Conservative candidate named

A lawyer from the Scottish Highlands has been chosen as Conservative candidate for Orkney and Shetland.

Donald Cameron, from Spean Bridge in the Highlands, and will contest the Orkney and Shetland seat in the General Election in May.

Since 2005, Mr Cameron has been an advocate acting for a range of clients in public law and agricultural and crofting law in the Court of Session, High Court of Justiciary and Scottish Land Court. He has appeared in litigation in Orkney, and recently represented Sustainable Shetland as junior counsel in their appeal to the UK Supreme Court.

He studied at Oxford University and then City University in London, before undertaking an internship at The Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC, USA.

Mr Cameron is married with three young children and has worked on Conservative campaigns in Scotland as well as managing a family business in the Highlands. In addition to having direct business experience, he has had experience in both English and Scots law.

The Conservative Party's General Election candidate Donald Cameron. Photo: Rosalind Griffiths
The Conservative Party’s General Election candidate Donald Cameron. Photo: Rosalind Griffiths

Mr Cameron has stood in previous Scottish parliamentary and UK General Election campaigns with significant success, but not outright victory – he stood against Charles Kennedy in the Highlands in 2010 – and said he was “delighted” to have been selected as candidate for the Northern Isles.

On his first visit to Shetland on Monday he said it had been a “fascinating day” which had incorporated visits to Sumburgh Lighthouse and St Ninian’s beach, and which he spent “getting a feel for the place and trying to understand the issues people face”. He said: “The countryside is stunning, breathtaking, and the people are very warm and friendly.”

His recent connection with Shetland was in SuS’s appeal to the Supreme Court, and he said: “I’m in favour of onshore wind energy in the right place but I don’t believe we should compromise our landscape and environment.”

He had seen the issue before in other remote and rural areas, he added.

Living as he does in a rural area, Mr Cameron feels he can identify with many of the problems faced by Shetlanders, such as “fragile communities lacking infrastructure and communications”. He would strive to improve this, especially in the more remote areas of the isles, if elected.

He said: “I really care about that and feel remote areas get a raw deal. I would like to promote better web coverage and broadband speeds.”

Maintaining good transport links, both inter-island and to the mainland, would be another of his priorities if elected. He would work to reduce transport costs and improve efficiency for both passengers and freight to and from the islands, and said: “I appreciate how important it is to travel on a reasonable budget.”

As MP, he said, he would also concentrate on standing up for the interests of local businesses and the rural economy at Westminster, and encourage sustainable economic activity and financial discipline at a local and national level.

Additionally he would encourage “constructive co-operation” with Westminster by the Scottish parliament and support efforts for greater openness from government and more grass-roots participation in local decision-making.

He stressed that if elected he would “without doubt” move to the area: “You can’t represent a constituency without living in it.”

Although he acknowledged that “local issues are what people care about”, he cited some important national ones too – namely, to sustain the economic recovery and to fight to keep Scotland in the UK.

He said: “I think that the track record of the Conservative-led UK government has delivered a strong and growing economy and that the party’s long-term economic plan will secure a better future for our families. Just as important, I passionately believe that Scotland’s place is within the Union and I promise that if elected, I would continue to campaign relentlessly for a United Kingdom.”

He added that he thought the break-up of the UK would bring “huge economic dislocation”.

Chairman of the Shetland Conservative Association, Maurice Mullay said: “We are delighted to have a Conservative candidate for Orkney and Shetland of the calibre and quality of Donald Cameron. His legal and business background is a tremendous asset and will ensure that he can represent the islands and islanders interests at the highest levels with ability, confidence, diligence and enthusiasm.”

He added that Mr Cameron’s engaging personality would be of considerable benefit in dealing with the general public, officials and politicians.


Add Your Comment
  • Robin Stevenson

    • March 16th, 2015 20:48

    Hmm…Seems like a nice chap, and like the other Cameron, quite likes the odd day trip up to see the natives, did anyone notice if you`d been “love-bombed” perchance?…or does that come later?.. along with “YOUR DOOMED”, If you leave the Union?…I suppose there`s not really much difference between what Mr Cameron`s offering compared to Mr Carmichael, or the other one?…as they`ll ALL take their orders from London anyway.

    “I think that the track record of the Conservative-led UK government has delivered a strong and growing economy and that the party’s long-term economic plan will secure a better future for our families”.

