We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Apologies Mogger,
That question was meant for Fernan10. Got posts mixed up, won't do it again. Thanks for the link. I especially liked this bit
'In this context it was agreed to take the appropriate measures to remove all obstacles limiting the economic growth and sustainable development of the Falkland Islands, including in trade, fishing, shipping and hydrocarbons. Both parties emphasised the benefits of cooperation and positive engagement for all concerned.'
Auson,
I'm not quite sure you understood the point of the link. Perhaps you could read the communiqué and then all might become a little clearer.
I think they are more than "ideas" mentioned. This was a high level meeting between two Secretary of State discussing medium to long term strategies for closer cooperation between the UK and Argentina.
As to your comment of "do you know who UKEF is?" Yes - I am fully aware. I made no suggestion that the UKEF was lending to Argentinian companies.
Premier is seeking funding from multiple state export finance departments highlighting the how multinational the consortium is which is being put together in the hope of getting to first oil.
Mogger
I would be furious if they invest money in Argentina and then deny the FI, whos side are they on if that happens. Would appear that they support Argentina's claims to them
I think this is a really interesting point. It depends I suppose on how deep the rabbit hole goes!
You could look at it that UKEF lends money to companies to support their business and all things UK so not aimed at just putting Argentina's nose out of joint, but then if it's for a specific project that is attached to Argentina then issues could arise.
However you could also look at it that if Argentina go down that road, are they shooting themselves in the foot if UKEF has supported projects that benefit UK and Argentina, then not only are they trying to influence what is happening in the FI, but could put projects and jobs at risk in Argentina. Where does it stop.
I seem to recall during the drilling they rattled the sabre about boycotting suppliers, banks and anyone else connected to "illegal drilling in the Malvinas" as they put it. So it's not too much of a leap to imagine the same if not more so with not just exploration, but a long term development taking place.
I suppose the way to look at this is, will UKEF be influenced by the possibility of Argentina playing up (which they are going to do whether or not UKEF support the project) and what is more detrimental, sabre rattling and posturing or not getting involved and appearing to have been influenced and shown weakness with regards to a project that would effect many companies as well as the FI and it's people whom have a right to self determination as well as our support which the UK already does with armed forces based on the islands.
IMHO, this does bear some more thought but at the moment apart from this, I still cannot see why UKEF would not support such a project when there are so many wins.
LTT
Mogger,
Some 'interesting' ideas there, do you know who UKEF is ?
Also UKEF does not lend to Argentinian companies its job is to support UK exports.
All,
I refer you all to the following. Signed 3 years ago you will see progress has been made in several areas.
Points 5 and 10 are key
Mogger
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/communique-between-argentina-and-the-united-kingdom/uk-and-argentina-joint-communique
Hi Auson:
I´m saying the following: suppose UKEF make a loan to an oil company resident in Argentina.
And, then, UKEF gets involed in Sea Lion (through a direct loan, a guarantee or a political risk insurance).
In that case, an argentinian judge could impose an economic sanction (e.g. a fine) in UKEF, and then could ask the argentinian oil company (debtor of UKEF) to withdraw the payment of interest or principal to UKEF, in order to satisfy the payment of the fine.
Do you think that, after providing funding for Vaca Muerta, will UKEF be willing to accept that risk by supporting Sea Lion?
Regards
Fernan
Fernan10,
You are effectively asking if the Argentine Gov't would take legal action ( which they would loose as Falklands is sovereign ) against UKEF ( UK Gov.t) who are currently financing £1b for Oil production in Argentina ?
An interesting article in The Guardian, talking about the chance of UKEF to participate in the development of the Vaca Muerta oil field in Argentina.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/22/uk-to-use-1bn-meant-for-green-energy-to-support-fracking-in-argentina
The issue that I see here in relation to the potential involvement of UKEF in the financing of Sea Lion is the following: I understand that Argentina has laws that impose economic and criminal charges to companies and individuals participating in the financing and/or development of Sea Lion. For that reason, any oil company with investments in Argentina will refrain from being involved in Sea Lion.
Applying the same logic, if UKEF provides the funding for a development of an oil field in Argentina, could it prevent it from getting involved in Sea Lion?
I would like to know your views on the subject
Regards
Fernan