Westminster Voting Intentions

[Stuart Dickson]

Not at all. All I am saying is that my dog could probably grow the economy if it could borrow lots of money. It doesn't mean that you are intelligent or especially good at your job.

Well the SNP planned to borrow a hell of a lot more than we are currently had we gotten independence. So I suppose what you are saying is instead of voting for the usual monkey in a red rossette Scotland should vote for the Natsi dug instead.

Fortunately as a United Kingdom we've enjoyed the benefit of regular, sustained economic growth - one of the fastest growing economies in the world - whilst our government has managed to bring down our rate of borrowing year on year. Why vote for anyone else?

[DougJamie]

Nice to see such a reasoned balanced debate on here. Football and politics hmmmm bad karma.

So to add fuel, people who vote Tory should be set on fire

[BuddieinEK]

If you are going to talk like a prick then you can talk to someone else.

If you would rather not answer a sincere question feel free to say so!

[BuddieinEK]

If you are going to talk like a prick then you can talk to someone else.

And since you asked so nicely, I'll take the time to explain...

Before voting, i like to explore options and do my homework.

I have no party loyalties whatsoever and will vote for the person or party I see best placed to do the job at that time.

I wrote to Ms Sturgeon and asked her why I should vote for SNP at the general election when I was concerned that an increase in votes for them may be mistakenly taken as a mandate to push for another independence referendum.

Credit where it is due, she took the time to respond and said the right things... even if I'm not fully convinced!

Now Oaksoft, having established the facts, which one of us was talking like a prick?

[salmonbuddie]

Damn that pesky oil price, dropping like a stone and costing us all those jobs.....

http://m.scotsman.com/news/uk/oil-and-gas-sector-set-for-8-000-new-jobs-1-3718085

I haven't read it, just saw "oil & gas" and "The Scotsman" in the same sentence and mindlessly jumped to this conclusion. That's how it works, right?

[bluto]

Damn that pesky oil price, dropping like a stone and costing us all those jobs.....http://m.scotsman.com/news/uk/oil-and-gas-sector-set-for-8-000-new-jobs-1-3718085

I haven't read it, just saw "oil & gas" and "The Scotsman" in the same sentence and mindlessly jumped to this conclusion. That's how it works, right?

The worrying aspect of the article is that the area in which jobs may grow appears to be in decommissioning, while exploration and on-shore work will grow overseas.

You're offering Herr Dixon ammunition....

[salmonbuddie]

It's not worrying, it's part of the project lifecycle and has to happen at some time. The point is that even a low oil price doesn't necessarily mean job losses immediately. I work in nuclear decommissioning, if similar regulatory bodies are involved in North Sea decommissioning (and I believe they are) then there's a good few careers yet to be made.

And that's before the oil price rises again and makes production even more profitable again.

[bluto]

It's not worrying, it's part of the project lifecycle and has to happen at some time. The point is that even a low oil price doesn't necessarily mean job losses immediately. I work in nuclear decommissioning, if similar regulatory bodies are involved in North Sea decommissioning (and I believe they are) then there's a good few careers yet to be made.

And that's before the oil price rises again and makes production even more profitable again.

I see the Thurso/Dounreay car park stuffed with the thousands still working on the decommissioning, there. Which is good in the meantime, people earning money, learning professions and crafts... But will end at Dounreay.

The point of my post above wrt the article, is that, like Dounreay, we're also in the end game for boom-time in the North Sea oil industry. There are so many other sources of oil now known about, that are more exploitable, more cheaply and offering a 'better' grade of oil. When prices do rise, they will be the first to be exploited.

[Stuart Dickson]

I see the Thurso/Dounreay car park stuffed with the thousands still working on the decommissioning, there. Which is good in the meantime, people earning money, learning professions and crafts... But will end at Dounreay.

The point of my post above wrt the article, is that, like Dounreay, we're also in the end game for boom-time in the North Sea oil industry. There are so many other sources of oil now known about, that are more exploitable, more cheaply and offering a 'better' grade of oil. When prices do rise, they will be the first to be exploited.

There article even mentions this with 27% more interested in onshore shail gas and oil extraction.