    Huh!…£1.5 Trillion national debt, Ruth Davidson [Tory leader of the Scottish branch] saying “that there should be no more talk of powers for the Scottish parliament”…[although, in fairness she`s changed her tune since then… I wonder why?].. 5 more years austerity cuts, 2% tax cut for the oil industry having stuck 12% on it last year, Osborne bleeding it dry, right up until budget day, then pretend that he`s a generous, giving chancellor? [probably knock another 2% off]…Sorry Mr Cameron, but I`d prefer a society where the divide between rich and poor is narrowed, not made larger, and not with a government committed to robbing the worst off to pay for their own economic incompetence.

    It`s a funny old world,… isn`t it strange that the Tories were the most successful party in Scottish electoral politics from 1912 till 1964.
    Whatever happened to the Scottish Tories?…. They turned into Scottish Nationalists.

  • David Spence

    • March 16th, 2015 22:18

    Being a Tory, his priority will be the privatisation of all Local Authority Services, and then to be a shareholder of the private companies taking over these services (the me, me and look after number 1 society)……….as a guess. lol

  • John Alan Spencer

    • March 17th, 2015 11:32

    It baffles me why the tories even bother standing a candidate here as they will never get in. Of course, Alistair Carmichael is basically a tory now.

    I would urge everyone in Shetland to vote SNP.

    • Robert Duncan

      • March 17th, 2015 12:43

      I don’t intend to vote for him or his party but this at least seems a candidate with his head screwed on. The Conservatives haven’t done terribly in this part of the country historically, either.

      SNP voters should probably be very pleased at any potential for Carmichael to lose votes elsewhere.

    • George Kippets

      • March 19th, 2015 18:15

      And I would urge anyone thinking of voting SNP to read the informative document “100 broken SNP promises” which can easily be located online. I would also urge them to contact our local SNP candidate Mr Skene and ask him about these promises…. it should be amusing to hear him wriggle and squirm.

      • Robert Sim

        • March 19th, 2015 21:44

        That will be the out-of-date document dating from 2011?

        Voters here have the same choice as those across Scotland at this election: to return an SNP MP who will potentially be part of a group holding the majority of Scottish seats and which will be able to influence the UK government in the best interests of Scotland; or to return an MP who will be in all probability isolated in Scotland and unable to exert any influence on behalf of Shetland and Orkney.

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 19th, 2015 21:54

        Huh!!…January 2011?….why not just take it back to the 60s George?

      • Ertie Herculeson

        • April 7th, 2015 13:27

        Oh please, George. That will be the out-of-date document dating from 2011? It’s more like “500 Broken SNP Promises” by now.

  • John Tulloch

    • March 17th, 2015 21:00

    @Robert D,

    I’m pleased to agree with you on this and I’m not surprised Maurice Mullay is delighted with their candidate.

    Insofar as the rest of Scotland is relevant, Labour are now even more likely to lose their deposit.

    Mr Cameron is starting from a low ebb but he appears to have a lot going for him as a candidate. He’s likely to take votes from all the other parties, not just Alistair Carmichael, including the Nats, especially, once their voters cotton on that they are the party:

    * of Viking Energy,
    * of under-funding Shetland schools by 40 percent and
    * of keeping Shetland tied into the EU in an independent Scotland.

    Gladstone and Grimond will likely hold the sea for the Liberals, however, a capable candidate has appeared who may be attractive to voters concerned about these issues.

    • Robin Stevenson

      • March 18th, 2015 1:21

      No wonder you want out of the EU John, after all, look at the lousy benefits?

      “As an independent country we would have benefited from an additional £850m in farm payments from Europe, estimated to support an additional 2,500 jobs in our local communities over the period 2014 to 2020,”

      The economic and social benefits our membership of Europe brings, with Scotland exporting nearly £13 billion of goods and services to Europe a year, and 330,000 Scottish jobs associated with exports to the EU.

      “Membership of the EU places Scottish businesses within the world’s largest economy, whose 500 million citizens enjoy some of the highest standards of living on the globe. Around 20 million businesses operate in the EU single market, and the EU is a vital export market for Scottish firms – accounting for almost half of Scotland’s international exports in 2013, worth £12.9 billion each year.

      Around 40 per cent of foreign-owned companies in Scotland are EU-owned, and every year since 2006 Scotland has been ranked one of the top two areas of the UK outside London for foreign direct investment.

      Hmm…doesn`t look too bad actually?….John could you please link the benefits for leaving the EU?

