Brexit and Norway: What to Avoid


NINTCHDBPICT000246785102

The pseudonymous writer Fjordman had his identity outed because the crazy mass-murderer Anders Breivik admired and cherry-picked Fjordman’s writings. Breivik’s admiration led the Norwegian authorities to accuse the famous counterjihadist as an accomplice by association. Of course Fjordman was exonerated of all suspicion much to the contempt of all European Leftist Multiculturalists. The Multiculturalists had cast so much disdain onto Fjordman that he fled his homeland Norway over death threats for a while. That was a while ago so I am uncertain of his current living conditions. HOWEVER, I am quite pleased he is still writing.

 

I found a recent Fjordman essay at the Gatestone Institute. The essay analyzes the choices the UK faces after Brexit and lists Norway and Switzerland’s non-EU membership as horrible models to follow.

 

JRH 9/16/16

Please Support NCCR

**************

Brexit and Norway: What to Avoid

 

By Fjordman

September 15, 2016 at 4:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • “[Britain wants] to be like Switzerland but they don’t know that Switzerland has to pay an enormous amount to the EU… They will have to accept the free movement of people and pay high fees and accept some laws which they would have no influence on.” — Daniel Pedroletti, president of the Swiss community group New Helvetic Society London.

 

  • Norway is the only country that has adopted all EU directives before their deadline. Norway, which is supposedly not a member of the EU, thus implements EU rules and regulations more obediently than do the founding members France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

 

  • Most of Norway’s laws are currently written by bureaucrats in Brussels, not by elected parliamentarians in Norway.

 

  • The citizens of Norway rejected membership in the EU, twice. Opinion polls today show that a very large majority of Norwegians are against membership in the EU. Despite this, the nation’s politicians have made the country more or less a member of the EU, only without any influence or voting rights — in opposition to the popular will, and possibly also in violation of the country’s Constitution.

 

  • The British should study the case of Norway closely. But mainly as a negative example of what to avoid.

 

On June 23, 2016, 51.9% of the voters in the United Kingdom voted for leaving the European Union (EU). The turnout was high, and the British referendum gained great international attention. Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s National Front, praised the result, calling Brexit “the most important moment since the fall of the Berlin Wall.” Le Pen said that if she wins France’s 2017 presidential election she would call a referendum on leaving the EU.

 

Nigel Farage stepped down as leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) shortly after winning the historic vote. Many death threats against him and his family from supporters of the EU reportedly affected his decision.

 

The complicated divorce process between the UK and the EU could take years of negotiations. Some people have looked to Switzerland and Norway, two of the wealthiest countries in Europe, as possible models to follow, yet both maintain a close cooperation with the EU. There are also concerns in Switzerland and Norway about how Brexit will impact their own relationship with the EU.

 

Daniel Pedroletti, president of the Swiss community group New Helvetic Society London, says there is “a big misunderstanding” in Britain surrounding Switzerland’s position:

 

“They want to be like Switzerland but they don’t know that Switzerland has to pay an enormous amount to the EU and accept the laws without being an influence [on them].

 

“They don’t realize that if they want a similar agreement they will have to accept the free movement of people and pay high fees and accept some laws which they would have no influence on.”

 

Though not a full member of the EU, Switzerland has over 120 bilateral agreements in place with the bloc — its main trading partner.

 

Nigel Farage does not want Britain to emulate Norway’s deal with the EU. It is terrible, he says. The Norwegian people rejected membership in the EU. Yet the Norwegian Parliament (Stortinget) has “deceived the people” and got Norway into a very bad agreement with the EU, according to Farage.

 

Norwegians voted against joining the European Community/European Union twice, in 1972 and in 1994. After the 1994 referendum, the country’s political leaders designed a close association deal with the EU. This is the EEA Agreement, known as the EØS Agreement in Norwegian. This does not cover common agriculture and fisheries policies. Control over natural resources is sensitive in a country with a long coastline plus major offshore deposits of oil and natural gas. Yet apart from a few such exceptions, Norway in reality became an associate member of the EU after 1994. EEA membership requires the free movement of persons, services, goods and capital with the EU. Norway is also a part of the open-borders Schengen Agreement, which has severely weakened checking migrants and asylum seekers across much of Europe.

 

Statistics from 2016 show that of all the 31 countries in the EU and the European Economic Area (EEA), Norway is the only country that has adopted all EU directives before their deadline. Norway retained its top position for the third year in a row. Its two fellow EEA countries, Iceland and Liechtenstein, were the worst at implementing directives. Norway, which is supposedly not a member of the EU, thus implements EU rules and regulations more obediently than do the founding members France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. This may surprise people who view Norway’s relationship with the EU as something to emulate.

