Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 6th September 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

$145 a barrel and rising as G8 leaders get set to discuss world crisis



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 07 July 2008
SOARING global food and energy prices and international concern at the nuclear plans of renegade states Iran and North Korea are set to dominate the G8 summit when it gets under way today.
The three-day summit in Japan will see world leaders discuss how best to address the unprecedented cost of oil after a price of a barrel rose to $145 last week.

The bloodshed and political unrest in Zimbabwe and the failure to hit a target from the G8 summit in Gleneagles, in 2005, to boost aid to Africa will also be on the agenda.

The annual event will be the first attended by Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, and the eighth and last for the US president George Bush, whose term of office ends in less than 200 days.

Mr Bush, speaking yesterday as he arrived in Japan, said North Korea had not fully addressed US concerns about its nuclear activities. Last week the Communist state provided information, but suspicions remain about uranium enrichment, a process in creating nuclear bombs.

The G8 is due to issue a "strong message" condemning both North Korea, which withdrew from the worldwide treaty on the proliferation of nuclear weapons five years ago, and Iran, which has faced United Nations sanctions since resuming uranium enrichment two years ago.

Mr Bush said: "North Korea did provide a declaration of its plutonium- related activities and did blow up the cooling tower of its nuclear reactor at Yongbyon. That's been verified and is a positive step, but there are more steps to be taken."

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, said G8 leaders would discuss how to increase pressure on Robert Mugabe following the disputed presidential elections that left him clinging to power in Zimbabwe.

Mr Brown last week repeated his belief that Mr Mugabe had blood on his hands after using violence to steal the election from the opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai. The White House said it believed leaders would "strongly condemn" the Zimbabwe regime in their official communique.

Mr Brown has warned that rich nations must not abandon their commitment to tackling climate change and world poverty because of tougher economic conditions.

Amid fears that previous pledges on aid to Africa and carbon emissions could scaled back, he insisted they should in fact be accelerated.

British officials are looking for the countries to make a "reaffirmation" of aid promises made at the Gleneagles summit to double development aid by 2050. They want poor countries encouraged to develop their agriculture sectors so they can feed themselves. But there is also recognition that African countries must keep their side of the bargain by rooting out the "cycle of coups, crises and corruption".

Yasuo Fukuda, the Japanese prime minister, who is chairing the summit, has committed the G8 to greater efforts to tackle climate change. "Global warming is a huge challenge and humanity has no time to lose," he said.

The summit is being held on the northernmost Japanese island of Hokkaido. There will also be debate on the question of whether the use of land to grow biofuel crops – to reduce dependency on oil – has driven up food prices.

At Westminster, the UK government will today publish the Gallagher review into the effect of biofuels alongside ministerial plans for the way forward. Japan believes biofuel production is compromising the supply of food, but that view is not shared by the US.

Delegates will get to test-drive the latest technology

US PRESIDENT George Bush said it all: he is looking forward to battery-powered vehicles looking more like cars than "golf carts".

That future will be visible for all to see – and for world leaders to test-drive – during the three-day G8 summit in Japan this week, which will showcase the country's status as being at the forefront of technology that does not rely on fossil fuels nor emit greenhouse gases.

All seven main Japanese car-makers are providing demonstration vehicles, including the Toyota FCHV-adv, which uses a nickel hydride battery and can travel more than 500 miles on a tank of hydrogen gas.

Honda FCX Clarity cars, which are powered by hydrogen fuel cells, are ferrying the delegates between meetings. However, the nearest hydrogen filling station is 13 miles away due to security concerns.

Security guards have been getting in on the act too – they patrol the grounds around the conference area in Hokkaido on Segway two-wheeled battery-operated scooters.

Visitors to Japan frequently return with tales of the extraordinary controls on the lavatories, from heated seats to a choice of music to accompany each visit. At the G8 summit, even the loos take on a "green" dimension, using up to 31 per cent less water than normal appliances by employing new types of flush. The lids even pop open at the wave of a hand.

A visitor to the summit travelling from Singapore would need to spend £125 offsetting his or her "carbon footprint" of 2.7 tonnes. This would be done by buying three trees, which would negate the carbon in 30 years.

The Japanese government is planning to offset the total expected emissions from this week's summit of 25,000 tonnes, according to a spokeswoman.

IN NUMBERS

8
members of the G8: UK, USA, Canada, Italy, France, Germany, Russia and Japan. However the EU is represented by the Commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, which is why there are nine seats at the top table.

20,000
security agents and riot police guarding the world leaders.

5,000
journalists in Japan covering the three-day event.

4
occasions the summit has been held in Japan previously. The years were 1979, 1986, 1993 and 2000.

1975
when the first summit was held.

62
President George Bush marked his birthday yesterday.

The full article contains 973 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 July 2008 11:29 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: The G8
 
1

Paula,

07/07/2008 00:01:17
The first thing they need to do is get a handle on the speculators who are actually the cause of this. They crashed the mortgage market and moved into oil and food. Suddenly the prices surge upwards.

And the same few people make millions by the minute.
2

,

07/07/2008 00:03:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

Highland Mighty©,

07/07/2008 00:03:53
$145 a barrel and Salmond actually expects us to believe that relying on a highly unpredictable and declining source for 25% of our income is the way ahead.