      • John Tulloch

        • March 18th, 2015 9:51


        Whether being in the EU is beneficial for Scotland is another discussion and the decision is up to Scots voters, but we’re discussing Shetland, here and the case for Shetland NOT being in the EU can be summed up in a single word:


      • Ali Inkster

        • March 19th, 2015 21:42

        So scotland will be better off independent and get more EU aid. How does that work?

    • Brian Smith

      • March 18th, 2015 7:13


      • laurence paton

        • March 18th, 2015 20:52

        It is clear from Brian’s chuckling that he has not had his livelihood destroyed by the corrupt fisheries laws dictated from Brussel’s , nor had to spend winter’s nights shovelling fish over the side of his boat to avoid prosecution and then go home at the end of the week with no pay.
        It’s easy to chuckle about such things if you toast your feet in a warm office for a living.

        Robin , you speak of getting all this money from brussels for farming ?
        It’s actually just a fraction of what we pay in that we get back

        I don’t know how you can boast about all this extra jobs in the future thanks to the EU !

        Look how many boats and jobs disappeared from the Scottish fleet since the beginning of the century !

        What’s left of the fleet have survived despite the corrupt management regime of the EU and certainly not thanks to it!
        The tenacity of the men who remain in the UK fleet is what have enabled the industry to survive

        Once again watch the movie =
        I dont think you will brag about the CFP or the CAP if you actually understood it’s wider effects and real agenda

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 19th, 2015 1:23

        Laurence,… Is this Fullfact or Fauxfact website the one headed by Tory Party donor and AnneFreud Centre Chairman Michael Samuel?…

        Perhaps IF we had an EU fisheries representative fighting Shetlands corner, we wouldn’t have to shovel fish over the side of the boat?….what about yer man David Coburn, Laurence, what`s he doing?..or what about asking the UK Gov to send our Scottish fishing minister to Brussel’s instead of Lord De Mauley?

        So give me the facts Laurence, How much does Scotland put into the EU and how much do we, actually get back?…[and I don’t mean just fishing]…I`ve given figures on the benefits of being in the EU [IF you’d like to scroll up]…..SO, how “Better off” are we outwith the EU?

        Brian….[you may want so save your chuckle after Laurence’s answer]

    • Robert Duncan

      • March 18th, 2015 10:33

      I doubt there are many “Nats” likely to be swayed by the Tories. There will be some, I’m sure, but I think a strong candidate does them as a party more benefit than harm. The same goes for UKIP, really. I expect the Labour candidate will be thoroughly disappointed come May 8.

      I hope our local media will continue good coverage of the candidates as the date approaches. Mr Cameron speaks well but I do wonder how much substance there is in what he says. For example I would question how he proposes to actually go about “working to reduce transport costs”. That seems more interventionist than his party’s general outlook so I’d like to know a bit more detail on any policy ideas there.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 18th, 2015 11:51


        I take your point about a strong candidate benefiting the “Nats”, however, he is the only candidate, so far, to make encouraging noises about the three issues I highlighted.

        If, for example, wind farm opponents of Viking Energy managed to reframe this election as a refendum on Viking Energy, I could see a considerable number of votes heading for Mr Cameron.

        Mike MacKenzie’s involvement in the schools campaign will shelter the SNP from that storm, however, the under-funding of Shetland’s education system, at 40 percent, is spectacular and while that may be blamed on a “funding formula”, the SNP have been and are continuing to, preside over that.

        If Cameron lives up to his billing, he should be able win votes in these issues – “Opportunity knocks!”

      • Robert Duncan

        • March 18th, 2015 13:17

        I agree that some of the most vociferous anti-wind farm protesters might find him a suitable vote, but I don’t think that’s enough. I know many of those same protesters who will never vote Tory whatever is promised.

        I suspect the vast majority of those who ever had intentions of voting SNP will a) blame your second point primarily on the UK Government and b) not be concerned by the third. That’s not to say I agree with them.

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 18th, 2015 15:35

        John, once again, I’m stunned at your parochial view on Scottish politics, this ISN’T a bi-election this is a General Election, this is about selecting which Government to take charge of the entire UK or, indeed, the party that will influence that government that’s best placed to serve it’s people? … To say, for example, “I’m not voting Greens because they insist on moving a lamppost” [or ANY other single issue] is frankly, naive?

