1 April 2003

EU demands NOK 2.3 billion for EEA Agreement (Aftenposten)

Yesterday, the EU reduced to NOK 2.3 billion the amount it is demanding that Norway pay in financial contributions in return for an expanded EEA Agreement. This is half as much as it had originally demanded in January, a demand that sent shock waves through the ruling coalition in Oslo. Norway and the two other small EFTA countries, Iceland and Liechtenstein, repeated their offer of an annual EUR 144 million contribution to economic and social equalization in the expanded EU. This is six times more than they are currently paying.

SAS is planning to slash a number of key employee benefits in an effort to save billions of kroner over the next few years. Lower pensions, reduced insurance cover, an end to full pay when employees take sick leave and a reduction in the early retirement scheme are among the items on management’s wish list. Negotiations with union representatives are already underway. The most controversial proposals involve key benefits such as pensions, insurance cover and sick pay. “These will be the difficult issues to negotiate. We will fight to retain the benefits we have won over time,” said Asbjørn Wikestad, a spokesman for one of the SAS unions.

According to Trine Skei Grande, leader of the Liberal Party’s parliamentary group, the EU has so far not brought peace in Europe. On the contrary, the Iraq crisis has strengthened opposition to Norwegian membership of the EU, she said. “There is no point in Norway sitting at a table and listening to France and Britain arguing,” she said. It is the dispute between EU heavyweights Britain and France/Germany in the Security Council that she has in mind.

The Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) has decided to weigh into the battle to prevent eight government agencies, which are currently headquartered in Oslo, being relocated to towns up and down the country. In a letter to the Storting, LO president Gerd-Liv Valla has called on Labour and Government Administration Minister Victor D. Norman to redo his homework and carry out a second evaluation of the pros and cons of relocation. The Storting is soon due to debate Mr Norman’s relocation plans. The Progress Party, Labour Party and Socialist Left Party are still in two minds about whether to throw out the entire scheme. In her letter to the Storting, Ms Valla asked Mr Norman to carry out a new and more thorough evaluation. “All in all the LO feels that the Ministry is far from having presented a convincing case for making considerable changes to the agencies’ organization and location,” concludes Ms Valla. The LO president is therefore putting pressure on the three opposition parties, particularly the Labour Party, to reject the proposal. However, despite the accusations of sloppy preparatory work, the proposal to relocate the government agencies will probably gain majority backing in the Storting. Both the Labour Party and the Socialist Left Party have supported relocation in principle, and the Government only needs to win over one of the two parties in order to vote through its proposal.

The Immigration Directorate has proposed that bogus asylum seekers, often from countries in eastern Europe, who have had their applications refused, be denied free bed and board at refugee reception centres. However, both politicians and the police fear that this could lead to an increase in crime. “The fear that some of them will resort to crime is undoubtedly real. At the same time, it does seem strange that the state should pay for these people to live in Norway. They have, after all, had their applications turned down,” said Arne Johannessen, head of the Norwegian Police Union. Both the Labour Party and the Socialist Left Party believe the proposal will create more problems than it solves, while the Progress Party gives it its support.

Labour’s party secretary Martin Kolberg has apologized for remarks he made linking the Bondevik-led coalition government with the Nazi era in Norway. But he is sticking to his accusation of Norwegian Thatcherism, a sharp swing to the right in the Government’s policies.
(Aftenposten)




The Government is planning to spend more of the country’s oil revenues to get more people back to work. However, Finance Minister Per-Kristian Foss is refusing to put a figure on the sum in question. “The economy is suffering a downturn, so there is more room to spend more of the Government Petroleum Fund, and not tighten public spending when tax revenues drop. This means that we will have to spend less when the economy bounces back,” said Mr Foss.
(nrk.no)




Fisheries Minister Svein Ludvigsen is waving a fat cheque book under the noses of Norway’s coastal fishermen in an attempt to get them to quit the business voluntarily. Those who do continue fishing risk having to shoulder a huge burden of debt. The Minister’s report to the Storting on structural measures for the coastal fishing fleet is intended to reduce the number of fishing vessels in operation in order to increase the profitability of those that remain. Those that remain in business will have to pay to take over their colleagues’ catch quotas. However, according to Bjørn Hershoug, a researcher at the Norwegian College of Fishery Science in Tromsø, this will leave them deeply in debt.
(Aftenposten)

The Government, backed by a cross-party majority in the Storting, has unequivocally stated its opposition to the US-led invasion of Iraq. Since the war was initiated without a second Security Council resolution, it is Norway’s belief that the invasion has no foundation in international law. We take it for granted that Foreign Minister Jan Petersen will leave his US counterpart Colin Powell in no doubt that this is Norway’s position when the two meet in Washington later this week. At home, it is well known that Mr Petersen has not been as clear on this matter as his boss, Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik. Let us hope that he is less hazy when he is on foreign soil. It is not particularly unusual for the various members of a coalition government to disagree internally about the position Norway should take on important international issues. But once the position is taken, the Government must speak with one voice to the world at large. In his conversations with US Secretary of State Colin Powell, Mr Petersen must be crystal clear that the reconstruction of Iraq must be carried out under the auspices of the UN. Any Norwegian approval for a purely US-led reconstruction effort would be the same as giving moral support to the US/British invasion.