Insane. Just insane.
4

,

07/07/2008 00:09:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

ThomasP,

07/07/2008 00:10:05
The only thing that is insane is spending money on nuclear power ststions, nuclear missles and going into debt by 500 billion and rising.
6

The Great Deception,

07/07/2008 00:29:22
The price of oil is rising that much. The dollar is a worthless piece of paper.

Use the exchange rate then and now and you'll see oil rising a third less.
7

,

07/07/2008 00:31:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

subrosa,

07/07/2008 00:32:49
An article in the Daily Mail states Gordon Brown wants us to stop throwing food away and that would save £8 a week per household. It goes on to say that the G8 crowd are having a dinner later today and 40+ chefs have been called in to prepare it.

Hipocrisy at it's best.
9

,

07/07/2008 00:42:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

TommyKaye,

UK 07/07/2008 00:54:59
Labour MP spent £500,000 of taxpayers' money running office from home staffed by wife

David Marshall used expenses to run an office from his home which was staffed by his wife Tina
A Labour MP used almost £500,000 of taxpayers' money over six years to help run an office from his home which was staffed by his wife.
David Marshall, 67, who has quit to spark the Glasgow East by-election on July 24, used the expenses to pay for a constituency office and staff.
But Mr Marshall's office was in his semi-detached Glasgow home and he employed his wife Tina as his secretary. It is also believed he paid his daughter Christina to work from his home from the same pool of money.
A Commons spokesman said MPs can use their home as an office but only claim for additional costs like 'extra phone lines, heating and lighting'.
From 2001-2007, Mr Marshall claimed £91,000 incidental expenses provision, which is used to pay for constituency offices, plus £400,000 for staff and £11,000 for their travel expenses.
He listed only one member of staff on the Commons register - Christina Marshall. It was unclear if this was his wife Tina or daughter Christina.
Neighbours and political sources said his wife had worked for him - with Labour ex-Minister Brian Wilson saying that Mrs Marshall had worked for her husband as a constituency secretary.
Mr Marshall is said to be suffering clinical depression. Party sources said he felt 'under pressure' over the expenses allegations.
The family refuses to comment on why he spent so much on office expenses, why he ran an office from home and what family members were on his payroll.
11

Castaway,

07/07/2008 01:02:20
Norway pop 4,623,291
Norway, has used its "accidental inheritance" to set up a Petroleum Fund, the Government Pension Fund -- Global which now has surpluses worth around £206 billion or £59,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. 11/3/2008

Scotland pop 5,094,800
Scotland, which could have used its "accidental inheritance" to set up a Petroleum Fund, the Government Pension Fund -- Global which now has surpluses worth around £0 or £0 for every man, woman and child in the country. 7/7/2008

The Norwegian fund, created in 1990, invests Norway's oil and gas wealth in foreign stocks and bonds to save for future generations when the oil runs out and to shield the Norwegian economy and currency from the threat of overheating through huge oil income.
12

A Better Way,

Scottish Nation 07/07/2008 01:59:36
High and Shoitee,

No Alex Salmond simply wants the Scottish Nation to decide its own future by Scots for Scots. Nothing more and definately Nothing Less.

You sir are either of foreign origins like say Northern Ireland, or are merely just another of those hangers on to those with their snouts in the trough.

The average Scot who you seem to have forgotten, like the average Unionist Drone on these pages, is that the English Politicians are responsable for the mass depravation that is a normal feature of the Scottish Nation in 2008. Alex Salmond, who your masters have you on this forum, simply believes that our Nation is the only democratic force that can correct these evils. The real Question is why do you not wish to see the end to the English Inspired Disease.

Me I think you are just another one of these paid Unionists who treat the Scottish Nation with contempt. May I suggest you would be well served if you went about your business by taking care of your own kind down south.

Your type are not to be despised merely because your loyalties lie in a foreign land and you interfere in Scottish issues. Please refrain from promoting a system that does not allow any disenting Democratic Nation to dare upset the London Applecart.
13

Ted999,

North Bay 07/07/2008 03:01:34
Saudi Arabia says oil is over priced. Others experts are also are saying the same thing. There is no shortage of oil, just bad management of inventory levels. The oil bubble will burst some day soon. That's what happens to big bubbles. Oil futures have been artificially inflated in value by commodities traders for weeks. Traders like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are making a fortune. I think new regulations are necessary. I find it interesting that billionaire financier George Soros calls this OIL phenomena a Bubble when everyone else sees a sharp spike in oil prices. He says he believes there are lots of bubbles building in financial markets, and in OIL. To quote him he says "He believes better regulation is necessary to keep commodity prices at more reasonable levels." That's what I have also been saying. Thegovernment needs to step in and do something about commodities trading. First of all, OIL and Gas should not be traded like poker chips. The consequences of a mistake are far too grave. Look whats happening in Europe now with strikes and protests etc. Imagine if the same thing happened here. To help make my point imagine if we traded wheat commodities and wheat jumped 100 percent so traders all jumped in and bought more driving the cost up even higher... soon the whole world would starve because wheat prices would skyrocket. There are probably controls on wheat trading so this can't really happen but what about oil. Can Investors drive the price up indefinitely? What controls are in place to prevent a huge spike in prices on the NYMEX. Oil is a key commodity and it's basic for the proper operation of commerce in America. For investers to gamble with this commodity in Futures speculation is very irrational and irresponsible. I firmly believe there needs to be safety controls in place to prevent greed driven spikes in prices on the commodities exchange the same as there were safety controls implimented after the great crash of the Thirty's to prevent a botto
14

