« Salmond: "We will take forward powers for our Parliament" | Main | Alex Salmond makes the case for full independence to the SNP conference »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c61a053ef014e8847dce2970d
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Salmond: "I will be laying down markers for what this mandate means.":
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
AN 'INDEPENDENT' SCOTLAND WOULD BE ENTITLED TO NO MORE THAN A POPULATION-BASED PORTION OF THE UK's OIL & GAS RESOURCES* THAT EXIST FARTHER THAN 20-MILES FROM SCOTLAND's SHORES!!
*about 8% of total oil and gas value based upon Scotland's 5M population as approximately 8% of the United Kingdom's 61M...
When Scotland entered the Union it had no offshore oil resources.
Once entered into the Union, Scotland ceased being a 'nation-state' entity and became a component of a much bigger nation-state: the United Kingdom.
International laws, conventions and practises existing at the time of Scotland's entry into the Union provided countries with shorelines rights to the resources off of their shores at distances of only 20-miles from their shores.... not the 200 miles+ that today's international laws provide for.
The nation-state that is the United Kingdom became the beneficiary of international laws that substantially increased countries' offshore legal jurisdictions while expanding the exclusive rights countries' have to off-shore undersea resources: IE: expanding nations' offshore legal and exclusive resource-rights jurisdictions from 20-miles out to- in many cases- in excess of 200 miles from their shores- when these new laws were enacted/adopted last century...
At the time that laws expanding nations' ownership of off-shore undersea resources were enacted/adopted last century, Scotland was not a functional 'nation-state', but rather was a component of a larger nation-state: the United Kingdom... and as a consequence Scotland did not become- and is not today- the rightful 'owner' of undersea resources such as oil and natural gas that happen to be found farther than 20 miles from its shores!!
Should Scotland or any other component of the United Kingdom decide for whatever reason to declare unilateral independence in the future, any off-shore resources (and/or profits from such) existing more than 20-miles from its shores would- if international laws were to be adhered to- have to be divided up between the other parts of the United Kingdom...
______________
Roderick V. Louis,
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posted by: Roderick Louis | May 06, 2011 at 09:04 PM
Now that Scotland has discovered its new sense of being, it is beholden up on England to set her free to rediscover their Darien dream.
bon voyage
Posted by: Anoneumouse | May 06, 2011 at 11:09 PM
Lets just see how Salmond plays the referendum line
Will he be able to 'delay it' for one excuse or another,when the backbenchers are screaming for it?
Do the Scottish people really want to break away from the rest of the UK or is it the politicians,
like Clegg & the Lib Dems,with their AV referendum,
who think they know their stuff when it comes to the public?
I think it will be forced onto Salmond by others in his party.
Have the Scottish voter called his bluff?
Posted by: Holly | May 07, 2011 at 09:07 AM