[bluto]

So what you are saying is that the north sea oil will be left there until there is a real shortage of oil - which will make it even more valuable? Money in the bank then? We should then stick with the UK for the next 30 years and then split when we will all become billionaires - f**king cool man.

Er..... naw. Speaking as a billionaire (latent), that's no what I was saying...

(Also - 30 years no good to me. I'll be long gone.)

As Earth (if it does) moves to other sources of energy deemed less damaging to the planet, any future oil that IS wanted will come from more easily exploitable resources.

A big and interesting 'if' in all this (for me) is what OIL will do to redeem its produce - how it will cut Carbon damage etc. That'll impact future production, too.

[another alias]

So what you are saying is that the north sea oil will be left there until there is a real shortage of oil - which will make it even more valuable? Money in the bank then? We should then stick with the UK for the next 30 years and then split when we will all become billionaires - f**king cool man.

couldn't we just do independence now and issue a few granny bonds in the meantime?...

[Stuart Dickson]

Ah the good old SNP. Remember all that shite from a few months back about how Scotland would make £billions selling our wee windmill generated electricity to the South of England. Well today the STV website is carrying a story where John Swinney and Nicola Sturgeon completely contradict that by arguing that Scotlands power security is threatened by Nation Grid plans to close coal power station - Longannet - a closure being forced on the National Grid by the EU.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[Buddymarvellous]

I think you over simplify to suit your argument.

Firstly Longannet is owned by Scottish Power not National Grid.

Secondly the Grid company are charging way over the odds compared to English power stations for transmission from Scotland. Scottish Power are simply trying to force more reasonable charges from NGC - hence all these threats to close - these are basic negotiating stances.

[beyond our ken]

I think you over simplify to suit your argument.

Firstly Longannet is owned by Scottish Power not National Grid.

Secondly the Grid company are charging way over the odds compared to English power stations for transmission from Scotland. Scottish Power are simply trying to force more reasonable charges from NGC - hence all these threats to close - these are basic negotiating stances.

scottishpower don't want to close longannet and the grid want it to stay open, problem is that the regulator doesnt want to alter the transmission charges which were intorduced by the tory government in 2010

all the signs are that there will be a compromise of some sorts an that there will be a gas station built in scotland to replace it as part of the deal on transmission price

[saintnextlifetime]

Salmond announces he wont go into a coalition with Labour and instead would only offer a looser arrangement based on voting on individual issues. Hours later , Red Ed says he wont enter a coalition with the SNP . .lol

Was Miliband trying to save face. .

[Stuart Dickson]

Salmond announces he wont go into a coalition with Labour and instead would only offer a loser arrangement based on voting on individual issues. Hours later , Red Ed says he wont enter a coalition with the SNP . .lol

Was Miliband trying to save face. .

Fixed it for you.

[Stuart Dickson]

scottishpower don't want to close longannet and the grid want it to stay open, problem is that the regulator doesnt want to alter the transmission charges which were intorduced by the tory government in 2010

all the signs are that there will be a compromise of some sorts an that there will be a gas station built in scotland to replace it as part of the deal on transmission price

Yes there probably will, however it still doesn't cover for the fact that prior to the Referendum the SNP were quick to tell us that our renewable energy industry had provided the country with not only energy security, but sufficient amounts of electricity that we'd be able to make £billions exporting electricity to the South East of England. Roll forward just 6 months and the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance are telling the electorate that without Longannet Scotland's energy security is at risk.

Do the wee windmills that Alex Salmond spent £billions on work in the way the SNP keep telling us they do, or do we really need a heavily polluting coal fired power station to keep our lights on - like the SNP are telling us.

[Stuart Dickson]

During the whole of last year the Scottish wind farms produced on average 98% of the electricity we needed.

So some of the time we obviously need to use other sources until the storage of the overcapacity that wind farms generates can be made economical.

Glad to help.

Wow, really? 98% huh?

So not the 43% that Business Green claims was supplied in total by the WHOLE of the renewable energy industry in Scotland then? That's strange. If wind farms give us 98% of what we need why would we need Longannet, when we've also got 2 nuclear power stations, another coal fired power station, 3 gas or oil powered stations and 2 hydro power stations.