Ted999,

North Bay 07/07/2008 03:06:38
Continued from post above.......

to prevent a bottoming out of stocks. It's a big game to them... but if the rules of the game are flawed then accidents happen. I am refering to the ENRON LOOPHOLE, SWAPS LOOPHOLE, and LONDON LOOPHOLE. A huge spike could take prices through the roof and this would not be good for for anyone except PERHAPS for the speculator involved. The Canadian Government is investigating this as we speak and rightly so. If other governments follow suit then futures traders may be forced to follow new rules of trading. When fear, greed and suspicion surround an activity what does that tell you? The commodities market needs a good overhaul to bring some credibility back into commodities trading. New regulations are necessary because a huge greed driven spike in oil can cause fear among all other investment sectors that are adversely affected by high oil prices. That fear would trigger a market reversal of grand proportions that would far out-weight any gains made by oil. These high prices are not sustainable and jeopardise economic growth globally, The price is inflated far above it's true value which is probably closer to 80 dollars a barrel. Visit our website and take part in our gas poll on. We asked who's to blame for high gas prices and got some very interesting results. Over half of respondence say they blame speculation for the problem. http://www.nbtv.ca
15

Dougie Douglas,

Brisbane 07/07/2008 04:11:16
Every dollar more that a barrel cost obviously causes economic pain for the economy.

Conversly an independent Scotland would not fear higher oil prices as fuel taxes would be ours, all ours, extra revenue would be used to stimulate the economy beyond the pain of higher fuel costs.

It's not selfish, it's natural self interest as displayed by every single country in the world.


High fuel cost are only going to continue with demand from India and China's emerging middle classes being the primary drivers.

$200 a barrel in 12 months I predict - Scots are being given a second bite at the cherry - will they take it?
16

yockel,

07/07/2008 07:23:40
They turned us into consumers to artificially keep the economy alive by spending borrowed money. Now Gorgo wants us to eat less to save the world. Hang on a minute, if we stop consuming the world markets will crash and the recession will deepen, what ya going to do Gordo? Hide?
17

BK,

Cyberspace 07/07/2008 07:47:03
"Mr Brown last week repeated his belief that Mr Mugabe had blood on his hands"

Pots and kettles spring to mind. Brown has butchered more than Mugabe, both as PM and supporter of Blair, in his illegal wars..
18

Jock ex 45Cdo RM,

THORNHILL 07/07/2008 08:51:02
1 #17 again the vexed question of Lies and Greed.
the Fifer still maintains his importance.
2 Time we capped the TOTAL TAX ie VAT and VED to say the year 2000 level.
Why does the Government of the day need the extra cash collection as apercentage of World Oil Prices?
3 Speculation. Suppose oil fell back to $50-00 a barrel, would Gordon and Alister go for voluntary UK Insovancy?
3 @5 Spot on

19

Edward,

07/07/2008 09:04:14
Brown is now saying we waste food
and that we should stop bulk buying, which saves us money and that supermarkets should stop offering 2 for 1 deals (which again saves us money)
Before lecturing us on wasting food, perhaps he should be lecturing George Bush, as Americans are the biggest wasters of food, something even thay would agree with
But why is the cost of food gong up?
Well perhaps its something to do with fuel costs going up atributed to greedy speculators, which needs investigating. Also the mass conversion by farmers to produce product for bio fuels. A the push for Bio Fuels included Gordon Brown!
Of the farmers that produce food for the table, they are not actually seeing any benefits of price increases as its the supermarkets that still make the money. Supermarkets like TESCO's who are a Labour donor
20

GordonJ,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 09:06:50
#12- Typical rubbish spouted by a brain-washed Nationalist.

You have to resort by trying to belittle others and have no time for people who think different from you. Last I looked this was a democratic country and we will decide our own in future in time. Hopefully once the vote goes the way of staying in the Union, you will do us a favour and leave!
21

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 07/07/2008 09:14:06
#12 - a Better Way
"No Alex Salmond simply wants the Scottish Nation to decide its own future by Scots for Scots . . . t you would be well served if you went about your business by taking care of your own kind down south. Your type are not to be despised merely because your loyalties lie in a foreign land "

Here we have the nationalist, racist, xenophobic, bigot in all its glory.

What about the 14-20% of people in this UK region that are not 'Scots'.

"your own kind down south" - racist, parochial rubbish.

"English-inspired disease" - wow - old Adolf would have signed you up in a heartbeat .

Er have you noticed that it is largely 'pure blood Scots' who have wrecked the economy of the UK, destroyed the education system, the health system, the transport system - and left us with the greatest national debt in the history of this country: Bliar, Cook, Reid, Brown, Alexander, Darling, Des Browne - the whole sorry neo-Marxist pack of them - Scots to a man,

The Scottish Labour Party has in effect been running UK PLC sine 1997 - and our current dire straits are a direct result of what happens when the tartan mafia rule the roost.