 

Most of Norway’s laws are currently written by bureaucrats in Brussels, not by elected parliamentarians in Norway. Some scholars warn that the transfer of power to the EU is so great that it violates Norway’s Constitution and seriously undermines the democratic system.

 

norwegian-prime-minister-erna-solberg-european-commission-president-jean-claude-juncker

Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg with European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, on January 21, 2015. (Image source: Norway Prime Minister’s Office)

 

In June 2016, the Norwegian Parliament voted overwhelmingly to attach the nation to the EU’s financial supervision. Critics decried this as the “biggest concession of sovereignty” in many years. With a vote of 136 in favor and 29 against, Parliament approved a bill that would tie Norway’s regulation of financial and insurance institutions to EU rules. Center Party leader Trygve Slagsvold Vedum opposed the bill and warned that it was “a circumvention of the Constitution.” The group “No to the EU” stated that Parliament had gone directly against the will of the people by weakening national sovereignty. An opinion poll showed just 26 percent of Norwegians supported the plan to tie Norway to the EU’s financial oversight.

 

The citizens of Norway have rejected membership in the EU, twice. Public opinion has been consistently against membership for decades. Opinion polls today show that a very large majority of Norwegians are against membership in the EU. Despite this, the nation’s politicians have made the country more or less a member of the EU, only without any influence or voting rights. The politicians have done this in opposition to the popular will, and possibly also in violation of the country’s Constitution.

 

Britain is a larger country with a much bigger economy than Norway. This will give it a stronger position in negotiations with the EU and others. However, it would be a mistake not to learn from the experiences of other nations. When shaping their future relationship with the EU, the British should study the case of Norway closely. But mainly as a negative example of what to avoid.

_____________________________

 

© 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor Full Disclosure: I failed to ask for that “written consent”.]

 

About Gatestone Institute

 

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.”
— John Adams

 

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

 

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;

 

  • Human Rights

 

  • A free and strong economy

 

  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world

 

  • Energy independence

 

  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

 

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

 

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and their possible consequences, and the READ THE REST

 

For God, Country, Family and Queen


Brexit - British Exit of EU

Here is what I believe an American viewpoint on the Brexit decision UK voters will decide on June 23, 2016. In case you are out of the news loop, Brits are deciding to remain or leave their membership in the European Union (EU). There are a bit of economics and sovereignty issues agitating a significant amount of Brits pertaining to this referendum. However, it appears to me the hugest issue leaning toward leaving is the EU is imposing European nation members – including the United Kingdom – to accept unvetted Muslim refugees from war zones in which ISIS is slaughtering non-Muslims and the seeming increase of violence in other Muslim nations against indigenous Christians trapped in a mandatory allegiance Islamic Sharia Law.

 

We Americans don’t like to be told what to accept and to not accept from a foreign capital. Even though the UK is an EU member, the Brussels capital city is still a foreign capital to Brits.

 

JRH 6/13/16

Please Support NCCR

*********************

For God, Country, Family and Queen

Will U.K. Embrace Freedom

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 6/11/2016 2:52 PM

 

The majority of the United Kingdom’s people currently understand that they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by leaving the European Union. They refuse to be bullied by Eurocrats, such as German Chancellor Angele Merkel and French President Francois Hollande, who advocate a single European government being forced on all EU members, along with a dysfunctional, multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual progressive vision for society. They seek to regain the U.K.’s lost sovereign power. And, they will take measures to strengthen their democracy, national security and economy, by taking an enormously beneficial step toward reshaping their future and marking their vote to leave the European Union on June 23rd.

 

A federal Europe, a powerful centralized government for Europe, was never a British dream, however, the EU has steadily worked towards that end, even though it began as an economic partnership only. The EU now maintains its own parliament and supreme court, and more often than not, the U.K.’s demands are dismissed by this “economic partnership”, since Britain holds a small minority of voting rights within the EU.

 

The EU makes 60% of the U.K.’s laws [Blog Editor: Both UK-Leave and UK-Remain offer legitimate stats on the law issue. Determining who is correct is largely subjective to how the particulars affects any particular group], in corporate business, manufacturing, farming, oil exploration, medical research, transportation and real estate. It has also forced Britain to accept millions of people from other EU nations into its country, and too often, it has been at Britain’s expense, when poor Europeans take advantage of the U.K.’s welfare system.

 

Any properly led nation should not desire membership in the business inhibiting EU, a political entity that mandates 2,009 word regulations on matters like growing and processing walnuts for sale. There are only Ten Commandments in the Bible, 66 words in the Lord’s Prayer and 270 words in the Gettysburg Address.