[Stuart Dickson]

Read his post again, taking the time to spell out all the big words, and stop making a fool of yourself.

I don't know if his number is correct but I am willing to take it at face value as he is not one of the few posters on here who have a tendency to pull numbers out the air just to back up his argument. In other words, he is not you.

Ah blind loyalty. See I know that Cockles is lying. I know he's misquoted WWF Scotland's report which claims that in 2014 wind farms generated enough electricity to cover the needs of 98% of HOMES in Scotland.

Now of course WE NEED more than that obviously unless it's his intention for the rail network not to run, strreet lighting not to work, traffic lights to go dark, offices to remain cold, unventilated, dark and powerless, and our factories not to operate.

At the bottom of the WWF report they even state that the assumption they used is that Scotland's total power usage is sold at 41% domestic and 59% non domestic.

I know the SNP policies would have led to mass unemployment in an independent Scotland, so perhaps he does feel that the wind farms we have would cover all WE NEED. Fortunately 55% of us weren't quite so stupid.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[beyond our ken]

Yes there probably will, however it still doesn't cover for the fact that prior to the Referendum the SNP were quick to tell us that our renewable energy industry had provided the country with not only energy security, but sufficient amounts of electricity that we'd be able to make £billions exporting electricity to the South East of England. Roll forward just 6 months and the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance are telling the electorate that without Longannet Scotland's energy security is at risk.

Do the wee windmills that Alex Salmond spent £billions on work in the way the SNP keep telling us they do, or do we really need a heavily polluting coal fired power station to keep our lights on - like the SNP are telling us.

I think you will find that support for wind comes from westminster and not holyrood, the tories signed off on a few great deals for the industry just last month

[TopCat]

Salmond announces he wont go into a coalition with Labour and instead would only offer a looser arrangement based on voting on individual issues. ]

Where did he say that?

[2becks]

Where did he say that?

He didn't. It wouldn't be his place to do so anyway. however, the leader of the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon has stated repeatedly that this is her intention.

[TopCat]

He didn't. It wouldn't be his place to do so anyway. however, the leader of the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon has stated repeatedly that this is her intention.

But no one in the SNP actually ruled it out?

[Stuart Dickson]

It was a conservative msp that I quoted. Will check later the telegraph news article from January.

I honestly didn't see him mentioning only homes.

I'm quite happy to admit I got it wrong if I am.

So remind us, is it North or South Lanarkshire you live in?

http://www.wwf.org.uk/about_wwf/press_centre/?unewsid=7432

There's the article. It's obviously a tainted press release since it's from the WWF - and it's written to be extremely positive about the renewable energy industry. However as I've said, even in there you can see that their own assumptions are based on 41% of our electricity consumption being for domestic use and as you'll see from the article it's quite clear they are talking about how many homes the wind turbines can power - not the total electrical energy consumption - or our total electrical need - for the whole of Scotland. So it appears that the SNP were lying pre referendum about Scotland's energy security.

As for whether the support for wind turbines comes from the Westminster or Scottish Government can I point out that Fergus Ewing on the 22nd of March 2012 announced a massive £303 million investment from the SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT into the renewable energy sector. Since then of course we've seen the Scottish Government nationalise the assets of the bankrupt company Pelamis having come under extreme criticism from the Scottish Green Party and from the owners at Pelamis and Aquamarine who say that the Scottish Government continually frustrated their efforts by throttling funding for wave power.

Sadly it appears that this time round Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney are not lying. Without Longannet and Independent Scotland would NOT have the capability of generating enough electricity for our current needs.

[saintnextlifetime]

Where did he say that?

He said it on the Radio 2 , yesterday , from an interview that had been recorded the previous night. He was quite adamant that there would be no coalition , which probably prompted Miliband to confirm the same , yesterday . .

There is no advantage to form a coalition with Labour , and as Salmond says , he has had plenty of experience working with a minority government , which , is something Red Ed , obviously doesn't have . .

Check it out. .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b055jn0v#auto

. .from about 9:43. .

ETA where he said it. .

Edited March 17, 2015 by saintnextlifetime