22

Saoghal Beag,

07/07/2008 09:18:14
no edward, broon is sating stop buying bogofs, it halves his vat take.
23

Saoghal Beag,

07/07/2008 09:22:06
21 tweedmouth, no fair calling them neo-maxists, not one of them has a conscience, let alone a commitment to social policy, they are not even folowing adam smith.
24

Mikey,

07/07/2008 09:23:45
Same applies to you, GordonJ! Will you leave an independent, affluent Scotland for pastures new?
25

LEAL,

07/07/2008 09:27:26
High oil prices should not be a problem in Scotland.We produce far more than we need ourselves and so have a surplus to sell on the world market at a high price.The only trouble is we as Scots would rather give the surplus to London than spend it in Scotland developing infrastructure,both economic and social,to carry our country to a prosperous future.Until now that is.People in Scotland are split equally on whether Scotland should be independent,but both camps now realise Scotland can survive without London rule.As the debate goes on,more and more pro union people will start to doubt the fear campaigns that eminate from London,and ask why it is so many people in Scotland have so little when London takes so much from us.
26

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 09:28:24
3

According to you Scotland generates 99bn in revenue without North sea oil so we dont need a single penny in North sea oil revenue at all. We in fact generate more than 3 times the income we receive from the Barnett formula without taking North sea oil revenue into consideration according to your figures and calculations and yet you say we would be financially backrupt outside of the UK even with oil revenue comming in?
Are you a total moron then?
27

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 09:32:38
21

Correction "SCOTS UNIONISTS" to a man you xenophobic little englander you.
Now remind me again of all the benefits and good government we had under Thatcher, Heath, Major and the other little Englander unionists?
28

ruthie,

ALBA 07/07/2008 09:39:14
and mr North britain lectures us peasants on not throwing away food as he flies round the world in a private jet, chartered apparently from Texas, to pick him up in London then take him to Japan. Get that man out!VOTE SNP!
29

,

07/07/2008 09:41:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
30

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 09:49:39
29

You have in fact proved on a previous thread that Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK by approx 102 billion pounds if you include North sea oil revenue at its present value and at the same time insisted Scotland couldnt go it alone financially. You claimed we would in fact live under a deficit even though according to you we can get by happily with the 30 billion from the Barnett formula. Now does that make any sense to you at all?
Or are you going to finally admit your just a lying little torag?

All of this is based on your figures your calculations and your government sources I didnt make this up YOU DID. I still have your original posts sitting on my hard drive would you like me to paste them here?
31

,

07/07/2008 09:53:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
32

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 09:57:10
31

Highland Mighty...,
03/07/2008 17:54:21
30. Go and read the links.

They are from the RBS Oil and Gas Index. The very same that Salmond claims to have helped create:

Production in 1999 = 2.9m barrels per day

....Production drops 8-10% every year for 9 years....

Production in Jan 2008 = 1.2m barrels per day


38
McMadman,
http://scottishreferendum2008.blogspot.com 03/07/2008 18:09:49
Highland

Clearly you are mathematically challenged.

The market value of 1.2 million barrels of oil, at a current market rate of $144 dollars, is $172,800,000. Or, assuming an exchange rate of $1.90 to the £,
£90,947,368.42.

That's £ 90,947,368.42. Per day. Annualised, this comes to £33,195,789,473.30.

£33bn, for the sake of a few pennies.

I understand that the current block grant to holyrood is around £30bn per year.

Hmmmm. Being independent would seem to benefit us by more than £3bn, based on your own oil output figures.

And theres more:
33

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 09:58:04
31

Highland Mighty...,
03/07/2008 18:22:19
37. Scotland is now the third richest of all the UK's nations/regions after London and the south.

Edinburgh is now the richest area in the entire UK.

The oil revenue is a major proportion (~25%) of our economy yet is beyond our control and highly unstable and unpredictable. It would be insane to rely on it in any way for future revenue.
It's the same as relying on a session at the roulette table for a quarter of your income. Would you take that risk? Would you take that risk with the entire country's economy?

Even with massive tax revenues, both oil and non-oil, we are only now GENUINELY making it into the black....but it is ALL down to the oil having increased nearly 500% in price over the past 5 years.

However, we should certainly not consider oil as a reliable source of income (which it clearly isn't except in Salmond's warped mind). Even with Buzzard and the other far smaller oilfields coming online, total production will still continue to drop. Buzzard, at the very best, will only fill half of the 1999-2008 gap.

My solution is to stay put, take the secure income, budget and public services that comes from not being heavily dependent on oil.

Then we can either sit with the steady 1-2% growth of the past 60 months and keep public spending at current levels, growing with the rest of the UK (which has constantly outpaced much of Europe for a similar period).....

Or we seek faster improvement now with a boost in growth through tax cuts, attracting more businesses and boosting the economy generally. However, this will obviously mean a cut in public services.














64
Highland Mighty...,
03/07/2008 19:25:47
However, if the price drops after independence OR the oil fields fail to meet expectations, then up to 25% of the economy and tax revenue will start to fade away.