        Your 40% under-funding Shetlands Schools “Mantra”, is completely wrong :

        Please read the full report by independent “Anderson solutions”…here`s a snatch :

        • The Report, through a lack of clarity, has done little to correct the publicly presented information on the high cost of Shetland’s secondary education compared to the other island groups. For example at no stage does the report clearly state that known anomalies means that the published figure is wrong and that the true figure for 2012/13 is £11,534, a difference of 18% rather than the 40% presented in the published data and repeated publicly in the media. The information necessary to know this is contained in the Report but clarity is weak. In addition, we are not aware that any attempt to correct previous publicly made statements has been made since the SIC Report was published in July 2014.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 18th, 2015 20:48

        @Robin Stevenson,

        You wrote: “Your 40% under-funding Shetlands Schools “Mantra”, is completely wrong”.

        If so, I urge you to contact SIC political leader Gary Robinson who is putting it about in the media that Shetland spends £48.3Mpa on education and receives funding of only £29Mpa, determined by the use of a ‘funding formula (see his reply to my comment under Jeremy Sansom’s ST letter).

        i.e. Holyrood is under-funding Shetland’s education by £19.3Mpa – 39.96 percent.

        I can only go by the information available to me, if your information differs from Gary Robinson’s, you should complain to him, not to me.

        No disrespect, however, I’m inclined to accept his version, not yours.

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 19th, 2015 0:49

        Gary Robinson is wrong, and IF you’d bothered to read my link before condemning me you’d have realized?
        Scroll up “Click” on it and read it please,… this is Gary Robinsons accounts being taken apart by an independent body that show up …erm…inconsistencies, shall we say?

        I’m NOT complaining John, you were?

      • John Tulloch

        • March 20th, 2015 14:42

        @Robin Stevenson,

        Is this the report your link connects us to:

        “Review of ‘Annual Cost of Secondary Education per Pupil in Shetland’ published by Shetland Islands Council, July 2014.

        Preliminary Findings Report (by Anderson Consulting Ltd.)”?

        This doesn’t tell us Gary Robinson’s figure for Shetland’s total education expenditure is wrong, it tells us only that the calculation of SECONDARY cost per pupil is wrong.

        Given that cost per pupil doesn’t include all expenditure, not to mention that this report is limited to secondary costs, you’ll need to do a lot better than that to get Holyrood off the hook of under-funding Shetland’s education system by £19.3Mpa, i.e. 40 percent of the total spend.

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 20th, 2015 18:55

        John,.. I can only provide information that is available to the general public, however, judging by this investigative piece by Anderson Consulting Ltd, and the [not so great SIC accounts] I’m led to the conclusion that this figure of 40% seems to have reared it’s ugly head on, perhaps, more than one occasion?… or do you think it’s just a coincidence?

        • The Report, through a lack of clarity, has done little to correct the publicly presented information on the high cost of Shetland’s secondary education compared to the other island groups. For example at no stage does the report clearly state that known anomalies means that the published figure is wrong and that the true figure for 2012/13 is £11,534, a difference of 18% rather than the 40% presented in the published data and repeated publicly in the media. The information necessary to know this is contained in the Report but clarity is weak. In addition, we are not aware that any attempt to correct previous publicly made statements has been made since the SIC Report was published in July 2014.

        Perhaps You could link me the “Actual” SIC Accounts for ALL spending on education and the amount received from the Scottish government?

      • John Tulloch

        • March 20th, 2015 22:05

        Do your own research, Robin, I’ve done enough for you already.

        Ask Gary Robinson, same as I did – and remember to tell him you think he’s telling ‘porky pies’ about the 40 percent under-funding.

        Or pop along them at the Town Hall, I’m sure they’re very helpful.

        No-one from the Scottish Government or the SNP has denied Mr Robinson’s claim about the 40 percent under-funding.

        Wouldn’t you think, at least, Danus Skene would be concerned at the damage being done to his candidacy and would have protested about it?

        Unless he’s been told to keep his mouth shut the same as Dougie Young and the rest of them?

        Or maybe he’s gone under-ground to marshall the “trows”?

        Are you the SNP Shetland spokesperson, now?

  • Robin Stevenson

    • March 18th, 2015 13:01

    Sorry John, I was under the impression that Shetland was a part of Scotland? and therefore benefited from ALL the reasons I posted….However, IF it`s a single issue like “Fishing”, Who was it the UK government sent to argue Scotlands case for fairer fishing quotas again?….Ooh! yes, that fishing expert and fellow Etonian, Lord De Mauley. so how did he do? did you get a good deal? do you think the UK Gov, swung it in your favour then?

    In 1973, Ted Heath ‘sold out’ the fishing industry in order to gain entry into the, then, EEC. The EEC, Common Fisheries Policy, allowed member states to gain equal access to waters of its members.

