American Renaissance
Previous Story       Next Story       View Comments       Send This Page       Date Archives       Category Archives

Norway’s ‘Thatcher’ Eyes Poll Chance

More news stories on Scandinavia

Andrew Ward, Financial Times (London), September 13, 2009

She casts herself as the Margaret Thatcher of Norwegian politics, intent on overhauling the country’s big-government welfare system and tightening its borders against immigration.

If opposition parties win a majority in Monday’s parliamentary election, Siv Jensen could get the chance to put some of those ideas into practice.

Her populist Progress party is the dominant force among several opposition groups aiming to oust Jens Stoltenberg, prime minister, and his centre-left government after four years in control of the world’s fifth-largest oil exporting nation.

Opinion polls show the race on a knife-edge, as the ruling Labour party and its coalition partners fight to defend the Nordic welfare model against opposition calls for lower taxes and more free enterprise.

“We already have conservative governments in Sweden and Denmark,” Ms Jensen pointed out in an interview with the Financial Times on Sunday. “So the Nordic model is over-rated.”

With Finland also controlled by the centre-right, Norway is the last bastion of social democratic rule in the Nordic region, with the exception of Iceland, which shifted to the left after last year’s banking crisis.

Mr Stoltenberg is hoping his government’s response to the global downturn will help him become the first Norwegian prime minister to be re-elected in 16 years, as the country’s oil wealth helps insulate the country from the sharp recessions suffered by its Nordic neighbours.

Rules limiting how much of the country’s $400bn oil fund can be spent each year were temporarily cast aside to stimulate the economy, keeping unemployment at about 3 per cent, compared with nearly 8 per cent in Sweden and Finland.

Gross domestic product, excluding oil, returned to growth in the second quarter after a mild recession—the country’s first in two decades.

“This is a stable government that stood up to the financial crisis—that is our central message,” says Jonas Gahr Store, Norway’s foreign minister and a senior Labour official, in an interview.

Ms Jensen’s Progress party wants to permanently relax limits on oil spending to lower taxes and invest in infrastructure—tapping into voter misgivings about the country’s strategy of hoarding oil revenues while keeping tax rates among the highest in Europe.

“We are one of the richest countries in the world, yet our health and education systems have all sorts of problems,” says Lotti Lovold, a retired medic, strolling along a parade of party campaign stands in a central Oslo park.

“We should use the oil money to bring them up to standard.”

Ms Lovold’s husband, Per, is drawn to Progress by its tough stance on immigration in a traditionally homogeneous country where immigrants now make up more than 10 per cent of the population.

“We have been paying for this welfare system for years and these people are coming in and robbing us,” he says.

Ms Jensen has played down the immigration issue during this campaign as she seeks to push her party from the margins to the mainstream. For the first time, the Conservative party, the second-largest opposition faction, has said it is willing to work with Progress in a coalition government, but potential centrist allies remain wary.

If opposition parties cannot reach agreement, the left may be able to remain in power even without a majority.

Ms Jensen says she is willing to make concessions in order to unify the right—perhaps even forfeiting the prime minister’s job, provided her party has a strong hand in government. “My priority is the policymaking, not the position,” she says.

People on the left are horrified by the thought of Ms Jensen in power. Greta Johnson, a retired teacher, says the Labour party represents “the Norway I know”.

“This party has been good to me,” she says. “If we switched to a more capitalist system I would lose the benefits I have been paying for all my life.”

Original article

(Posted on September 14, 2009)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment     Send This Page      Search

Comments

1 — Anonymous wrote at 7:04 PM on September 14:

I sure know how I would vote if I were a Norwegian.

2 — Anonymous wrote at 7:13 PM on September 14:

“This party has been good to me,” she says. “If we switched to a more capitalist system I would lose the benefits I have been paying for all my life.”

Rich socialists are the biggest hypocrites. They need immigration and cheap labour to fund their comfortable, privileged lifestyles.

In an economic crisis, they’re the first to sellout their supposed allies: the working poor and the environmentalists.

3 — Reggie18b wrote at 7:24 PM on September 14:

‘Centre right’ just means more of the same.

4 — Istvan wrote at 7:28 PM on September 14:

Use the oil revenues to boot the third worlders out. Then you can lower taxes because you’ll have less need to fix troubled schools, you’ll need less police, fewer prison guards, fewer rape crises centers, less cultural sensitivity training - oh the list is endless.

5 — Whiteplight wrote at 8:00 PM on September 14:

“This party has been good to me,” she says. “If we switched to a more capitalist system I would lose the benefits I have been paying for all my life.”

> This is the of false fear many older conservatives in the U.S. - in a way. My parents worked 20 years for the government via civilian services at an Air Force Base and have been getting fat pensions for the past 34 years including healthcare AND Medicare. But they don’t want “Obamacare” - that would be too Xocialist. The truth is that they fear a reformation of our benefits system because they might be found out. That fear makes them righteously angry (they are political Christians too) and they know every slogan Rush and others manufacture for their daily use.