It's highly unlikely there would be a full 25% drop but even half that would do tremendous damage t
34

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA being held back by the UK 07/07/2008 09:59:30
With Glasgow Labour MPs voting against the SNP's proposals to reduce the fuel price with a fuel duty regulator and voting to increase Vehicle Excise Duty Glasgow SNP MSP Bill Kidd published a table of recent high profile votes showing how Glasgow Labour MPs had failed to stand up for their constituent's interests by voting for measures that made life more difficult for them.

Mr Kidd condemned Glasgow's Labour MPs for failing to support their constituents again and again and said it was indicative of how Labour had neglected Glasgow and taken its voters for granted.

Commenting Mr Kidd said:

"This week Labour MPs from Glasgow showed how they take their voters for granted by voting to keep sky high fuel taxes up.

"Over half the people in the East End of Glasgow travelling to work use their car and have been let down by Labour as the cost of motoring is already proportionately high for them.

"The only MPs from Scotland who were on their side were MPs from the SNP. Glasgow's Labour MPs voted against the means to provide those motorists with some relief from sky high fuel taxes.

"However that is not the only example of Labour MPs voting to back Gordon Brown but not Glasgow.

"Glasgow Labour MPs voted to abolish the 10p tax rate and voted to still keep 1.1 million low paid workers worse off. They backed the Labour Government's Post Office closure programme which has seen 24 local post offices close in the Greater Glasgow area; and they voted to take £184 million in lottery money for good causes in some of Scotland's poorest communities to subsidise the spiralling cost of the London Olympics.

"Those examples show that again and again Labour MPs take their constituents for granted and neglect their interests.

"In contrast SNP MPs voted to stop the abolition of the 10p tax rate, for a suspension of the Post Office closure programme and to protect lottery money for Scotland's poorest communities. SNP MPs have already shown a commitment to Glasgow whi
35

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 09:59:35
31

MisterN,
Scotland 03/07/2008 19:42:15
64

If oil revenue is 25% of the Scottish economy then the Scottish economy equates to 33 billion x 4 at todays oil prices by the Government figures you produced on another thread. Scotland receives 30 billion from the Barnett formula so maybe you could take the time to explain how the f*ck we are better off in the Union even if oil prices dropped overnight to a 1/4 of their present value?

Your own bullsh*t still shows Scotland as better off going it alone.


74
MisterN,
Scotland 03/07/2008 20:34:02
HM

According to you Scotland generates 99bn in revenue without North sea oil so we dont need a single penny in North sea oil revenue at all. We in fact generate more than 3 times the income we receive from the Barnett formula without taking North sea oil revenue into consideration according to your figures and calculations and yet you say we would be financially backrupt outside of the UK even with oil revenue comming in?
Are you a total moron then?


77
MisterN,
Scotland 03/07/2008 20:47:55
HM troll

You have in fact proved on a previous thread that Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK by approx 102 billion pounds if you include North sea oil revenue at its present value and at the same time insisted Scotland couldnt go it alone financially. You claimed we would in fact live under a deficit even though according to you we can get by happily with the 30 billion from the Barnett formula. Now does that make any sense to you at all?
Or are you going to finally admit your just a lying little torag?

And that was the little sequence of events that occured a couple of days ago.
And now your posting the same sh*te again.
36

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA being held back by the UK 07/07/2008 10:00:18
SNP MPs have already shown a commitment to Glasgow whilst its own Labour MPs have not.

"The SNP Government has also helped mitigate the effects of soaring prices and energy costs by putting more money back in people's pockets by freezing Council Tax and reducing prescription charges.

"The coming by-election in Glasgow East is a chance for the people of the East End of Glasgow to send a message to the Labour party that they are no longer being taken for granted; that they want MPs on their side – on Glasgow's side – not protecting Gordon Brown.

"Only an SNP vote in Glasgow East can send that message and only the SNP has introduced the policies to help the people of Glasgow."
37

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA being held back by the UK 07/07/2008 10:04:47
If Zanu Liebour are not voting against the interests of the working class of Glasgow, they are voting for filling thir boots up by continuing their greedy grabbing selfish corruption using our taxes to stuff their houses with the John Lewis list.

The word went out in the commons before the debate that their was no point in turning up as it was going to be thrown out. When every one had made other plans the Labour hogs piled in and voted to keep their expenses.

What a vomit inducing bunch of pigs.
38

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA being held back by the UK 07/07/2008 10:06:04
SNP Candidate for Glasgow East Cllr John Mason today said “the wheels have come off Labour’s campaign before they’ve even picked a candidate” after the Scottish Government announced an extension of the concessionary fares scheme to injured veterans and re-confirmed that there would be no changes to the eligibility, times or routes available to older and disabled people on the Scottish Government’s concessionary fares scheme.

Cllr Mason attacked Labour for "scaremongering" in Glasgow East on the issue, and said that the announcement was further evidence of the SNP government delivering first class services for people in Glasgow and throughout Scotland.

Cllr John Mason said

“The wheels have come off Labour’s campaign bus before they’ve even picked a candidate. Today’s announcement shows the SNP is on your side – guaranteeing free bus travel for older and disabled people through the concessionary fares scheme.

