration of popular democracy in action much admired across the world?

See this from the great Neal Ascherson in the Guardian in 2014

‘In the past three days, Scots have looked at one another and asked: “What do we do with all that joyful commitment, with the biggest surge of creative democratic energy that Scotland has ever seen?” For many, perhaps thousands of people, it has been the most important public experience in their lives.’

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/21/scotland-independence-creative-energy-must-not-be-wasted

If you’ve been watching any of the Donald’s performances recently, you can only think it’s a good sign that he’s agin Scottish independence.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-independence-would-be-terrible-says-donald-trump-1-4519872

According to the Scotch Whisky Association:

‘Scotch Whisky is vital to the entire Scottish and UK economies, adding £5 billion in value each year, supporting more than 40,000 jobs and exporting £4 billion of Scotch annually to almost 200 markets.’

The £4 billion in Whisky exports and £400 million in Gin exports reported here contrasts interestingly with HM Customs and excise figures of only £895m and £108 million lends support to commentator B le Panda below my previous article:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40090366

https://thoughtcontrolscotland.com/2017/07/29/scottish-government-invests-in-glasgows-second-new-distillery-as-scottish-whisky-sales-climb-toward-1-billion-and-scotland-produces-28-of-all-uk-food-and-drink-exports/comment-page-1/#comment-3950

http://www.scotch-whisky.org.uk/news-publications/news/uk-market-for-scotch-whisky-grows-in-2016/

Now, Scottish produced Gin exports are up 11% to £400 million with Esker Gin from Aberdeenshire now recognised as the best in the world at the International Wine and Spirit Competition in London on 26^th July. Other Scottish gins won silver awards for packaging and mixing.

https://sbnn.co.uk/2017/08/02/aberdeenshire-high-spirits-local-gin-producers-win-title-worlds-best-gin/

© bigstock.com

To protect themselves against price dips, oil producers, especially smaller ones, tend to sell ahead some of their future production. The more they do so, the less certain they feel about future trends whereas if they do less of it then that tends to mean they are more confident prices will rise. It’s called ‘hedging’ as in ‘hedging your bets’.

Some, such as Premier Oil which produces around 80 000 barrels per day has hedged only 10% in the second quarter of 2017 whereas in the same period in 2016 they hedged 30%. Tullow Oil which is of similar size has not hedged at all. This is quite a strong indicator of confidence in price rises of the kind I’ve already reported on this including these:

Refiners begin scramble for crude oil supplies. Now who do we know with lots of that? Oh yes, we do.

Oil price climbs above $51 per barrel as US reserves fall: Scottish North Sea oil remains profitable

These bets may well pay off handsomely for oil producers including those in Scottish waters, if some informed experts are correct:

Independent Scotland’s oil wealth is assured as Aramco chief predicts huge shortages

https://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/14783/european-oil-producers-weak-hedging-shows-bet-on-price-rebound/