    But how does a country so ‘well placed’ in an industry, lose out to Norway, Denmark and Spain? How was our competitive advantage in a vital industry lost? Well, like many of Scotland’s other great industries, they were and are impacted by inappropriate decisions taken in Westminster.

    Today Scotland only receives 41% of the UK’s European Fisheries Fund allocation and only 1.1% of total European fisheries funding. With Westminster unwilling to represent Scotland’s fisheries, this is below a fair allocation. Scotland does continue to land 7% of all wild caught fish, 12% of EU aquaculture production and is the world’s third largest salmon producer.

    Sure, “Fishing” has now been devolved to the Scottish Government, but without independence we`ll be represented by our UK gov lackie in the EU by people like De Mauley, …the sad part was Richard Lochhead [Scottish Fishing minister] was asked to attend Brussels to brief De Mauley, but sit at the back and “Shut up”.

  • John Tulloch

    • March 18th, 2015 13:59


    As regards whether Shetland is “part of Scotland”, may I refer you to Stuart Hill’s treatise on the subject, “The Stolen Isles”.

    It’s a meticulously researched piece of work on both historic and legal aspects of claims to sovereignty over the isles. It’s surprisingly readable and makes a powerful case, a case I have yet to see refuted, that Shetland (and Orkney) is not and has never been, legally, “part of Scotland”.

    Where Shetland is concerned, Westminster and Holyrood are “like Pepsi Cola and Coke”, with little to distinguish one from the other, with the exception that an autonomous Shetland would likely find the UK/rUK a more stable and dependable guardian power than Scotland.

    And you, unwittingly or otherwise, put up a convincing case for why Shetland fishing industry needs to be free of Holyrood, Westminster and Brussels, like those of our North Atlantic neighbours, Iceland and Faroe, who are independent/autonomous and have declined to join the EU.

    • Robin Stevenson

      • March 18th, 2015 19:20

      Erm…John, we’ve already covered Shetlands and Orkney’s sovereignty in an earlier post, did you not bother reading it?… I didn’t disagree with you, however Captain Calamity [Stuart Hill] may have got a few things…erm…somewhat muddled?

      With regard to you finding Westminster and Holyrood much the same, I’m afraid that’s just utter nonsense.

      Let me try to explain to you what would happen with an independent scotland IF S&O decided it was wiser to stick with the rUK, firstly, I take it you’re aware of the 12 mile rule for what is regarded as an enclave to the Scottish mainland?…No?…well read on :

      Under UNCLOS III the islands would be regarded as an “enclave” residing wholly within Scotland’s “Exclusive Economic Zone” (see the paragraph “Continental shelf”), and as such would only have the right to resources within a 12-mile radius of their coastline – of which, in terms of oil, there are basically none.

      Don`t tell me you believed Tavish Scott`s gibberish John?…Oh Dear!!…never mind, at least the Isle of man is in the same boat [IF you pardon the pun]….I`m afraid that would probably be much the same for your fishing rights too, but hey!….At least you`d be kept busy feeding your more dependable and stable guardian the rUK?

      Oh!…and btw, Denmark is a member of the EU already, who pay 11.7% of Faroe’s yearly National budget?

      • laurence paton

        • March 18th, 2015 21:14

        After 30 years of a failed management regime from Brussels that has led to millions of tons of fish dumped at sea and many livelihoods lost the how the hell can you continue to argue in favour of Brussel’s control?

        Alex Salmond stated ” We will take our place at the Brussels’s table”
        Not an independent Country but a province of Europe and dictated to by an EU commission whom we don’t elect.

      • Brian Smith

        • March 18th, 2015 21:54

        I once met a stalwart of the Shetland Movement who denied vociferously that Denmark subsidised the Faroes in any way!

      • Robert Duncan

        • March 18th, 2015 22:09

        I think my previous posts on these pages show I’m in no way a partisan voice on the issue, so I hope it doesn’t come across that way when I say: the enclave argument, initially formulated by Wings Over Scotland I believe, is just complete, unfiltered nonsense. Your link doesn’t even mention the word enclave.

        There may be complicating factors were Shetland a dominion of a UK minus Scotland, but were it an independent nation it would be entitled to an EEZ just like anybody else, with a waters extending to the median point between ourselves and Scotland.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 19th, 2015 8:38

        @Robert Duncan,

        HEAR, HEAR!!

    • John Tulloch

      • March 19th, 2015 8:35


      The Shetland Movement chap may or may not have been right about Faroe, however, we already know that Shetland overpays tax by £80Mpa+ versus what is received back in funding – without counting oil revenues from Shetland waters!

