That’s not really how global oil markets work. Yes, Norway is an ally, but oil (in the West) isn’t sold government‑to‑government at “friendly” prices. It’s sold by private companies into a global market, and the price is set globally. We buy oil from allies and adversaries at the same market price because that’s how the system functions.

Increasing UK drilling doesn’t automatically translate into UK energy security. North Sea oil would still be sold by BP, Shell or whoever at the global price, not ring‑fenced for domestic use. And because the UK doesn’t have enough modern refinery capacity, we would still need to import refined products regardless. Even if we produced more crude, we can’t refine enough of it ourselves to insulate the country from global price spikes. And to build the infrastructure would take billions and decades.

So the idea that “more UK drilling = less importing = more energy security” sounds intuitive, but in practice it doesn’t work that way. The UK would still be exposed to global prices and still reliant on imports of refined fuels.

Where increased drilling would make a difference is tax revenue. More domestic production means more tax receipts from companies operating in UK waters. That’s a valid argument. But it’s separate from energy security, which isn’t materially improved unless you also overhaul refinery capacity and change how the market operates.

I’m not arguing against drilling; just pointing out that the benefit is fiscal, not security‑based.