This crisis should have been averted by us having enough power to be independent.
That‘s not just on this government, but all of them.
Sitting on a sea of gas and oil it takes a special kind of stupid to fuck that up.
This is a pretty good article that explains the UK approach vs Norway. Although it points the finger at Mrs T, every government from the mid 70's onward could have cried stop and moved the strategy from spend to save. Of course when you bake the revenue into our future plans that is difficult but not impossible to do.
Anyway, current oil prices will at least change some of the conversation from Indi ref 1 to Indi ref 2 as long as Nicola gets her finger out ;-)
The North Sea oil boom of the 1980s created colossal revenues for the United Kingdom and its neighbour Norway. Today, as both nations move towards a fossil-free future, we examine how the aftermath of the boom has unfolded on both sides of the North Sea.
eandt.theiet.org
I have extracted some for those that don't want to read the whole thing. A lovely example of spend vs save.
Back in the 1980s, for a whole golden decade, it seemed that the sun would never set on the prosperity North Sea exploration brought to the United Kingdom and Norway. Both nations gratefully cashed in on a new gold rush ushered in by the alignment of two factors. First, the price of oil had rocketed since the global political shocks of the Arab-Israeli War of 1973-4 and the Iranian Revolution of 1978-9. Second, while consumers sought an alternative to dealing with the inflated markets of the Middle East, rapid exploration of the North Sea’s continental shelf meant that economically viable oilfields were coming on stream at considerable pace.
With the energy crisis of the 1970s a thing of the past, Time magazine reported that “the world temporarily floats in a glut of oil”. The Institute of Fiscal Studies stated that “the growth of North Sea oil revenues is the most important fiscal development in the British economy in the 1980s”. In fact, during the 1980s, taxation on oil from the North Sea delivered to the UK’s Treasury (when adjusted for inflation) an average of £18bn per annum, or 10 per cent of its entire income. As a direct result of tax revenues and state investment in oil generated from the North Sea, Norway was able to consolidate its economic independence and resist joining the EU.
What the two countries did with their surplus revenue has effectively mapped their economic futures for half a century. As the UK’s former Secretary of State for the Environment (and later Defence) Michael Heseltine said recently, Britain under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher “squandered the windfall” on short-term consumerist policies such as subsidised housing and mortgage tax relief policies. Heseltine says he would have preferred to see the money invested in a ‘sovereign wealth fund’, a state-owned financial instrument for securing long-term benefits for the nation’s citizenry.
This is exactly what Norway did, investing its surplus revenues in the so-called ‘Oil Fund’ which owns 1 per cent of the world’s stocks, is valued at more than US$1tn and, according to The Economist, is the largest fund of its type in existence.
Today, the economic fortunes of the two countries differ vastly: in terms of GDP per capita Norway is currently the second wealthiest country on Earth (after Luxembourg), while the UK comes in 20th, with a GDP per capita of almost exactly half of Norway’s - US$52,291 (£38,961) compared with $102,907 (£76,686) (projected figures for 2022).