Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Shell to Sea again
Read more about: Energy
Over on Indymedia they have details of the latest escaped by the shell to sea people. This time a group of them “scaled” can’t see any climbing gear in the photos and put in place a banner reading.
PROTECT IRISH NATURAL RESOURCES
Now call me nieve but arn’t we always told that the campaign is to PROTECT ROSSPORT PEOPLE. i.e that there is a danger that the project could go wrong and kill people? That these pipelines are going to near houses? That all they want is to send SHELL TO SEA? OK I will admit that I know now that Shell to Sea has been hijacked by people with anti-corporate agenda’s who think that we are Venezuela and can just stick a spike in the ground and get oil. Also they continue to peddle the myth that we will not get any money from this venture that we are giving the money away for free. That
“The government’s supine support for the oil companies shows that they prioritise the welfare of Shell shareholders over the wellbeing of their own citizens. Shell are being allowed to keep all the gas and sell it to the highest bidder”
Now what that ignors is the fact that we will charge 25% corporation tax and are operating to best European practice as best we can. Indeed selling it to the highest bidder is better as it will provide us with more tax take. Maybe we should be calling them nieve? This debate has been done to death, and the people care little for it even the people in Mayo as seen by Gerry Crowley’s seat loss. But I liked the picture so I’ll raise it again.
The government has allowed the country become the most indebted nation per head of population on this earth. See http://www.irishelection.com/10/e13-trillion-reasons-why-ireland-has-an-overdraft-for-an-economy/
Our young people are also up to their eyeballs in Mortgage Debt. There is no other nation on earth that willingly gives away its resources. Each country invest resources and bring in the Multi National Oil Companies as equal partners. They then would have more power to protect their own Environment and would not be such wallies to allow the multi nationals put their own citizens in jail. Norway gets up to 75% take from Oil/gas production off their shoreline; now they have over €200 billion euro in funds set aside for their citizens. Simon! Your comments above do not surprise me. I guess you would be a supporter of Fianna Fail and I would think that you are well off. Anybody who supports Fianna Fail in relation to their treatment of our Hydrocarbon Resources and who does not already have at least €10 million in the bank would need their head examined!
I guess you would be a supporter of Fianna Fail and I would think that you are well off
You would guess wrong on both counts but that really is not the issue.
Firstly we have no where near the resources of Norway. Even taking 75% of the money in Norway it still works out more or less more profitable to explore gas in Norway then it does in Ireland. If we opperated in the same manner as they do we would have Zero resources.
I have written about Oil and gas in more detail here if you wish. http://www.irishelection.com/12/we-aint-got-no-beverly-hillbillies-yawall/
Good to see Simon still in business of ungrounded assertion making instead of reasoned argument.
Shell won’t pay corporation tax because they can write off their costs for 25 years, but not just those incurred at Rossport - their internationally incurred costs.
Tell me this Simon, do you ever open a book?*
*literary allusion (A-S-T-B be FO’B)
their internationally incurred costs.
Got a source on that by any chance?
Yes. But I’m not the one going around assuming things. Why don’t YOU research the tax status of the operation.
The agreement between Shell and the FF Government was signed by Ray Burke. This is of course a guarantee that the Irish people’s interests were well protected!
Shell got generous tax breaks, permission to drive a coach and horses through normal planning procedures. Mayo got a few short term building jobs, and the Revenue a guarantee of almost zero income from the project.
This was one of the Burke’s major triumphs, almost as good as the West Link deal. No proof of corruption has been put before the public… but the whole deal stinks
Gordon
Yes. But I’m not the one going around assuming things. Why don’t YOU research the tax status of the operation.
Shell can write off there costs for the last 25 years in the state and the costs of development and can write off the costs of operation. Something that is also allowed in Norway. http://www.npd.no/English/Emner/Ressursforvaltning/Promotering/whynorway_tax_system.htm
Gordon The reason that we have to make our oil deals sweet is because we have so little of it. People could go to other countries and make far more money because the chances of striking oil was far far greater. Personnal I would have no problem with high tax on oil or indeed an oil semi-state if we were norway and could strike oil left right and center the problem is we are not we have 2 medium finds in about 3 years. Which makes Ireland one of the lowest in the world. It would not pay us to be so choosy. If the price of oil goes up and suddenly we find loads of oil then of course we should radically overhaul our structures but until then it is better to take what we get if ou get me.