 

In a desperate attempt to force Britain to remain in the EU, Prime Minister David Cameron has even sought allies in the Labor Party, such as former union chief Brendan Barber and former Labor Minister Harriet Harman. Both the Conservative and Labor Parties are split on the Brexit issue, and about half of the Labor Party sees Brussels as a protector for strikes without ballots and an ally in the Courts.

 

Noting that Conservative budget cuts are dwarfed by payments to the EU, the Labor Member of Parliament Kate Hoey has stated that the EU backs big business and tramples down British workers’ wages, even as it exploits Eastern European wages. Her view is supported by R.M.T., the left-wing labor union, and their assessment just happens to be accurate in this case.

 

In a recent Ipsos Mori poll, 58% of Britons don’t believe Brexit will harm their standard of living, and if the Telegraph’s May 31st report on EU fraud is accurate, the U.K. is certainly heading for greener pastures by leaving. More than $955 million (670 Sterling) was lost to fraud last year, and although four in ten EU officials were implicated in these crimes, only a few have been fired.

 

Compounding the EU’s economic funk, the EU is also trying to force Britain and the entire EU membership to follow German Chancellor Merkel’s example, the worst foreign policy decision in Europe since 1945, by opening up its country to millions of Muslims, who do not qualify as “refugees” in any classical definition. Thousands of these “refugees” are aggressive, young able-bodied men, of fighting age, who enter Europe chanting “Allahu Akbar.”

 

The EU has zero respect or concern for its members’ national sovereignty, and its recent threat to fine Poland $1.5 billion for refusing to accept Muslim refugees/invaders illustrates this perfectly. It also shows how much power it believes it holds, and it will not leave the U.K. unscathed from its tyrannical shenanigans, if Britain remains.

 

A fierce and relentless critic of the EU, Poland has its own “Polexit” movement underway to leave the EU. Several other nations, such as Sweden, Switzerland, France, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have similar movements ongoing; they all have one thing in common, in that they want a Europe comprised of free nations. Also, some countries, like Poland and Hungary, assert that the current massive wave of Muslim migrants threatens both their national security and their country’s Christian identity.

 

Ironically, Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski pointedly suggested that hundreds of thousands of Syrian male “refugees” of fighting age should be in Syria fighting, rather than being dispersed throughout the EU nations. He stated: “They expect us [the West] to send our troops to fight and die for Syria, while hundreds of thousands of Syrians sip coffee — at the old town square, chatting up our women, and watch us fight for their security.”

 

“Are these happy young men really timid souls fleeing war and prosecution? They aren’t quite the heart-rending image of disheveled, traumatized refugees fleeing the horror of their war-torn home country one might expect”, blared the Britain Express.

 

In April, Nigel Farage, UKIP leader, noted that the Muslim migration was “a fifth column living within our communities, that hates us, and wants to kill us and … overturn our complete way of life.” Continuing further, Farage stated: “… the Christians of Syria and Iraq … only 10% of what they were a few years ago … qualify for refugee status because they’ve been persecuted for who they are. I want us to welcome genuine refugees, not the disaster that is engulfing much of Europe today.”

 

Britain already leads Europe’s intelligence community, and much of Britain’s national security concerns are handled through NATO, so Brexit will cost Britain next to nothing. However, the gains will be substantial, in that the U.K. can exit the anti-nation state European Convention on Human Rights, making it easier to extradite and deport terrorists, and more importantly, the U.K. will be able to assert and enforce its own immigration policy without EU interference.

 

Yisrael Katz, Israel’s Intelligence Minister, observed that the EU has lost focus of its security issues, as its leaders continue “to eat chocolate and enjoy the good life with their liberalism and democracy.”

 

Chris Grayling, leader of the British House of Commons, drives home the case for Brexit with the most important point in his May 23rd Washington Post editorial, stating: “It is much more accurate to consider the differences between parts of the European Union in terms of a comparison between the United States and Bolivia, rather than one between Nevada and Maryland. Different countries, different cultures, different economies, with huge gulfs between them[.] … The United States would never accept a situation in which the countries of Latin America could join together and decide what laws should apply in Washington. It rightly expects to be a strong, independent country. That’s what I want for Britain too.”

 

Britons __ rally, for God, country, family and Queen, and reject the EU’s globalist designed tyranny that has no regard for your struggles to secure a council flat, a doctor’s appointment, a seat for your child in a good school and the harm caused by the greatest wave of immigration in U.K. history. Reject the EU’s, the Bank of England’s and the International Monetary Fund’s failed crap economic experiment that has created unemployment rates of 38% to 48% in many EU nations. And, if you love England and wish her to survive as a unique nation, reject the dark night the EU has planned for her and embrace control of your nation and your destiny on June 23rd by embracing freedom: Vote Leave.

 

By Justin O. Smith

_____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links as well as text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith