Opposition to EU membership grows in Iceland

As a new left-wing minority coalition of the social-democrats and Left Greens takes power today (with new elections planned for the 25th of April) it looks like opinion is shifting away from support for EU membership. According to the Norwegian newspaper Dagsavisen the last two polls have both shown the no side in the lead - by 38.3 to 37.7 percent in one poll and by 59.8 to 40.2 in another - which is in stark contrast to those carried out just a few weeks ago. In addition Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre who has been in Iceland for the last few days says he doesn’t expect EU membership to be an important priority for the new government. It was reported yesterday in The Guardian that Brussels is keen to have Iceland as a member and would fast-track them for admission in 2011. For numerous reasons though it is in the interests of Iceland not to go down such a road and in the end it's what ordinary people think that counts.

As for why Iceland should remain out the most important thing is perhaps fishing which with the collapse of the nation’s banking industry is likely to become an even more important part of its economy in the years ahead. At the moment Iceland as part of the EEA can stay out of the Common Fisheries Policy and therefore can set its own quotas and regulate who fishes off the Icelandic coast. If they joined the EU on the other hand they would be forced to open their waters to fisherman from right across the union and would have to accept centrally agreed quotas which they would have little control over. Iceland has long fought for national control of its fishing stocks, getting into several skirmishes with Britain in the 70s, and over the last few decades they have made a far better job of building a sustainable fishing industry than any of the member states of the EU.

The collapse of Iceland’s currency was the main reason why people initially turned in favour of the EU yet even if Iceland did become a member it’s in no way guaranteed they’d be allowed to use the Euro because of the strict fiscal rules imposed on member states. Some in the Norwegian government opposed to the EU, such as Centre Party leader Liv Signe Navarsete, have instead suggested that Iceland’s currency could be tied to the Norwegian krone. I’m not an economist and have no idea what the consequences of such a move might be for Norway but it would certainly in my view be the most favourable option for Iceland, stabilising its currency while allowing it to remain independent of many of the centralised and undemocratic EU structures which take little account of the social and economic needs of ordinary people.

Norden til venstre: Icelandic government falls, left ahead in Norway

Icelanders protesting outside parliament in Reykjavik

After weeks of regular protests outside the Icelandic parliament in Reykjavik, the government has finally collapsed with the social-democratic Alliance unwilling to continue in their coalition with the conservative Independence Party. Many Icelanders have meanwhile thrown their support behind the socialist Left Greens with them expected to become the largest party in any future election according to the polls. A government which refused to accept any responsibility for what had happened and for the misery which many ordinary families have been subjected to, has finally given in to the demands of its angry citizens, or at least the social-democrats have realised that staying in a coalition with the Independence Party any longer will do them more harm than good.

If the Left Greens become the largest party and if the Alliance have enough seats to allow both parties to form a coalition then Iceland will undoubtedly have the most radical government of any western country. Their ability to act will of course in many ways be reduced due to the serious situation the country finds itself in, with the economy expected to shrink by 10% this year, unemployment approaching a record high and inflation making basic items hard for many Icelanders to afford. But with the right policies the poor and the jobless need not be hit as hard as they might otherwise have been. A left-wing government would, I expect, return to a more progressive tax system, do what it can to stop people losing their homes and redistribute whatever resources are available to those who need them the most. Perhaps most importantly they would lay the foundations of a new economy based not around banking but on developing the nation’s vast natural resources in a way which is largely at harmony with nature.

The political situation right now seems a little unclear with the outgoing Prime Minister Geir Haarde calling for a national government while some in the Alliance, Left Greens and agrarian Progressive Party have called for the three parties to form a temporary coalition until the elections, already expected to take place in May after an earlier announcements from Mr Haarde shortly after he was diagnosed with cancer. It’s difficult to say what the political impact of either option would be for the parties involved but the Left Greens are the one party which has consistently offered a real alternative to the free market economic policies Icelanders are now blaming for what’s happening so I expect they’re likely to remain strong over the next few months.

In Norway meanwhile the last three or four polls have all been predicting a parliamentary majority for the centre-left which is significant as ever since their election in 2005 most polls have been predicting a clear victory for the opposition. Before these latest polls the left hadn’t been ahead once since 2007. Fortunately the financial crisis has helped turn things around around as the government appears to be seen doing things, putting forward a number ‘crisis packages’ to help Norwegian businesses, banks and municipalities. Yesterday a further 20 billion kroner was announced and if it proves not to be enough the government can quite easily dip into the oil fund. Nevertheless predictions are that over 100,000 jobs could be lost over the next few years so they’ll be hoping as few as possible go before the election in September.