“The SNP Government is even looking at extending the scheme to injured veterans. Far from cutting back as Labour claimed the SNP is delivering a better service for people in Glasgow and throughout Scotland.
39

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 10:06:09
One way of dealing with this problem would be to re-introduce the cartel system and fix the price of oil at the level it was about a year ago. The high oil price is due to speculators forcing the price up. It is nothing whatsoever to do with a shortage of oil.

As for Brown, I find it astounding that he is preaching to us as though we were a load of nursery school kids. The majority of the food price problems in this country are due to the criminal mismanagement by his stupid government. If he scrapped fuel duty altogether, then the situation would be a lot better very quickly.

It is refreshing to note that a meeting such as this is going to address some real issues for once, rather than concentrating on the fictional King Canute concept of "global warming" of "climate change".
40

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA being held back by the UK 07/07/2008 10:06:33
Cllr John Mason said

“The wheels have come off Labour’s campaign bus before they’ve even picked a candidate. Today’s announcement shows the SNP is on your side – guaranteeing free bus travel for older and disabled people through the concessionary fares scheme.

“The SNP Government is even looking at extending the scheme to injured veterans. Far from cutting back as Labour claimed the SNP is delivering a better service for people in Glasgow and throughout Scotland.

“The SNP in Government has already shown that we are on the side of people in Glasgow fighting back against gangs with more police on our streets, targeting the booze and blade culture with plans to end access to the cheap alcohol that fuels violence on the city’s streets, and now guaranteeing free bus travel for our elderly and disabled people, and extending it to injured veterans in recognition of their service.

“In contrast Labour are once again offering nothing but scare stories while they sit back and watch as families feel the pinch from Labour’s tax hikes and rising food and fuel prices.

“Once again the SNP are on your side while the Labour party is out of touch in Glasgow.”
41

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA being held back by the UK 07/07/2008 10:08:09
"New figures released today by the SNP show there has been an 146% increase in electricity and gas disconnections in the last two years as prices have soared. There is an overwhelming demand for Westminster to take action on energy prices yet Labour are doing nothing to help - they are completely immobilised.

"The Prime Minister is raking in an offshore oil windfall of some £5 billion - yet refuses to take the measures needed to bring relief to hard pressed families and business. And he refuses to give Scotland a fair share of our own oil wealth - the equivalent of £40 a family in Glasgow East, which would give the Scottish people direct and long term benefits.

"Compared to this 'rabbit in the headlights' approach from the UK Labour government, the Scottish Government have taken decisive action to help people and the economy.

"Among the 140 measures the SNP have taken in government over the past year, we have frozen the Council Tax, begun the phased abolition of prescription charges, slashed business rates, installed a record number of free central heating installations, and restored free education.

"These positive and progressive policies show that the SNP Government are on the side of the people whilst the struggling Labour party is out of touch. It's time to move on and for Glasgow East to move forward with the SNP."
42

HEN BROON 5,

ALBA being held back by the UK 07/07/2008 10:08:39
ALBA GU BRATH
43

MisterN,

07/07/2008 10:15:29
HM

To summerise:

YOU STATED "Production in Jan 2008 = 1.2m barrels per day"

Which equates to at todays price 174000000 dollars per day or approx 87 million pounds per day or approx 32 billion pounds per annum

YOU ALSO STATED "The oil revenue is a major proportion (~25%) of our economy"

Therefore according to you the Scottish economy is worth 32bn x 4 or 1.28 trillion pounds.

But all we get is 30bn from the Barnett formula therefore we are subsidising the UK by approx 1 trillion pounds ACCORDING TO YOU AND YOUR GOVERNMENT DERIVED STATISTICS.
44

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 10:19:44
35 Mister N
You obviously no understanding of the difference between such things as GDP, revenue etc. May I suggest that you acquire some before you start abusing and insulting others.
£99bn is a GDp figure not a revenue figure.
Also the revenue from oil is not £33bn. This is the price at which it is sold. From the $144 price the oil companies deduct their development, appraisal and operating costs. The remainder is then taxed at 50% - this is the revenue i.e. considerably less than half of the £33bn
45

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 10:20:24
43

I do apologise that should be 128billion not 1.28trillion therefore we only subsidise the UK by approx 100million pounds per annum according to HM and the Government.
46

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 10:22:28
44

Actually it is taxed at 75% in total and none of the above stats or figures are mine they all belong to HM so if you have a problem with them then refer it to him or her or whatever.
47

Upandunder,

07/07/2008 10:22:38
Petrol in the UK is cheap. It's around 30p in the £1 spent at the forecourt.

The rest is subject to various (large) taxes.

Our hopeless PM is all talk and no action: He says he's concerned for British families and businesses, yet refuses to share the actual pain of the rise in oil prices.

Thanks, Gordon. You're pathetic. Like all Labour politicians.
48

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 07/07/2008 10:23:03
What are you all moaning about? As Gordon says "we have never had it so good" and if you stop wating the odd old vegetable then everything will be well again.
49

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 10:23:53
44

Where did I use the 99bn GDP figure in my summing up?
50

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 10:26:05
47

Exactly the figures above are based on taxed crude not the tax taken from the refined product at the forecourt. the mind boggles at how much the treasury takes in from Scotland when you consider the above figures are in fact deceptively low.
51

Tris,

Dundee 07/07/2008 10:32:16

#8

I noticed that on the news this morning.

