answersLogoWhite

0

In 2006 Grant Thornton, an accountancy firm, estimated that even if all the revenue from North Sea oil (NB North Sea and not Scottish) were allocated to an independent Scotland would have a £6 billion deficit. A 2008 study claimed that with the increase in oil prices the oil revenue totals £12.8 billion, leaving a £4 billion surplus. This misses the key point. This is a UK resource. If Scotland opted out of the UK then the North Sea oil could be very easily channeled through Newcastle. The only reason Aberdeen was chosen was to provide jobs and wealth in the ‘granite’ city. What intellectual argument is there to conflict this view? I can imagine lots of grumpy Scots huffing and puffing but look what Westminster was happy to do in Iraq to secure oil, what makes the Scots think England would be any less protective closer to home?

User Avatar

Wiki User

16y ago

What else can I help you with?