The left has also been strengthened from an ideological perspective with Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg arguing that the crisis proves the superiority of the Norwegian model over the free market American one, given that Norway has been far less affected by most other countries and that it was unregulated capitalism which was undeniably responsible in the first place. The right-wing Progress Party (Frp), which recently showed its true colours by calling for uncritical support to Israel during their war against the people of Gaza, has only one answer: yet more tax cuts and deregulation together with the reckless use of oil revenues. Perhaps as a result of the voters are abandoning them in droves with the Frp down to below 20% in the most recent poll, the lowest they've had for years.

The election is of course over 8 months away and a lot will happen before then. Personally I think it could go either way - although even if the four opposition parties do get a majority the composition of the future government is far from certain as both the Liberals and Christian People’s Party have suggested they’d be unwilling to join a government which includes the Progress Party. What’s clear though is that the left’s now in a better position to hold on to power, due largely to the crisis, and hopefully the opposition will be weakened further as they come under greater scrutiny in the run-up to the election.

By the way if you want to keep up to date with what's happening in Iceland these are all good sources:

http://newsfrettir.com
http://icelandreview.com
http://www.icenews.is

Update on prostitution law in Norway

Norwegian Parliament (Storting) in Oslo

As you may know the Norwegian government has been planning for a while to follow Sweden in criminalising the men who pay for sex. Influenced by radical feminism, the law aims to shift the responsibility wholly on to those who create the demand for prostitution and who use their money to abuse and exploit others. Like in Sweden the punishment will be a fine and/or term in prison of up to 6 months although at the same time it'll go further by making it also an offence for Norwegian citizens to buy sex while abroad.

Kvinnegruppa Ottar, the more radical of Norway’s two main feminist campaign groups, is reporting on their website that the law is to be voted on by the Storting on the 20th of November and if it passes (which is almost certain as it has the support of all three governing parties as well as the Christian People’s Party) it will enter the statute book on the 1st of January next year. Glasgow City Council have also been advocating the adoption of similar legislation here in Scotland so let’s hope the Norwegian move will add new momentum for the campaign against prostitution not just in our own country but all over the world.

To mark the occasion the sex industry has been getting more attention in the Norwegian press than usual. Best-selling tabloid VG has gathered together a series of articles under a section titled 'det norske sexmarkedet' on their website and in the last few days it's emerged that several years ago a member of parliament was warned by the Storting's President Jørgen Kosmo after being reported paying for sex while on an official delegation abroad.

The VG articles, as well as giving coverage to both supporters and opponents of the law in Norway and abroad, go into detail about the effects of the law in Sweden where, since it was introduced in 1999, trafficking and street prostitution have been dramatically reduced and where the vast majority of people continue to support the legislation. But undoubtedly prostitution does still continue and it's not necessarily been as effective in curbing the demand as feminists would have liked. Many Swedes blame the softness of the penalties handed out or believe that the police haven't done enough to tackle the problem. Indeed of the 189 people reported in 2007 for buying sex not a single one (according to VG) was convicted.

The authorities in Norway will perhaps try to learn from some of these failings but, regardless, the law will still send out an important message about what society thinks of prostitution and whom it believes should be held responsible for its existence. As Grete Jacobsen from Kvinnegruppa Ottar said in an article for Stavanger Aftenblad, it is:

“Mest av alt retter seg mot menn og menn sine holdninger! Loven sier at vi som samfunn ikke aksepterer at menn ser på kvinner som en vare de kan kjøpe seg rett til å penetrere bakfra i smugene i Gamle Stavanger, eller hvor det nå skulle være. Det er en lov som slår fast at prostitusjon er vold mot kvinner og barn, og det motsatte av likeverd. Helt korrekt blir kundene definert som voldsutøvere og fra 1. januar i neste år, vil horekundene bli straffeforfulgt for sine handlinger. Da kan endelig folk melde i fra til politiet om navngitte horekunder. Fra da av må horekundene stå til ansvar for sine overgrep. Andre tiltak for å snu menn sine holdninger har dessverre ikke lykkes. Horekundens frihet har gått på bekostning av andres frihet og må dermed begrenses i et samfunn der kvinner og menn skal være like mye verdt...

“Å skape en folkelig motstand mot prostitusjon vil likevel gi den største effekten av en kriminalisering av horekunder. Loven er normgivende og kommer som følge av en langvarig, seig kamp om hodene til folk. Det er ikke lett å frata menn rettigheter, men det forplikter å være et av verdens mest likestilte land. I en verden med økende fattigdom og prostitusjon, trengs menn i en solidarisk dugnad for mer rettferdighet, også for kvinner som da slipper å ‘opne seg for mannen.’”

"Most of all directed at men and men's attitudes! The law says that we as a society do not accept that men should be able to see women as a commodity which they can buy the right to penetrate from behind in the alleyways of Old Stavanger, or wherever it is now. It is a law which clearly states that prostitution is violence against women and children, and the opposite of equality. Correctly those who pay for sex will be defined as perpetrators of violence and from the 1st of January next year, will be punished for their actions. Then can people finally report to the police the customers who buy sex. From then on the customers will be made responsible for their abuse. Other measures to change the men's attitudes have unfortunately not worked. The freedom of sex customers has come at the expense of others' freedom, and must therefore be limited in a society where women and men shall be of equal value...

"Creating a popular opposition against prostitution will be the biggest impact of the criminalisation of those who pay for sex. The law is normative and comes as a result of a long, tough battle for people’s minds. It is not easy to challenge the position of men, but it is an obligation to be one of the world's most equal countries. In a world of increasing poverty and prostitution, men are needed as part of the collective struggle for more justice, and also for a society where women will no longer have to ‘open themselves for the man.'"

(Sorry about the far from perfect translation. I’m learning Norwegian but even with a dictionary it can be hard to understand fully what some things mean or how best to phrase them in English.)

Also worth looking at is this speech/presentation (in English) by a representative of Kvinnefronten, the other main feminist organisation in Norway, on the background of the campaign against sexual exploitation in her country:

http://www.kvinnefronten.no/INTERNASJONALT/2548

Large increase for minimum pension in Norway - but will it be enough to keep the left in power?

Leaders of Norway’s three governing parties - Kristin Halvorsen (Socialist Left - SV), Jens Stoltenberg (Labour - Ap) and Åslaug Haga (Centre Party - Sp)

The centre-left government in Norway on Wednesday announced a historic increase to the minstepensjon (minimum pension) of 14% - from 119,820 kroner this year (around £11,500) to 136,296 kroner (around £13,000) in 2010 - by comparison the basic state pension in the UK is just £4,700 a year. Disability benefits have also been increased by a similar amount and the settlement has overall been seen as an extremely positive one for the poorest sections of society.

But with opinion polls consistently predicting a strong lead for the four opposition parties of between 5 and 20% all is not well in Norway. Especially when much of the declining support for the three governing parties has gone to the Progress Party (Frp) - a populist and highly opportunistic right-wing party which plays on people’s dissatisfaction with high tax rates and their fears over issues like crime and immigration. The Frp cannot, I think, be compared to the neo-fascist and overtly racist parties which have been gaining support across Europe but their high level of support (over 25% in recent polls) is nevertheless a worrying phenomenon.

Large numbers of public sector workers are currently on strike as teachers and nurses are demanding higher pay from local councils and the government’s recent decision to increase fuel taxes in a country which already pays the highest prices for petrol anywhere in Europe isn’t exactly popular. In addition a range of reports of run-down schools and universities, a declining quality of care in hospitals and residential homes, and dangerous and poorly maintained roads, have led many to seriously question the competence of both local and national authorities.

I recently read a comment on Dagsavisen partly blaming the government’s unpopularity (and the rise of the Frp) on the social and cultural impact of Norway’s enormous oil wealth - people have apparently came to think that anything is possible, that public services should all work perfectly and that they shouldn't personally have to bear the costs of something which could be funded through the oil revenues. They demand to see all the possible benefits of the oil wealth now without realising the importance of saving it for future generations and for dealing with the impact of the oil running out in the next few decades.

The Frp is clearly on the right economically, calling for tax cuts and greater private involvement in the provision of public services. But much of their support has been gained, not through this, but through their lavish spending promises - particularly for the elderly but also when it comes to education and healthcare. In most countries it would be impossible to combine this with lower taxes but, at least in the short term, this may appear not to be the case in Norway where oil revenues guarantee a large budget surplus each year.

