Imagine a government that claims to be your partner, your equal, your protector. Now imagine that same government discovering a wealth so vast it could transform your nation lifting families out of poverty, rebuilding your industries, and securing your future and instead of sharing this truth, they bury it. They lie to you. They take the wealth for themselves while telling you that you’re too poor, too weak, too dependent to stand on your own.
This isn’t fiction. This is exactly what Westminster did to Scotland in 1974. The McCrone Report proved that Scotland, with its North Sea oil, had the potential to become one of the richest countries in Europe, yet both Conservative and Labour governments colluded to keep this secret from you. Why? Because if you’d known, you might have demanded the independence that would have made this wealth yours. They hid your future. They robbed you of your right to decide what to do with your own resources. And they did it while pretending the Union was a partnership. If that doesn’t fill you with anger, ask yourself this: What kind of government hides prosperity from its own people to keep them dependent?
In 1974, Professor Gavin McCrone, then Chief Economic Adviser to the Scottish Office, authored a report assessing the economic implications of North Sea oil discoveries for Scotland. The findings were staggering. The report projected that an independent Scotland, benefiting from North Sea oil revenues, would experience substantial budget surpluses. It stated: "The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. The report emphasised that oil revenues would significantly improve Scotland's balance of payments, alleviating concerns about budget deficits. Such surpluses could lead to a strong Scottish currency, attracting foreign investment. It also highlighted that Scotland's membership in the European Economic Community (EEC) would facilitate trade diversification, reducing economic dependence on the rest of the UK. This strategic positioning could enhance Scotland's economic resilience.
McCrone suggested that the newfound oil wealth could bolster arguments for Scottish independence, as the economic advantages of remaining in the Union would diminish. He stated: "For the first time since the Act of Union was passed, it can now be credibly argued that Scotland's economic advantage lies in its repeal. At the time of its writing, the UK was grappling with economic challenges, including inflation and balance of payments deficits. The potential economic boon for Scotland from oil revenues, as outlined in the report, was politically sensitive. Consequently, the report was classified as "secret" to prevent fueling Scottish nationalist sentiments. The report remained undisclosed until 2005, when it was released following a Freedom of Information request by the Scottish National Party (SNP). Its revelations sparked debates about the management of Scotland's oil wealth and the transparency of the UK government regarding Scotland's economic prospects.
The decision to classify the McCrone Report as "secret" was made under Harold Wilson's Labour government. Specifically, this occurred in the context of heightened concerns about the rising influence of the Scottish National Party (SNP) and the potential for growing support for Scottish independence, given the economic advantages outlined in the report. Jim Callaghan, who succeeded Harold Wilson as Prime Minister in 1976, maintained the secrecy of the report during his tenure. The suppression of the report remained government policy for decades, across both Labour and Conservative administrations, until its eventual release in 2005 under the Freedom of Information Act. The suppression of the McCrone Report and the subsequent lack of public awareness of Scotland’s potential economic benefits from North Sea oil had several tangible and intangible effects on Scotland during the decades that followed.
The hidden potential of Scotland’s oil wealth denied the public a clear understanding of how much the country could benefit from autonomy. As a result, decisions on oil revenues were made by Westminster rather than being under Scottish control. Despite oil extraction occurring in Scottish waters, much of the revenue was directed to the UK Treasury. This limited investment in Scottish infrastructure, particularly in transport and public services. For example, Scotland's rail and road networks suffered underinvestment compared to those in the South of England. The 1970s and 1980s saw the decline of key industries in Scotland, such as shipbuilding, steel, and coal. The revenues from North Sea oil, had they been directed toward Scotland, could have been used to fund industrial modernization or a just transition to a more sustainable economy. Scotland faced increasing job losses as traditional industries declined, and alternative employment opportunities were not adequately developed. Regions like Glasgow and Lanarkshire bore the brunt of this economic stagnation.
