Every time I have made a comment suggesting that stopping oil licences isn’t good for the economy, someone (CBA to look back at who) popped up suggesting that isn’t how the global oil market works. Hence that somewhat sarcastic post. Unless the oil market is different for Norway.
From what I’ve understood, your criticism is linked to effectively surrendering energy security. The UK does not directly benefit, either through proper revenue or first refusal, from North Sea exploration (I will grant that tax revenues are generated). Difference with Norway is they still have public ownership of their exploration ‘vehicle’ so directly generate revenues and this has allowed them to diversify future income streams via the SWF.
Is It? You certainly swallow Reeves’s propaganda.The budget deficit, inflation and unemployment are lower than when Labour last left office. Debt as a percentage of GDP is a lot higher, but then there has been a global pandemic.I've noidea, but I do know Norway has a very healthy sovereign wealth fund while our economy is going backwards
Is It? You certainly swallow Reeves’s propaganda.The budget deficit, inflation and unemployment are lower than when Labour last left office. Debt as a percentage of GDP is a lot higher, but then there has been a global pandemic.
Also
UK Economic Outlook July 2024
In the latest edition of PwC’s UK Economic Outlook, we explore how viable the aim of ‘highest sustained growth in the G7’ is and whether the UK’s long-term structural issues can be overcome.www.pwc.co.uk
So there is revenue from North Sea oil - even if it is only tax revenue. In terms of first refusal (by which I assume you mean priority of supply) I would imagine that, in extremis, legislation could be passed to ensure primacy for the UK.From what I’ve understood, your criticism is linked to effectively surrendering energy security. The UK does not directly benefit, either through proper revenue or first refusal, from North Sea exploration (I will grant that tax revenues are generated). Difference with Norway is they still have public ownership of their exploration ‘vehicle’ so directly generate revenues and this has allowed them to diversify future income streams via the SWF.
Read your own post. You claimed the UK economy was going backwards, which is Reeves message.What on earth are you on about?
What has Reeves got to do with the fact Norway has built up a massive sovereign wealth fund?
Read your own post. You claimed the UK economy was going backwards.
Competence will lead to stability which will absolutely lead to growthIt is, we've just had the first Parliament which has overseen a drop in living standards since who knows when.
The fact there is growth predicted doesn't alter that.
As for me swallowing Reeves propaganda, I didn't vote for her and don't think she has a strategy to get us moving again, the only one who's swallowed any propaganda is you with your thinly veiled attempts to gloss over the shit show that has been the last 14 years of tory rule.
Publicly owned company operating for the benefit of everyone? Bloody commies!
Let’s hope pension funds don’t lose all their money when they have been directed where to invest.Competence will lead to stability which will absolutely lead to growth
Hope so tooLet’s hope pension funds don’t lose all their money when they have been directed where to invest.
The figures I’ve seen aren't predictions of growth, they are the actual position. The PWC article does predict growth but not from the actual position, not the appalling one that Labour are claiming. I think she has a strategy, just not convinced it will work.It is, we've just had the first Parliament which has overseen a drop in living standards since who knows when.
The fact there is growth predicted doesn't alter that.
As for me swallowing Reeves propaganda, I didn't vote for her and don't think she has a strategy to get us moving again, the only one who's swallowed any propaganda is you with your thinly veiled attempts to gloss over the shit show that has been the last 14 years of tory rule.
The figures I’ve seen aren't predictions of growth, they are the actual position. The PWC article does predict growth but not from the actual position, not the appalling one that Labour are claiming. I think she has a strategy, just not convinced it will work.
So there is revenue from North Sea oil - even if it is only tax revenue. In terms of first refusal (by which I assume you mean priority of supply) I would imagine that, in extremis, legislation could be passed to ensure primacy for the UK.
So, stopping future North Sea exploration will impact the UK economy at the very least by reducing the tax take on top of which will be a loss of jobs.
Anyway.....Josh Eccles....!?....
Worse than the O'Hare chippy deviation!
(My first visit to this thread... What is going on!??)
Ahhh....I think my mistake here is thinking I was posting on the Josh Eccles thread!?!!! Ooops!Basically - a Leeds chippy ran out of dab butties and the whole neighborhood rioted, and the slow response rate from the emergency services was due to lack of fuel due to inefficient north sea oil strategies employed by the woke labour party.
You mean the currently 5% that is determined on national investment?Let’s hope pension funds don’t lose all their money when they have been directed where to invest.
Rachel Reeves wrote this article for Mail on SundayYou mean the currently 5% that is determined on national investment?
Govt infrastructure is probably as low-risk as you could get. Better than utilities.Rachel Reeves wrote this article for Mail on Sunday
My mission to aid investment, boost pensions - and to spread prosperity to all
By Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer
“DURING the General Election campaign, I promised readers of The Mail on Sunday that I would lead the most pro-growth, pro-business Treasury in our country’s history - and I meant it.
That is why in my first 72 hours as Chancellor, I announced the biggest reform of our planning system in a decade so we could get Britain building again. It is why in my first week I established a new National Wealth Fund that would work alongside business to unlock billions of pounds in private sector investment in the industries of the future.