So you now agree there is no tax benefit either. How can you pontificate as much as you do and on the basis of so little information or interest in the facts?!
So you now agree there is no tax benefit either.
If you are not going to deal with what I actually say and just try to spin and play the man and not the ball this really is of absolutely no use talking to you. As for interest is facts I am interested in facts. I would especially like to know where you get your “their internationally incurred costs.” line. Yet you are the one who doesn’t want to give a source for that. I find no reference to that in either the public enquiry report on Corrib http://www.publicinquiry.ie/pdf/Fiosru_2_LOW_RES_Final.pdf or
the SOS website. So if you have some info on that I would be very happy to hear it.
They can write off the costs from their tax bill but their costs are far lower then their profits which will be taxed. What we do as well Norway is as follows.
Profits-costs=x.
We tax x at 25%.
I read your other submission. You compare Ireland with Norway and to a lesser extent with Nigeria. The difference with those two countries is that both of their governments set up a National Oil Investment Company to invest in their own hydrocarbons; Ireland did not. What do you expect the Multi Nationals (MN) to do? They went with the countries that put up some of their own resources at the exploration stage, that way the risk was spread. The MNs are well fed donkeys, and further carrots like no Royalties etc would not entice them.
You agree with Minister Dempsey when he said in the Dail that the Irish People would not want the government to risk €20million cost of sinking a well. It just goes to show the lack of business acumen, despite the Celtic Tiger, that is in our government circles. The Irish External Debt is close to €2 trillion. Irish mortgage holders have debts totaling near €150,000,000,000. The associated property values would be 50% less. Yes, the country is colossal Negative Equity. Our government took what to them was the easy way, they encourage the House Building industry. An area of industry that does not produce any return after the initial building, but leaves massive 30 year Debts. In the nineties, I remember a study that said that the price of oil needed to rise to $25 a barrel to make the Irish Hydrocarbon industry profitable. You, Fianna Fail and the other Dumb, dumbs have done this country a great disservice.
The MNs can’t be trusted as the reply to your other thread proves. They tell us that the hundred wells or so that were sunk were dry. Irish workers, who worked on the oilrigs of the west coast in the 70s knew that there was hydrocarbons off Donegal and Mayo way back then. The wells were just spuded, until Irish Government Ministers yielded to giving greater terms. The Irish Government did not invest; they were sitting ducks to extract better terms from, and boy didn’t the MNs go to town on them. The Rossport people are made of sterner stuff, thanks be to Jesus!
The wells were just spuded, until Irish Government Ministers yielded to giving greater terms.
And in the 15 years since the generous terms and near record oil prices how many fields have come on stream in donegal and mayo? 1 Corrib which wa discovered in 1996 (i believe but certainly not in the 70s).
Also the difference is between Nigeria Norway and Ireland is they have far more proven resources then we have.
As for the debt thing maybe you are write but considering how people got rilled up about 100 odd million for PPRAS i wonder if they have as much capacity for putting money down a hole as I think you are trying to suggest they have. Personally I don’t think they do. But i am guessing you think differently?
You, Fianna Fail and the other Dumb, dumbs have done this country a great disservice.
There is really no need to get personal please play the ball not the man. Name calling does nothing at all to advance your argument.
Sorry Simon. I broke one of my own rules. I apologies profusely for my insulting writing.
I find this whole area so frustrating. It is the easiest thing in the world to find holes with an other person’s hopes and plans. The fact that our government agrees with the Multinationals (MN) in a load areas does not make sense. They have allowed scores of wells to be drilled off our coasts since the 70s without any Irish workers on board. We are expected to believe that there is nothing down there. A benign government would make employment for Irish Nationals in the 80s a condition of licenses. The MNs jail Rossport People (I nearly set Mayo People, but half of the people of Mayo have turned their backs to what is going on down there) who protest the laying of pipeline across their lands. Etc. It just makes little sense. The same oil bearing strata lie of our coasts as are off Norway. None of the excuses for not rolling up our sleeves and investing in rigs that go down deeper make any sense at all. Okay, the MN did not drill since they got the good deals; that is because the MN had still to finance it 100%. They continued to get more attractive terms elsewhere. Shell in been found out about over stated reserves had to tow the line by the Nigerians and the Norwegians who were making investments. Those who pay the piper, call the tune. The Irish Government was never at the races. Now that the price of fuel has sky rocketed they are coming back.
