Europe rejects calls for deep-sea oil moratorium
by Ian Hudghton
A ban on oil exploration, in the aftermath of last year's disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, would be disproportionate
The European Parliament's rejection of calls for a moratorium on deep-sea oil exploration will be welcomed warmly in the north east of Scotland. The spectre of such a ban first emerged in the aftermath of last year's disaster in the Gulf of Mexico; an overwhelming majority of MEPs have now decided that such a move would be a disproportionate reaction.
None of this is to say that MEPs - or people in the north east of Scotland – do not take safety matters seriously. This summer's leak from Shell's Gannet installation shows that accidents can happen and that complacency is not an option. As well as oil, the North Sea provides thousands of jobs in the fishing and tourism sectors – industries, which are heavily dependent upon a clean environment. And the people of the north east know about tragedy too. In Hazlehead Park, in Aberdeen, there stands a memorial to the 167 - men who died in the 1988 Piper Alpha disaster. The oil companies do not always get things right - and the subsequent inquiry under Lord Cullen led to some 106 recommendations being made to improve safety offshore.
But the oil industry remains a vital industry - not solely in terms of Scottish jobs, but in terms of European energy security too. An estimated 40 per cent of oil and gas reserves remain to be extracted and the North Sea sector has a good few decades to go, if policy-makers allow it to thrive. Unfortunately, the sector was under political attack even before MEPs cast their vote in Strasbourg. This attack came not from the European Union, but from the UK Treasury - a Treasury which has so far benefited from Scotland's oil to the tune of more than £300bn. The UK Chancellor's decision to increase the supplementary charge on North Sea oil profits will see operators facing an overall tax rate of 81 per cent on some fields - and Aberdeen University analysis suggests that there will be £29bn less investment over the next 30 years, as a result. Truly, a case of the government in London killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
All of which is being carefully noted by the people of the north east who, like people across Scotland, are gearing up for the independence referendum to be held during the current session of the Scottish Parliament. Scotland can only look to independent Norway with admiration – and, indeed, a degree of envy; and the way in which they have invested their oil revenues in massive sovereign wealth funds. It is perhaps worthy of note that in this May's Scottish elections the pro-independence SNP won nine of the nine seats in the north east Scotland region - and still took an extra seat on the proportional top up list. And so the oil industry truly matters. It matters to the EU, which has been made very much aware of fuel security issues in recent years. It matters to the UK government, which seems anxious to squeeze as much money as they can out of the North Sea - while they're in a position to do so. And it matters to the people of Scotland, who can only regret 40 years of squandered wealth - but who are also thinking of the future and Scotland's place in the world.
That future will undoubtedly have to see a lessoning of the world's dependence on oil and other fossil fuels. The country is very much aware of this and the Scottish government has been keen to push to the forefront of renewables technology - to make us the "Saudi Arabia of renewables". But in the medium term, oil will remain an absolutely vital part of the fuel equation - and Scotland must be allowed to continue the development of these resources. Which is why the people of the north east will be welcoming the European Parliament's vote. It is true that MEPs do not always get positive press coverage, but the parliament's decision was the right one for Scotland and the right one for Europe. Politicians must ensure that safety regimes are fully enforced - a requirement, which does not need to imply the demise of the industry.
Ian Hudghton is a Scottish MEP and serves on the Fisheries Committees in the European Parliament
Another separatist barking separatist dribble. Boo hoo, Scotland has had its natural resources stolen by that nasty UK. Wake up - Scotland is part of the UK and has benefited from oil revenue as a result, as have England, Wales amd Northern Ireland. 'Saudi Arabia of renewables'...What a joke.
Laskovar - UK
I'd think the lesson from the Gulf 'disaster' would be that even huge amounts of leaked oil are pretty harmless, in fact, you could make a good argument for it improving the environment.
The billions wasted in lost business tourism, drilling moratoriums etc were certainly a disaster, and for the families of those killed, but a handful of oily seagulls?
Why is this considered an 'environmental catastrophe' while tens of thousands of large birds killed every single year by windmills is not worth mentioning? Couldn't be anything to do with the lack of shake-down cash in 'alternative' energy?
Threepwood - Michigan
Freeing Europe and the US from oil dependency
The oil curse has wrecked many societies and slowed down economic development in producing regions, but the emerging shale gas revolution could be a 'blessing' for both Europe and America – claims Paolo Natali