      And that’s with the Shetland fishing industry sold down the river, to the EU!

  • John Tulloch

    • March 18th, 2015 20:53


    When people debating with me resort to sound bites like “Captain Calamity” and quoting the “Law of the Sea” from Wikipedia, I know they don’t have a clue what they’re talking about and/or they’re wasting my time.

    • Robin Stevenson

      • March 18th, 2015 23:23

      John, type in Google the name “Stuart Hill Shetland”, and see just how many of our MSM use that very sound-bite?…Look, I know he’s your hero, but let’s get serious, are you NOW saying that Wikipedia and The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, are talking nonsense?….I hate to burst your bubble but the laws are the laws? ;(

      • Gordon Harmer

        • March 19th, 2015 13:48

        So Robin you are not a Shetlander nor do you live here or you would not have to google Stuart Hill. Before you brand him with a name some refer to him as, it would be respectful to read his book and then voice an opinion.
        Just to make a point, laws are never clear cut and are there to be interpreted or even challenged, someone who uses spin as you do should know that.
        You speak like a Holyrood MSP who has no idea of Island life, or an SNP MSP who has no respect for Island life just plays to the greater good of the central belt.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 19th, 2015 16:22

        @Robin Stevenson,

        May I suggest you study the linked document, in particular, Mr Zahraa’s conclusions about Orkney and Shetland and if you do, perhaps, you’ll save youself from wasting your breath, as Jean Urquhart and several others wasted theirs, before your recent ‘materialisation’, from the aether, on to this forum.

        If you repeat the arguments you’ve just made, I’ll know you haven’t read it.

      • Brian Smith

        • March 19th, 2015 17:54

        Anyone who imagines that the article John Tulloch mentions has anything to do with Stuart Hill’s ideas would be mistaken!

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 19th, 2015 20:08

        Fascinating contradiction John?….So, read Dr Zahraa’s link, but, don’t waste your breath talking about it, because it’s all been said before?…..but I`ll know if you haven’t read it if you repeat your arguments, ….Huh!…how does that work?

        I take it John, you ARE fully aware that the eminent Dr has written this “Prospective” Anglo-Scottish Maritime Boundary revisited?….and therefore you’re fully aware that this ISN’T actual law, but merely what “Might” happen in the future if the subject was ever brought up?…[basically “Grey Literature”]

        Anyway, that aside, the actual UNCLOS laws still stand, and as we know Orkney & Shetland are within Scotland’s EEZ.

        “These extend from the edge of the territorial sea out to 200 nautical miles (370 kilometres; 230 miles) from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. In casual use, the term may include the territorial sea and even the continental shelf. The EEZs were introduced to halt the increasingly heated clashes over fishing rights, although oil was also becoming important”.

        Going back to Dr Zahraa’s Prospective, I see he’s highlighted the zone on page 29 Map 2, which more or less confirms Scotland’s EEZ, and NO change from the original Anglo-Scottish Maritime Boundary.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 19th, 2015 22:11

        @Robin Stevenson,

        You wrote: “UNCLOS laws still stand, and as we know Orkney & Shetland are within Scotland’s EEZ”

        Don’t you mean, “as UNCLOS laws still stand, the existing situation is that Scotland is within the UK’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and, as currently interpreted by HM Government – rightly or wrongly – that, also, includes Orkney and Shetland.

        Scots voted against independence so Scotland doesn’t have an EEZ,mtherefore, any consideration of such a hypothetical zone won’t be possible unless you are prepared to rescind your dismissal of Mahdi Zahraa’s “grey literature” from the Europen Journal of International Law?

        It surely follows that, if Scotland doesn’t have an EEZ, Orkney and Shetland can’t be “within It”?

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 20th, 2015 17:14

        Once again John, you’ve completely missed the point? We were talking about an Independent Scotland NOT the rUK?… are you now just making it up as you go along to fit your argument?..You’ve also chosen to pick and choose which parts of a post to argue about, without conceding or [having the courtesy] to concede a point….Would it not just be easier for you just to bang on with your usual mantra SNP = BAAAAD?, it`s a lot less typing for you, and it’ll save me having to upset your theory?

      • John Tulloch

        • March 21st, 2015 16:23


        Thanks for pointing that out, I’d missed that among the outpourings ‘fae Trolliegairts’.

        For clarification, I agree Mahdi Zahraa’s article is not relevant to Stuart Hill’s campaign, rather, it’s an interpretation of international law in the context of the current situation.