The North British Fat Controller Nut Case telling us to buy less food, and my mind went immediately to the series of programmes on Radio 4 not so long ago "Eating for Britain" I think it was called, where they talked about how entertaining is done in Government, the Diplomatic Service, and I think, at Buck House.

These people pack a way a fair amount of top quality food and even more top quality wines at our expense at a cost of multi-millions a year.....

And this pathetic excuse for a prime minister tells us not to waste food.

Cretin. He's enough to make you bring up your dinner.

Perhaps he'd like to tell us how much washing up liquid to use; where to set our thermostats; how much petrol to use; how often to use the lavatory, while he jets off round the world, eating drinking and using fuel on our behalf.


52

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 10:37:21
44

Actually that 99bn figure is really interesting when you consider its lower than the GDP figures for countries such as Israel, Denmark, Belarus, Slovakia, New Zealand, Moroco and Kazakstan.
Especially when you consider Norways GDP is 247,416 million.
It appears most of the country is on the dole.
53

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 07/07/2008 10:42:48
#51 Exactly. I wonder if the G8 bigwigs including that sweaty unelected downcast looking potato from No. 10 Downing Street will be worrying about how many prawn cocktails and lobster salads get sent to the trash can during their multiple dinner parties in Japan.
54

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 10:43:46
46 MisterN
Sorry to correct you again but only a small proportion of the oil from older fields is subject to the petroleum revenue tax of 75%. Most is taxed at the special corporate tax of 50%.
You have quoted stats from somebody else but you have quoted them in the wrong context. It is obvious that you do not understand the difference between GDP and revenue.
55

The Scotchman,

07/07/2008 10:45:07
# 18 - Broon is a Weegie.
56

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 10:52:58
52 Mister N
You are getting your facts confused again. You have looke up the GDP of these countries but you have forgotten that these figures are in US dollars and then comparing them to the figure in pounds.
57

,

07/07/2008 10:54:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
58

,

07/07/2008 10:56:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
59

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 10:58:35
56

Be my guest.
60

ThomasP,

07/07/2008 10:59:02
#57

Guess what.

You may not know this but oil producing countries tend to gamble their finances on the price of oil...

It is one of the risks of using natural resources...

Prices rise and fall all the time.
61

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 10:59:57
57

You stated very very clearly that NS oil revenue is worth 25% of the entire Scottish economy did you not?
62

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 07/07/2008 11:00:24
Two things would immediately help this country:

1) the re-nationalisation of the railways with no compensation for shareholders as they are nothing but self-interested speculators.

2) the nationalisation of all oil fields and associated companies around the UK with no compensation for shareholders. Any workers or company directors who don't like the new deal can simply leave. There are plenty of oil workers available to fill their shoes.

In this way all revenue will flow into the treasury and taxes on fuel can therefore be lowered.
63

,

07/07/2008 11:04:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
64

,

07/07/2008 11:05:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
65

Tris,

07/07/2008 11:06:09
#11

Yes, but Norway had and has a sensible government which is dedicated to Norway and Norwegians.

On the other had, Scotland has had... well.... what can you say, Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown (who appears incapable of actually saying the word "Scotland").....a pathetic bunch in comparison.

It's hardly likely that we are up there with Norway, is it? And of course Norway didn't have to subsidise another country's wars and nuclear capabilities, so that this other country could send its top politicians (pathetic though they be)to dance on the world stage looking (self) important.

66

brownlie,

07/07/2008 11:06:52
58 Highland Mighty

"usual infantile abuse" ????

Last week on this site you accused me of making up quotes and attributing them to you regarding your previous posting of not being shocked by innocent Iraqis being killed. You claimed you had not made that quote and invited me to prove it.

""" 22/4/2008 18.06.11

Highland Mighty

Are you expecting me to be shocked that 10-20,000 innocent civilians were killed in a war involving 1.5 million troops?"""

Not only a callous and crass hypocrite but a proven liar!!
67

,

07/07/2008 11:10:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
68

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 11:10:54
57

You also stated we take in 1.2 million barrels of crude a day did you not?

Is the price of a barrel of crude not priced at 145 US dollars today?

Does the government no tax this crude at a total value of 75% just on the crude?

Actually while we are at it can you explain to me why the UK only takes in 1.2mbpd with over 200 active platforms and Norway takes in 2.4mbpd with 51?
I still cant get my head around that one
Dont we need the money?
69

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 11:12:45
64

Why cant you? running out of bullsh*t already?
maybe next time you will ensure you figures and stats actually fit in with your arguements which may save you looking like a total lying prat.
But I doubt it.
70

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 07/07/2008 11:15:09
#63 A short term period of painful re-adjustment for the benefit of all - not just the few.

If company directors have their snouts forcibly removed from the trough and shareholders are taught a lesson in social responsibility then that will be a very good thing.
71

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 11:16:13
61/68 Mister N
Once more you are just illustrating your total confusion over these matters.
HM satted that oil revenues were 25% of total revenues.
This does not mean that oil is 25% of the economy. That is a totally different concept.
Also, as I have told you, only a small amount of the oil is taxed at 75%. Most is subject to corporation tax charged once the companies have deducted their costs.
72

,

07/07/2008 11:22:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
73

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 11:22:40
71

Ok that still means that Scotlands total revenues are 4 x 24bn (75% of 32bn) and we still only get 30bn from the Barnett formula.
So you can cut it spin it waffle it any way you like according to HM Scotland subsidises the UK by a massive proportion.
74

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 11:24:21
72

Nothing left have you now its head in the sand and total denial.
Tripped up by your own lies and its a sad sight indeed.
What a sad little troll.
75

,

07/07/2008 11:29:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
76

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 07/07/2008 11:32:16
Oil is an asset that belongs to the people therefore it should be a nationalised operation that extracts it for the benefit of all. If any of you saw the criminal amounts of money that people charge for their services within the oil industry it would turn your stomachs.

Oil workers, consultants and bosses should be civil servants paid general scale civil service salaries. If they are unwilling, they can go and work somewhere else in the private sector - it will not be hard to replace them.
77

brownlie,

07/07/2008 11:32:28
67 Highland Mighty/AM2/Richard1/Alfred E. etc etc etc

You are not only a proven liar but you haven chosen to carry perpetuate your lying by posting a quote which I never made.

Do you really think that your postings carry any credibility on this site any more?

Anyone on this site can refer to your posting on the 22nd April 2008 at 18.06.11 whereas the post that you attribute to me is, like most of your postings, a nonsensical product of your over-heated imagination.

I, and others, would have thought more of you if you had admitted forgetting, possibly due to your multiple monikers, to have made that remark which is there in black and white for all to see.

As for your farcical reference to me using multiple monikers to make it look as if there are more than "four of us" it should be obvious even to the most slow-witted that there are infinitely more than four people on this site who disagree with you.

Perhaps you were referring to the fact that more than four posters on this site recognise you for what you really are?
78

MisterN,

Scotland 07/07/2008 11:32:47
75

They are your figures sunshine not mine I think they are on the low side but that is irrelevant to the point.
79

brownlie,

07/07/2008 11:34:36
Highland Mighty

I see you've come up with another moniker in Ugly George - how appropriate is that?
80

,

07/07/2008 11:35:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
81

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 11:37:52
71 Mister N
I have told you twice that the revenue from oil is not 75% of all the sales yet you persist in using this figure to justify your arguments. And you then have the temerity to say that others have their head in the sand. Go and look at the BERR oil and gas website and get some knowledge of these matters before you insult others.
82

,

07/07/2008 11:39:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
83

The Spook in Leith,

07/07/2008 11:39:53
Bloody hell, every time i come online all i see is Highland guff and GERS GERS GERS GERS, you bloody h. u n
84

Ugly George,

edinburgh 07/07/2008 11:40:06
79 Brownlie
No he has not. I am a totally separate individual. What point are you trying tto make?
85

The Spook in Leith,

07/07/2008 11:40:44
why cant you write h.un ? eh ?
86

The Spook in Leith,

07/07/2008 11:42:38
Scotland has 90% of the UK rain, its Scotland's rain..!!

Lochness has more fresh water than England and wales combined, Water for thought.
87

The Spook in Leith,

07/07/2008 11:45:49
the TNS System Three poll in the Sunday Herald, showing support for independence and the status quo neck and neck, with 39% in favour and 41% against - compared to 35% in favour and 50% against last August

Agree or disagree to Scottish independence (changes since last August inbrackets)

Agree: 39% (+4)
Disagree: 41% (-9)

Hmm, looking better..
88

brownlie,

07/07/2008 11:47:39
84 Ugly George

Deepest apologies, it was the "ugly" part that threw me - I thought that perhaps HM was telling the truth for once.

You must be aware that HM uses multiple monikers in order to make it look as if some-one agrees with him.

Those who do are possibly not aware that he is a deceitful devious individual who further stains the already tarnished face of unionism.
89

McMadman,

http://scottishreferendum2008.blogspot.com 07/07/2008 11:47:47
# 75 Highland Mighty...,07/07/2008 11:29:23

From your own quote

"#73. Read GERS. The UK-to-Scotland subsidy is £2.7bn."

No it is not. This is how you choose to spin it. You:

"I quote from GERS:

* A DEFICIT OF £2.7 BILLION INCLUDING AN ESTIMATED GEOGRAPHICAL SHARE OF NORTH SEA REVENUE.""

The clue here is in ""Estimated." I rather suspect that this "estimate" was based on a much lower market price for oil per barrel than is currently the case.

Whilst I have many times recognised that an economy cannot sustain itself on oil alone, HM has been many times asked and failed to answer a couple of very simple questions:

1. HM, is it your position (with or without oil revenues) that an independent scotland would have to run it's budgets at outturn figures of greater than 50% GDP ? If so, please state the figures in support.

2. Again: How is it the case that without oil revenues, Scotland would be an economic basket case when there are examples of other, independent countries that seem to manage ?

Gonnae answer these quiestions or dodge them yet again ?