If this country was 100% white they would still insist that those who cannot pay for their own care are bums and expecting a free ride. This is the level of hypocrisy in our current situation with the healthcare debate. Government support is fine for those who get government jobs or espouse the right politics or got into the biggest communist organization in the world - the U.S. Military Services (think about it). Our military also delivers free healthcare to foreign civilians as part of a so-called “Hearts and Minds” campaign. But we have been providing welfare for a high number of non-U.S. citizens abroad for decades. GW Bush himself spent many millions on Africa AIDS relief alone. But we don’t want any slackers among U.S. Citizens, do we? The whole system would fail if we weren’t sticking it to the working classes and working poor. They turn out to be just about the only people in the world who are not or will not be on some sort of government program.

Today, a poll showed that 70% of U.S. doctors support nationalized healthcare. We are sick of dealing with the insurance scams and irrate patients who take it out on the docs and staff. Many docs retired early during the 90’s managed care debacle out of pure frustration. The frustration to patients has made them litegious as well. The only people winning in all this are attorneys. I just love all these instant experts popping up all around now that there is legislation on the table - but you are all dupes.

I predict that insurance companies will win big again and healthcare services will become even more difficult for actual Americans. Illegals will merely continue to show up at emergency rooms and compel staff to treat them.

This country is so messed up - it will never get it right.

6 — KC wrote at 8:36 PM on September 14:

““This party has been good to me,” she says. “If we switched to a more capitalist system I would lose the benefits I have been paying for all my life.””

Yes, but unless you stop immigration, you’ll be paying out benefits to someone else and your welfare state will become unsubstainable.


7 — ATBOTL wrote at 9:46 PM on September 14:

Let’s hope not. Margaret Thatcher did nothing to slow immigration, nor did she reform the welfare system.

8 — Petrarch wrote at 10:40 PM on September 14:

The bottom line is Open borders means no boarders which means no real nation, no real identity, no ability to accrue a higher level of existence according to individual or group resourcefulness. Marxism,…carpetbaggers,gypsies and theives opportuning on the dilligent.

9 — Whitey wrote at 11:34 PM on September 14:

Its too late. Malmo is a hive of dark angry muslims. A dying populace and a fecund immigrant class. Like war was to the Great Depression so it will be for western nations in order to save themselves.

10 — ATBOTL wrote at 4:10 AM on September 15:

Malmo is not in Norway.

11 — KC wrote at 6:06 AM on September 15:

“If this country was 100% white they would still insist that those who cannot pay for their own care are bums and expecting a free ride. But we have been providing welfare for a high number of non-U.S. citizens abroad for decades. GW Bush himself spent many millions on Africa AIDS relief alone. But we don’t want any slackers among U.S. Citizens, do we?”

A good point. While I don’t believe in socialized medicine(single payer) for various reasons, I do believe that working people should get huge tax cuts to purchase their own insurance instead of getting it through work and that government medical insurance should be extended to those who fall between the cracks and can’t afford medical insurance ie. the unemployed, low wage earners, early retirees not eligable yet for medicare, people who have a bad medical history and can’t get insurance etc.. In order to do this, we must stop giving free medical care to illegals and to the other non-citizens yet we subsidize all these non-citizens while expecting americans who can’t afford insurance or medical care to fend for themselves. A nation should take care of its’ own.

12 — Anonymous wrote at 9:48 AM on September 15:


“This party has been good to me,” she says. “If we switched to a more capitalist system I would lose the benefits I have been paying for all my life.”


The figures I’ve heard for Norway is that their immigrant Muslims comprise 5% of the population yet consume an astounding 40% of the country’s social services. This lefty teacher quoted above seems either not to know this; or (more likely) knows it but would rather die than say it out loud.

In other words, the generous benefits package that this Norwegian teacher fears losing is much more likely to disappear due to slovenly, hostile foreign invaders than due to anti-immigrant politician Siv Jensen.

13 — Xenophon wrote at 10:28 AM on September 15:

It’s all a moot point. She did not win. The political inertia is too strong in Norway. They must play out this sorry drama to the bitter end.

14 — Mike wrote at 1:40 PM on September 15:

When did the immigrant population hit 10% of Norway’s total population?!

It’d be nice to see some statistics.

15 — Fr. John wrote at 5:13 PM on September 16:

“Norway is the last bastion of social democratic rule in the Nordic region, “

Not only that. In the last three years, the Norwegians have had the highest rape rates in Scandinavia, and 100% of those rapes were done by Non-Native Non-Caucasoid Males.

Immigrants, in fact.

Ah, diversity. Could we call the new party this woman is heading, the ‘Quisling Redevivus’ party? (please- for the sake of Norwegian women, some of the most beautiful in the world?)

16 — ATBOTL wrote at 12:42 AM on September 17:

100% percent of rapes in Norway were not done by immigrants. Why would you say something obviously false?


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Send This Page      Search