Norway, which discovered oil around the same time, used its revenues to establish a sovereign wealth fund that significantly improved its social services. Scotland, by contrast, saw little benefit from its oil wealth during this period, as the revenues were absorbed into the UK budget. In areas like Dundee and Ayrshire, economic deprivation worsened, with many communities experiencing poverty exacerbated by lack of investment. The potential of oil revenues to address housing shortages, education, and healthcare improvements was unrealized. The concealment of Scotland's potential oil wealth undermined the economic arguments for independence. Unionist politicians could dismiss claims that Scotland could thrive independently, further entrenching the notion of Scotland as financially dependent on the UK. During the 1970s and 1980s, the SNP struggled to gain traction as its economic arguments for independence were undermined by the lack of transparency regarding oil revenues.
While oil was extracted from Scottish waters, the environmental consequences, including oil spills and damage to marine ecosystems, were disproportionately felt in Scotland, with limited compensation or benefits for affected communities. Coastal and rural communities in Scotland, particularly in the northeast, experienced disruption due to oil-related activities. However, the wealth generated did not translate into local development or improved living standards in these areas. While Scotland had abundant natural resources to develop renewable energy, much of the focus during this period remained on oil and gas extraction for UK-wide benefit. A significant portion of the revenues could have been reinvested in renewables, putting Scotland at the forefront of the green energy transition decades earlier. The eventual revelation of the McCrone Report created significant disillusionment among Scots, particularly as it confirmed that economic information had been deliberately withheld to weaken the independence movement. Many Scots grew to see the UK government as prioritising its own interests over Scotland’s, reinforcing a narrative of exploitation that has persisted in political discourse.
If the Scottish people had access to the McCrone Report at the time of its publication in 1974, the political, economic, and social trajectory of Scotland could have been profoundly different. The report’s findings highlighting Scotland’s immense economic potential due to North Sea oil would likely have fueled a surge in support for the Scottish National Party (SNP), which had already made gains in the February 1974 general election. Armed with clear evidence of Scotland’s economic viability, the SNP would have been in a much stronger position to push for an independence referendum. The narrative that Scotland was too poor to survive without the Union would have been shattered. Had the people of Scotland been informed, the independence movement could have gained early momentum, and the political landscape of the UK could have been permanently altered. An independent Scotland would have retained control over its oil resources, creating opportunities to invest in infrastructure, social programs, and sustainable industries. The contrast between Scotland’s stagnation and Norway’s prosperity built on the same resource might never have existed.
Instead, the decision to keep the McCrone Report secret allowed Westminster to maintain control over Scotland’s resources. It also entrenched the narrative that the Union was essential for Scotland’s economic survival. This deception delayed progress, leaving Scotland to suffer the consequences of austerity and underinvestment while Westminster benefited from its oil wealth. Even today, the effects of this exploitation are evident in Scotland. Decades of underfunding have left infrastructure lagging behind, communities are still recovering from industrial collapse, and the wealth from oil revenues is nowhere to be seen in Scotland’s public services. What was framed as a “Union dividend” was in reality a theft—a theft of opportunity, wealth, and self-determination.
This brings us to the hard truth. Westminster has never been a true partner to Scotland. It has been an overseer, a taker, a controller. The McCrone Report was not just a report it was a confession, a document that revealed Westminster’s willingness to prioritise its own interests over Scotland’s prosperity. And if this is what the Union calls partnership, it’s a partnership built on lies and exploitation. How much more proof do we need that this Union is nothing but a scam? Westminster didn’t just steal Scotland’s wealth they stole our future, our confidence, and our right to make decisions for ourselves. They treated Scotland like a colony, stripping our resources to prop up their own failing system while feeding us lies about being "too small" and "too poor" to manage on our own.
The McCrone Report is irrefutable evidence of the Union’s true nature: exploitation masked as partnership. They knew Scotland could have thrived thrived but they couldn’t risk us realising it. So, they buried the truth, took the oil, and left us with the crumbs. This isn’t history. This is ongoing. It’s the same story repeated through decades of underfunding, control, and deceit. Scotland has been robbed blind, told to stay silent, and made to believe we’re dependent on the very system that’s holding us back. To any Scot still defending this Union, ask yourself: How much betrayal is enough for you?* How many more lies will you accept before you realise the truth? Westminster doesn’t govern for Scotland it governs for itself. And if we don’t stand up and break free, this exploitation will never end.
Sources:
BBC News report on McCrone Report release:
Analysis of Westminster’s handling of Scottish oil: