Hmm .. but if it happens, will the land end up being given out to constuction companies backhanding councillors such as whats happened all over Scotland in the Common Good land give away ?

Dare we trust our less than honest local authorities in this new venture ?

Not much good sending a copy of the report to wee Joke McConnell. He, will only do what his masters in Westminster tell him to do. As for Alexander, he is just a mouthpiece for the war criminal Bliar.

We don't just want control over the seabed to be devolved, we want everything to be devolved. In other words, we want independence, now.

But if we don't send all our dosh to London, they won't be able to "subsidise" us.

Waste of time. Westminster will not approve this and we'll continue to sit cowering in our little feudal country. Unless of course we bite the bullet on MAy 3rd.

Its money that is destined for Westminster coffers so there is no way that labour or liberal MSPs will try to bring it under Scottish control.

history has shown that the only way westminster retuns control of any land any were in the world to the indigenous people is when it costs more to hold on to it, than profit made from it.

sorry for the typo that should read "returns"

Always remember what was said during the Tories spell in Governmemt, 'Its not a lie its just being inflexible with the truth'

A much better saying is 'if you would'nt drink with them, dont vote for them'

Responsibility for Crown Land in Scotland should be transferred to the Scots parliament as should the profits emanating from them.

I cant think why anyone would oppose such a thing.

bet we still get ripped off if the morons on the mound get control of it labour will try to charge you for walking on the beach

Anyone know what the income is in England and Wales - as no doubt that will go to the UK treasury too and be distributed UK wide.

Do we want to say "its mine" and have less or do we want to say "its ours" and share more.

Answered my own question - Googled for crown estate financial reports.

It says:

“Net revenue surplus (profit) in Scotland for the year was £11.5 million, a decrease of £0.3 million (2.6%) from last year. It represents 6% of The Crown Estate’s total net revenue surplus.”

So, if 10% of the UK population live in Scotland and with Barnett get 12% of funding from common funds then while I'm not sure about the social and environmental benefits, the economic effect is to halve income.

Redefines my idea of "benefit"

peteedinburgh wrote:
"“Net revenue surplus (profit) in Scotland for the year was £11.5 million, a decrease of £0.3 million (2.6%) from last year. It represents 6% of The Crown Estate’s total net revenue surplus.”

So, if 10% of the UK population live in Scotland and with Barnett get 12% of funding from common funds then while I'm not sure about the social and environmental benefits, the economic effect is to halve income."

Scotland currently has 8.5% of the UK population and gets 9.4% of expenditure (though it generates 10.2% of revenue). Barnett will see that 9.4% reduce to 8.5% soon.

Your calculations assume that the money is distributed evenly. I doubt it is. Also, 6% is the revenue while we have no control over it. If it were managed to Scotland's benefit, it may well become much more profitable.

#13 If it were managed to Scotland's benefit, it may well become much more profitable.

Yup, buy a few more think pods in Holyrood.

Actually that headline today "Holyrood Closure " almost had me excited until I realised it was just a plea to forget about it.

#13 - sorry - but actually you annoyed me.

you say you doubt its distributed evenly - I assume you think its unfair to Scotland. However you state 8.5% of population get 9.4% of revenue. So yes it is uneven and its not unfair.

Then you say if its managed in Scotland it'll make more. Does this imply the crown commisioners in Scotland ( Down in Dean Village) will all be replaced and some new staff will do better. Or is this just an example of the blind optimism that clouds so much of scottish politics

As far as I understand it the crown estates legally are the property of the monarch.
After all the bills are paid (in simple terms) the remainder goes to the treasury who then pay all the costs that are accumulated yearly by the royals except Charles who gets his income from the profits after tax from the duchy of Cornwall.
I worked it out for 2003/04 and found that the treasury had 42 million surplus that it keeps after paying the royals costs, which is why I always laugh when I read the tax payers are paying for them.

I think there is more to this than meets the eye
I think we are not be provided the full facts, as I read somewhere that, the crown estate, encompass, the coast and terratorial waters, therefore it earns revenue from oil and fishing licences, which are far more than the £ 11 million figure mentioned here
Dont be surprised if London agrees as a sop to the Scottish people and blow there trumpet about giving more to Scotland, which was Scotlands to start with, but paring of certain parts of the Crown estates, such as the revenue earning licences

#16 You're annoyed?? You missed an important point. 8.5% of the population getting 9.4% of the revenue is unfair, especially when that 8.5% of the population generates 10.2% of the revenue, and only get 9.4% of it back.

'Scotland has an historic opportunity to take control of all crown land'...so say those who would promote 'the forthcoming Westminster UK Marine Bill". Hands off! It's probably another colonial grab to 'give back' the bones and gristle and keep the filet mignon like the twelve mile coastal waters.

Don't ever forget what was done to Ireland on the eve of their independence...when they were forced to sacrifice the six counties!

We are going to get all of our country back without the nod from London...whether they like it or not!