Comments published seem very few, and a deluded Scot often seems to be allowed the last word.
"Dave, I'm afraid you're just plain wrong - the UK Government's own figures show that Scotland is a net contributor to the Union.
Click on the red text to go to the Times article and the comments thread.
From The Guardian:
Click on the red text for the article.
And so it should be "controversial" - some of the oil and gas is England's.
The Tax Payers' Alliance found:
North Sea Oil has not funded the Scottish spending gap, despite Scottish Nationalist claims to the contrary. In only five of the last 23 years have North Sea Oil receipts exceeded the cost of higher funding paid to Scotland. Even with current high oil prices, the income from the Scottish share of North Sea Oil only just covers the spending gap, and North Sea Oil output is projected to fall by 50 per cent by 2020.
Click on red text for more.
And why should Scotland claim any of the oil for itself? This is supposed to be a "union" - surely resources are supposed to be SHARED?
And what's this "superior grant" Mr Pickford refers to? Scotland benefits from the Barnett Formula, whatever varying levels of public spending across England, England does not.
But Bill Pickford clearly does not know that. And yet The Times allows this man the final word in the comments thread.
And as for "English regions" - what the heck?!!
Perhaps I'm being a little hasty. But several people, including myself, have contributed to this comments thread to correct Mr Pickering. And the comments have, so far, been unpublished. Not even one of them has appeared.