Oor Nicola Sturgeon thread.

[Detournement]

Scottish Neoliberal Party

[Benjamin_Nevis]

5 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

I'm not sure any other party in government could do different according to this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-54630628

This kind of thing might end up being a positive of Brexit if it means state aid can be extended to provide these kind of guarantees.

Are you sure this desperate fuckwit isn't HB? 

[Gordon EF]

36 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Scottish Neoliberal Party

So do you think they should have broken EU laws on state aid instead?

[Detournement]

14 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

So do you think they should have broken EU laws on state aid instead?

Of course I do.

Also it's not the EU who are making them privatise our renewable resources.

Edited October 22, 2020 by Detournement

[NotThePars]

13 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

So do you think they should have broken EU laws on state aid instead?

Think it's probably less of whether they should and more whether they would even want to.

[Detournement]

Just now, NotThePars said:

Think it's probably less of whether they should and more whether they would even want to.

The state aid laws are just a handy excuse. If you are Germany and want to pump money into Lufthansa then they are quickly forgotten.

[NotThePars]

1 minute ago, Detournement said:

The state aid laws are just a handy excuse. If you are Germany and want to pump money into Lufthansa then they are quickly forgotten.

I've had the impression from Lexiteers and pro-EU marketeers that it's a useful kayfabe for justifying whether you support remaining in or not. Obvs Germany have a lot more leeway to do whatever they want and I know the retort from the SNP would justifiably be that they don't want to piss off the EU when they're on the outside wanting back in but I don't think the party would do it even if they could. They're not on the left. 

[renton]

6 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

I've had the impression from Lexiteers and pro-EU marketeers that it's a useful kayfabe for justifying whether you support remaining in or not. Obvs Germany have a lot more leeway to do whatever they want and I know the retort from the SNP would justifiably be that they don't want to piss off the EU when they're on the outside wanting back in but I don't think the party would do it even if they could. They're not on the left. 

They went to the effort of investing in BiFab to stop it going under in the first place. They obviously have some interventionist instincts.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Is there not the little matter of a tendering process that needs to be stuck to as well?

[Gordon EF]

1 hour ago, Detournement said:

The state aid laws are just a handy excuse. If you are Germany and want to pump money into Lufthansa then they are quickly forgotten.

They're not really though. Large parts of the UK energy industry were plunged into financial chaos because one small company took the UK government to court, challenging them on state aid. They lost the case eventually but whilst it was ongoing millions of pounds of payments to companies providing cover for electricity generation in emergencies were stalled.

All these kinds of things are the same. Everyone would love to use state aid and protectionism when it suits them.

You had the same uproar when steel from China was used to build the Queensferry crossing.  Didn't it turn out the kind of steel used simply wasn't produced in Scotland and due to the tendering rules, they couldn't have just decided to buy Scottish even if they'd wanted to.

Edited October 22, 2020 by Gordon EF

[strichener]

1 hour ago, Gordon EF said:

They're not really though. Large parts of the UK energy industry were plunged into financial chaos because one small company took the UK government to court, challenging them on state aid. They lost the case eventually but whilst it was ongoing millions of pounds of payments to companies providing cover for electricity generation in emergencies were stalled.

All these kinds of things are the same. Everyone would love to use state aid and protectionism when it suits them.

You had the same uproar when steel from China was used to build the Queensferry crossing.  Didn't it turn out the kind of steel used simply wasn't produced in Scotland and due to the tendering rules, they couldn't have just decided to buy Scottish even if they'd wanted to.

They could have decided to provide financial support.  It takes the EU at least two years to take these matters through their court and it would be the UK that the EU would have to take action against as it can only raise these matters against member countries.  By the time this went to court, the EU would have no jurisdiction.

[Gordon EF]

39 minutes ago, strichener said:

They could have decided to provide financial support.  It takes the EU at least two years to take these matters through their court and it would be the UK that the EU would have to take action against as it can only raise these matters against member countries.  By the time this went to court, the EU would have no jurisdiction.

It's a fair point although largely I don't think anyone's going to see this as much other than people who want to moan about the SNP finding something to moan about.

[Detournement]

I agree with Strichener they should have pursued a domestic industrial plan for green energy and waited to see how the EU reacted. When it came to Named Person they were happy to break the ECHR, fight it in the UK supreme court then attempt to restart the process in Holyrood. On the topic of energy they also seem to have abandoned the planned publicly owned energy utility which was meant to be launched next year.

I don't think being pissed off that the governing party don't have an industrial strategy, are selling off our natural assets and generally avoid any confrontation with corporate interests counts as SNP Bad.

[strichener]

1 hour ago, Gordon EF said:

It's a fair point although largely I don't think anyone's going to see this as much other than people who want to moan about the SNP finding something to moan about.

The issue here is that it is valid moan.  The SNP government already part own the yard and have extended millions in finance to the yard.  So much for becoming a renewable powerhouse - we don't manufacture the turbines nor do we make the jackets.  The turbines are essentially where we should be arriving to get into the market.  However a full Scottish solution (electrics, turbines, blades and structure) should be the aim.  It won't be without cost nor failures neither of which should put us off.

[Gordon EF]

53 minutes ago, Detournement said:

On the topic of energy they also seem to have abandoned the planned publicly owned energy utility which was meant to be launched next year.

i don't think you'll find many folk in the energy industry criticising the decision to drop that idea when you look back at the plight of publicly-owned and not-for-profit suppliers over the last two years. 

[alta-pete]

18 minutes ago, strichener said:

The issue here is that it is valid moan.  The SNP government already part own the yard and have extended millions in finance to the yard.  So much for becoming a renewable powerhouse - we don't manufacture the turbines nor do we make the jackets.  The turbines are essentially where we should be arriving to get into the market.  However a full Scottish solution (electrics, turbines, blades and structure) should be the aim.  It won't be without cost nor failures neither of which should put us off.

Exactly!!

WTF is the actual point of pumping £Ms into the company to then discover it is actually structurally uncompetitive in the first place and therefore incapable of winning new work anyway?

Prestwick Airport anybody? 

[Detournement]

28 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

i don't think you'll find many folk in the energy industry criticising the decision to drop that idea when you look back at the plight of publicly-owned and not-for-profit suppliers over the last two years. 

That's not something I follow. Which countries?

[Detournement]

40 minutes ago, strichener said:

The issue here is that it is valid moan.  The SNP government already part own the yard and have extended millions in finance to the yard.  So much for becoming a renewable powerhouse - we don't manufacture the turbines nor do we make the jackets.  The turbines are essentially where we should be arriving to get into the market.  However a full Scottish solution (electrics, turbines, blades and structure) should be the aim.  It won't be without cost nor failures neither of which should put us off.

Exactly. We should be aiming for vertical integration on renewables. Keep the entire value generated in Scotland.

[welshbairn]

37 minutes ago, strichener said:

The issue here is that it is valid moan.  The SNP government already part own the yard and have extended millions in finance to the yard.  So much for becoming a renewable powerhouse - we don't manufacture the turbines nor do we make the jackets.  The turbines are essentially where we should be arriving to get into the market.  However a full Scottish solution (electrics, turbines, blades and structure) should be the aim.  It won't be without cost nor failures neither of which should put us off.

That's a big ask and investment to make Scotland instantly globally competitive in all four. What kind of time frame are you talking about?

[Gordon EF]

2 minutes ago, Detournement said:

That's not something I follow. Which countries?

I mean UK energy suppliers like Robin Hood Energy (owned by Nottingham council) and Our Power (Not for profit, owned by housing associations and I think partly by the SG).  There have been a string of energy suppliers going bust over the past few years. It's a terrible time to start one up.