There may be some truth in that observation but it’s also the case that the governing parties had promised far more than they've yet been able or prepared to deliver and inevitably large sections of the electorate are likely to feel let down. The pension and benefit increases this week are a good start for a government trying to get in touch with the mood of its people again but they're long overdue and it will take a lot more over the next 15 months to get enough of the population back on side before the election. The government will also need to put across their agenda more effectively and take on the arguments of their opponents rather than allowing themselves to be scared by them.

One area to look at here is income tax - the government has so far avoided increasing it in the fear that it will harm their chances electorally. But in actual fact what they should be doing is making the case for taxation which is both high and, at the same time, progressive. Opinion polls have repeatedly found that Norwegians don't object to paying high taxes on income as long as they can see real benefits to their public services. What is unpopular are indirect and regressive taxes, particularly on basic consumer goods bought equally by the rich and poor alike. If the red-green government are genuinely committed to closing wealth inequalities then they must take concrete steps now to start shifting the burden away from ordinary people and on to those who earn the highest incomes.

Even if the worst comes to the worst and the centre-left doesn’t significantly regain its support by September next year an Frp led government is far from certain as although Høyre (the conservatives) have left the door open to cooperation with them, the other two opposition parties - Venstre (the liberals) and the KrF (christian democrats) - have not. The radical left's decline meanwhile looks likely to continue as the SV's inability to, as of yet, take the Labour dominated government in the radical direction many of their supporters had hoped has disillusioned many and harmed the party's reputation as a force for challenging the established political scene in Norway.

EDIT: This article from Red Pepper (which I found a few months later) is I think useful in explaining some of the tactics used by the Progress Party and perhaps why they've been so successful among sections of the Norwegian electorate.

Back to uni + some good news for once

After 4 months of doing very little I was fairly happy to go back to Glasgow Uni today for the start of my second year where I'll be studying level 2 Politics and Central and East European Studies and level 1 Sociology. A lot of work (which is not so good) but hopefully there'll be some interesting stuff as well. But there's one slight problem - I've got lectures at 9am 3 days a week (last year there was nothing before 1 in the afternoon). So today I was up at 7:30 after 2 and a half hours sleep - not getting back home again till 15 hours and 2 socialist meetings later. I don't know why I'm still awake but I do know that I feel crap and am probably more than doubling the risk of death from all sorts of hideous diseases (at least that's if the study on sleep I recently read about is correct).

On the subject of busy students, something I read today in the Guardian is that the English work much less than those in other countries (studying for just 26 hours a week compared to 41 for the Portuguese, 35 for the French and 34 for the Germans). These 26 hours are said to include 14 hours tuition and at least 12 hours private study. In my three courses the maximum time spent a week in lectures and tutorials (provided I went to them all) adds up to just 12 hours so maybe the Scots are even lazier. As for private study I didn't do nearly as much as 12 hours a week last year but then it was only my first year and I'm probably quite lazy. But I think the fact studying hours are generally much lower in the UK must have something to do with the way in which many students here have to devote so much of their time working in crappy jobs to cover their costs - something made far worse by the abolition of grants and the introduction of tuition fees (in England and Wales at least).

Not all news is bad news so here's some positive stories I've seen over the last week or so:

* After a recent reshuffle Norway's cabinet has, for the first time, more female than male ministers – by 10 to 9. Added to the fact that 4 out of 7 of the country's parliamentary parties have female leaders this is certainly a positive sign for gender equality in the country, at least at a political level. Another good thing about Norway is that it was the first country to introduce compulsory gender quotas within company management positions and soon no less than 40% of such posts can be occupied by women. Patriarchy of course goes a lot deeper than simply creating a lack of female politicians and business leaders but at least the Norwegians are doing more than most. And I'm very happy that they're likely to follow Sweden's example by criminalising the purchase of sex later on this year, a move which will hopefully have a significant effect on public attitudes to the sex industry in general.

* Scottish Labour's new leader Wendy Alexander appoints 7 women and 3 men to her party's 10 most important posts with hardly a mention and significantly less criticism than you might expect from our sexist media (although if I remember correctly the Daily Record had a big full page story titled “JOBS FOR THE GIRLS”).

* Italy considers fining men who pay for sex as well as serving legal papers in their own homes to shame them. Any action against these evil bastards is more than welcome but should surely also include keeping them behind bars for a good few months.

* The emergence of a new mass struggle against the brutal military dictatorship in Burma which has, for 45 years, been torturing and enslaving its own people and starving them of the nation's resources. Western countries might now be expressing their support for the protesters but let's not forget that they've done nothing up to now and have always been perfectly happy to let their corporations profit from the misery of the Burmese population.