        I was addressing two distinct, parallel issues and didn’t mean to mix them.

    • Gordon Harmer

      • March 19th, 2015 5:39

      He has obviously not read the book John and never will, something tells me that his comments which he posts and believes are definitive are from a superior being i.e. Alex Salmond and Robin Stevenson is a pseudonym.

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 19th, 2015 9:50

        Deflection Gordon, please stick to the facts, are you now saying that the UNCLOS link is NOT definitive? IF so could you please link any other source where the EEZ rule doesn`t apply?

      • John Tulloch

        • March 21st, 2015 15:38

        The EEZ pertaining to Orkney and Shetland has not been set by the Law of the Sea, the Law of the Sea provides a framework of guiding principles.

        If and when it becomes appropriate, Orkney and Shetland’s EEZs would be negotiated between the interested parties, failing which it would be determined by an international tribunal, taking into account issues such as equity, history and culture, traditional industry, etc.

        Do read Mahdi Zahraa’s splendid discussion of it in the link I provided you with, earlier.

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 21st, 2015 19:32

        Agreed John, “Negotiated”, being the operative word….. Before we get into the “Ifs and Buts”, let’s try to imagine that YOU had to decide both states EEZs… what do you base the carve up on?… Landmass? shoreline?…. population?….. how would you split it John?….Is Shetland in Scotland’s EEZ? Scotland in Shetland’s EEZ?

        The good Dr Zahraa’s “Prospective” is [of course] based on UNCLO laws, there are similar cases to the Scottish/Shetland situation but nothing identical, there is also considerably more reading on the matter.

        With regard to our imaginary scenario, should we just add up the total population/land mass of both states and divide that figure into the entire EEZs of both so everybody gets a fair share?…Hmm..[something tells me you wouldn’t come out of that too well somehow?]

        I have NO doubt in my mind, that IF Shetland and Orkney decided that its future lay with the rUK, rather than chose to be part of an independent Scotland, then map 2 on page 28, would be the most likely outcome. …..Please don’t tell me you were naive enough to be thinking of 50/50?…lol

    • laurence paton

      • March 19th, 2015 6:34

      John Tulloch,
      I would not expect the Conservative candidate to fight against the V.E Plan too vigourously.
      Wind energy has been corrupted from it’s true aim to filter money to the landed gentry from the common man.
      For thousands built so far worldwide there has been no noticeable reduction in the total amount of fossil fuels consumed.
      That is the one thing that we are constantly told must be done.
      Reduce fossil fuel consumption and save the planet from CO2 Emmissions

      • John Tulloch

        • March 19th, 2015 10:55


        I agree with all you say about the ineffectiveness and cost of wind farms, however, I’m not sure the Tories are as keen on them as you suggest.

        “Husky Dave’s” father-in-law was one of the first to install wind turbines, at a time when they were believed to be the only antidote to prevent the “sky from falling”.

        The Tories later posted sceptics at D.E.C.C. and Environment to keep the brakes on Ed Davey’s lunacy, the Liberals having, originally, been given free rein at DECC, to “combat climate change”.

        This Cameron has made encouraging noises about wind farms going to the right place, as opposed to despoiling wild lands and he was, after all, junior counsel for Sustainable Shetland at the VE Supreme Court hearing, so he should be well-informed about the issues.

        If he doesn’t oppose VE he won’t get opponents’ votes, they may go to UKiP, instead?

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 22nd, 2015 1:01

        Just out of interest Laurence, what are UKIP’s proposals for supplying sustainable energy?…or does it not need to be sustainable?….are our resources infinite then?

        What are UKIP’s policies on fishing?….is it a case of “We’re gonna need a bigger rod”, or do you actually have any?

        Are women [that are at prime age to conceive children] allowed to do ANY job whatsoever?

        Why should the Armed forces personnel be given priority over everyone else for housing, NHS, and a guaranteed job with the police, prison services etc, after 12 years service, [regardless of what they did in the forces]?

        What will UKIP do when an immigrant that arrives from an oppressive regime doesn`t have health insurance for the first 5 years?

        How does UKIP intend to make up the lost £13 Billion revenue from the companies that we deal with and the 330,000 jobs through exports to the EU?

        It’s all very well sniping from the wings Laurence, but unless you have positive progressive alternatives then your comments become as useless and much the same as the usual suspects.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 22nd, 2015 9:03

        “Sustainable energy”?

        A petroleum geologist contacted me to congratulate me on my comments about ‘Peak Oil’, adding his confirmation that there is enough oil to last humanity for, at least, 1000 years.