It is why we have introduced a new law to bring stability back to our economy so never again can we see a re-run of Liz Truss’s disastrous mini-Budget. And it is why I have backed the biggest overhaul in regulation of the UK Stock Exchange in 30 years to boost our global competitiveness.
But I know we must go further and faster. I am under no illusion to the scale of the challenge we face. We have inherited the worst set of economic circumstances since the Second World War. Taxes are at a 70-year high, national debt doubled under the Conservatives and public services have been pushed to breaking point.
We cannot turn that around overnight. It is going to take time and some tough decisions. But let me be clear: I am ready to take those decisions.
There are some who would argue that now we are in power we can abandon the platform that we were elected on. That we can turn on the spending taps and follow the Conservative Party’s path of unfunded promises that we know cannot be delivered.
I profoundly disagree. The mandate we were elected on was clear and I stand by it. We cannot tax and spend our way to prosperity, nor will we play fast and loose with the public finances. Instead, we need to back the wealth creators and deliver for the British people.
Previous governments have talked about a big bang on tax or regulation. I want to lead a big bang on growth because that is the only way we can fix the foundations, so we can rebuild Britain and make every part of our country better off.
That is why I can announce today our latest set of reforms to unlock growth, boost investment and deliver for pensioners.
Millions of people across Britain work hard and make sacrifices to save for their retirement, and there are hundreds of billions of pounds worth of assets in UK pension funds. However, not only is the current system not delivering the retirement savings it should be, but it is not doing what it should to support some of our great British businesses.
Conservative governments over the past 14 years have promised action to reform the pension market, but have failed to deliver. Where they have failed, I will act.
That is why I have instructed Treasury officials to launch an urgent review to make recommendations in the coming months for how we can reform the pensions market so it can deliver a better return for savers and ensure successful businesses can get the funding they need to grow, invest and spread prosperity across the UK. It is what other countries are doing and it is what we should be doing.
My demands of this review are clear: I want to boost investment in Britain, increase pension pots and tackle waste in the system. Let me take each of those in turn.
First, I want to see more pension schemes invest in fast-growing British firms. Even a one percentage point shift in the £800billion worth of assets that defined contribution schemes are estimated to manage by the end of the decade could release an extra £8billion of investment.
The same goes for the Local Government Pension Scheme in England and Wales. It is the seventh largest pension scheme in the world, worth £360billion. Its value comes from its 6.6million members, three-quarters of whom are women. This is money that could go towards building vital infrastructure, supporting small businesses and helping to put more back into our towns and cities.
Second, I want to see more done to deliver for pensioners to ensure the savings you make give you security and dignity in retirement. We will introduce new laws to boost some pension pots by more than £11,000 by ensuring schemes are well managed and deliver better value for money.
And we will tackle waste in the system through consolidation and the money spent on fees, including the £2billion spent by the Local Government Pension Scheme. Bringing pension pots together will also make it easier for people to manage their pensions, ending the administrative headache that comes from being part of multiple schemes.
This is only the beginning. If we are to turn our economy around, I know there is more that needs to be done. We need to tackle hospital waiting lists and reform our welfare system so we can help get people back to work. We need to give people more security at work by ensuring they are paid a decent wage. And we need to invest in our education system so we can build a workforce fit for the future.
I know we must repay the trust of those of you who voted for the Labour Party again or voted for us for the first time in your lives. I know we must also work just as hard for those who stayed at home or voted for another party.
But we were elected on a mandate of change and that work has already begun. We are fixing the foundations - and taking the country forward on a decade of national renewal.”
It won’t affect me, but it reads as if she is looking to pension funds to invest in the governments infrastructure projects. What happens if they go tits up, will the government indemnify those pension funds or will pensioners find they are stuffed.
Govt infrastructure is probably as low-risk as you could get. Better than utilities.
Why not ask the foreign govts and pension pots than invest in our other utilities.How will that generate returns required?
Why not ask the foreign govts and pension pots than invest in our other utilities.
So why not have our govt as the shareholder making the returns, able to give some of that to the investing pensions, and then spend the rest on further infrastructure improvements rather than someone's private yacht?They generate shareholder value as they are profit making private industries
So why not have our govt as the shareholder making the returns, able to give some of that to the investing pensions, and then spend the rest on further infrastructure improvements rather than someone's private yacht?
That's the question, always sceptical of deals like this, kind of damned in mistrust?Yes I’m sure pension funds would be hugely attracted to state controlled industries - that’s a brilliant plan
HS2?Govt infrastructure is probably as low-risk as you could get. Better than utilities.
I'll bite, what would you do to improve things. Obviously we can't just kick anyone who isn't classed as British, by whatever definition you want to use, out so how do you propose to 'fix things?The fact we have gone from minority communities rioting in Leeds, to government infrastructure and Norway, north sea oil et al, you know we're fucked.
Allegations of racism swept under the carpet because people are scared to confront it. A thread dissolving into nothingness. It's very disappointing.
@Deleted member 5849 the ultimate weak man with no balls. History will remember people like you.
WFH and flexi-time.I'm surprised all these doctors and engineers were able to take time from their busy schedule to do this to start with.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?