Don’t worry about it we all get a bit hot under the collar especially when we are passionate about something.
I am no geologist so i can’t really comment on oil bearing strata etc but I just think that if there was oil there considering the terms we offer someone would be pumping oil and gas out of there. It would make no sense not to be pumping when they should in theory make more money in Irish waters then Norwegian waters even with the 100% finance requirement (considering they can claim those costs back anyway would mean the 100% thingy would not make a difference I guess). The fact is they are not n Irish waters because t is not worth their while hence why the tax rate was lowered to make it worth their while.
Considering that these MNs employ loads of geologists who know more about this then you or I (Presuming your not a geologist) I can only conclude that when they say they haven’t found an awful lot that it is quiet true.
As for people turning their back on it it is quiet true. With Jerry Crowley losing his seat in Mayo and only getting 30% of the vote in Rossport http://www.politicsni.com/viewtopic.php?t=22537 (of course maybe more agreed but thought he was barking mad on everything else) maybe it isn’t that big an issue in Rossport either. I have never been there so can’t comment on what the ground opinion is. But going by the election there were more pro-shell TD votes then anti.
There was something about Irish Nationals working on oil rigs. The government did insist on it but I believe sometime in the 90s they were informed that this violated EU freedom of movement and they could not stop it. (Scottish workers were being used) Until then Irish workers did play a large part.
Also on the deeper rigs I maybe wrong but the kind of rigs I think you are talking about are only a fairly recent invention. Thus not relevant in the 80s etc.
Also I am not sure if they are returning this is from 2005
http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2005/08/21/story7252.asp
Simon calls doctor and TD Jerry Cowley “barking mad” but objects to the characterisation of himself as a “dumb dumb”.
Simon is proceeding on the assumption that merely because the oil is there it must be extracted no matter what the cost in civil rights, environmental damage and exchequer receipts. Now that is dumb.
Copernicus are you going to actually deal with any of the points I actually made or continue to take words from my comments at random? It really is getting old. And if you have a source on the international comment you made I would be really happy to read it.
Simon, you won’t even examine your own underlying assumptions. There is absolutely no point in arguing with you. If you disagree with someone you simply decide they haven’t dealt with any of your points. Let’s you nicely off the hook.
You proceed in the original post on the basis of two assumptions.
1) oil exists and therefore must be exploited. A non sequitur.
2) the Exchequer will benefit from coporation tax.
Both of these assumptions have no basis in fact, which is why you have not supplied any factual basis for them. What research did you do before you made these assertions?
None.
Why then is it up to me to research them for you? The burden of proof is on you, the person making the assertions in the first place.
oil exists and therefore must be exploited. A non sequitur.
That is not my point at all. My point is that if we want to exploit it then we have to create the environment where this is best done. The debate is whether the current state position is correct this is what me Gordon and Who’ll take the rap have been debating.
As for the other cost enviromental. I have never talked about the pipeline itself whether or not that should be moved to sea. Indeed I think it probably should. My posts and indeed the treatise of this post has been that state taxation of the oil exploration in Ireland is the correct method to take.
the Exchequer will benefit from corporation tax.
The exchequer benefits from corporation tax rate of 25% after costs. If you want a source on that I recommend you look up a government website like http://www.finance.gov.ie/Viewtxt.asp?DocID=1153&StartDate=1+January+2007
for instance
Why then is it up to me to research them for you? The burden of proof is on you, the person making the assertions in the first place.
Same back to you. You made the first claim of claiming back international operations the burden is on you to prove that. If you are not going to back up the only point you have made in this thread. Then I really don’t see the use of all this.
*slaps forehead