        Do you imagine that the world will be powered by wind turbines in 1000 years time? 🙂

      • Robin Stevensonr

        • March 22nd, 2015 11:18

        Of course I do?… Let’s face it. by your own calculation, we’d be out of oil?..Doh!!

      • John Tulloch

        • March 22nd, 2015 11:28

        Do you welcome the UK Supreme Court rejection of Sustainable Shetland’s appeal to overrule the Scottish Government’s planning consent for Viking Energy?

        Does SNP Shetland welcome it?

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 22nd, 2015 14:06

        Whether Shetland decided to be a part of Scotland or be part of rUK, it would seem that this wind-farm would go ahead anyway?
        Throughout history decisions have been made to utilise what the best alternative is/was “At that time”, who’s to say wind-farms are permanent?…it’s not as if we can replace the fossil fuels that we utilise?.. [until they run out]…IF, in the future, there is a “Better” sustainable alternative to wind power, then that should be looked at on its merits?

        While I appreciate the environmental impact that these turbines will create, I’m afraid you can only weigh-up the benefits compared to the pit falls. However, “Nothing” is permanent.

        “The wind farm could power more than 175,000 homes and would be expected to contribute around £30m to the local community each year”.

      • John Tulloch

        • March 22nd, 2015 18:30

        @Robin Stevenson,

        That’s a more carefully considered, less ‘gallus’ response than we’ve become used to from you, from which I take it that I’ve touched a nerve somewhere and that you are answerable to some party officials, be they local and/or national, so you have churned out some standard, pre-processed, safe soundbites.

        While it may be safely inferrred from what you wrote that you and your ‘puppeteers’ welcome the UK Supreme Court rejection of Sustainable Shetland’s appeal against the Scottish Government’s planning consent for Viking Energy, you didn’t actually confirm, specifically, whether you do.

        Do you welcome it?

        Does SNP Shetland welcome it?

      • Robin Stevenson

        • March 22nd, 2015 22:10

        Aww,…You started off SO well there John, and then [sadly] descended into some sort of paranoid havering…sigh/

        You’ll have noticed John, that previous conversations that we’ve had, can be both civil and constructive, it is only when certain posters [cough] start talking nonsense like comparing Nationalists to Nazis, or filth, or some other derogatory term, that the conversation becomes stifled.

        Much to your disappointment, I don’t answer to anyone,..erm. [apart from my good lady]..

        I cannot speak for the SNP Shetland, nor can I speak for the Scottish government, I’d imagine that Shetland SNP would concur with what was finally, and mutually agreed by ALL parties? [with the exception of Sustainable Shetland]

        Wind Turbines may well turn out to be the “Betamax” of sustainable energy, what seems like a great idea today, may become obsolete very quickly, IF something proves to be far superior tomorrow?

        Like everything in life :

        “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”.”………[John Lydgate…adapted by A Lincoln]

  • Ali Inkster

    • March 22nd, 2015 19:12

    Well it seems da only option ta save da isles is ta get clear o da lot o dem an geen fir full independence.

  • iantinkler

    • March 23rd, 2015 17:12

    Has anyone noticed that any critique of our SNP acolytes is promptly insulted, ridiculed or belittled. Robin Stevenson, here has the classic repost of a CyberNAT, to quote him, “John , descended into some sort of paranoid hovering…sigh/”; how very rude and unnecessary, also so very typical of this person. I word of friendly advice, Robin Stevenson, you do not help your argument with puerile, pointless insults. John may be many things, paranoid is not one of them, do not judge others by your own standards, it makes you look very foolish.

    • Robert Duncan

      • March 23rd, 2015 17:56

      I have certainly noticed that you personally attract langauge like that from time to time, but I would put it down more to your own tone than anything else. Perhaps you should take a look in the mirror if such “insults” upset you.

    • Robin Stevenson

      • March 23rd, 2015 18:46

      LOL…That’s IS funny Ali, …All this coming from the very guy who fills these pages with his abuses, bile and downright hatred towards the SNP or anyone that has the audacity to fight their corner…Rich… 😉

  • Iantinkler

    • March 23rd, 2015 20:21

    Duncan, my tone maybe, this insult was not aimed at me, John I believe was the target. Robin, not downright hatred towards the SNP, but contempt utter and compete for Nationalism.


Add Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.

200 words left

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Get Latest News in Your Inbox

Join the The Shetland Times mailing list to get one daily email update at midday on what's happening in Shetland.