Iceland in EU. Yes or no?

It is official!!

The oldest parliament in the world has voted 'yes' to a future EU membership. :jumping:

Quote:

---

Parliament in Iceland has voted by a narrow majority to set in motion an application to join the European Union, after five days of gruelling debate.

Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir of the Social Democrats has also been pushing for the adoption of the euro as the Nordic country's currency.

The bid must now be approved by the EU, after which Iceland's people will be asked to vote on it in a referendum. Ms Sigurdardottir said that several years of negotiations lay ahead.


The main benefits of EU membership at the moment would be the possibility of joining the exchange rate mechanism, and eventually adopting the euro. EU commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso welcomed the vote, saying Iceland was a "European country with long and deep democratic roots".
Opponents of the bid fear EU quotas could hurt Iceland's fishing industry. Correspondents say Iceland, with a population of just 320,000, has traditionally been sceptical about joining the EU.
But many people there have warmed to the idea of membership following the devastating economic meltdown which saw the top Icelandic banks collapse in a matter of days last year.

---

Needless to say, I am very excited by this. Go Vikings!

Plunder Bruxelles at will so long as you send us your women! :iceland:

The colonials are acting up again...

The only sensible action for Iceland is, of course, to embrace Norwegian overlordship again. Together we will rule the world!! The monks on England's coast will scream with horror!




Btw Louis, not to crush your hopes, but the woman they will send most is their PM.... And she's gay....

If this is a step towards making Old Norse the sole official language of the EU; then, by all means, I am all for it.

As for the genetical health of the women in such a small populace on an isolated island, uh...I remain unconvinced of the superiority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Btw Louis, not to crush your hopes, but the woman they will send most is their PM.... And she's gay....

---

Great news for LGBT community, a woman and homosexual. Go Iceland.

i dont see why not. are there even any icelanders in the backroom?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

i dont see why not. are there even any icelanders in the backroom?

---

As there are only some 300.000 of them, chances are rather low....

EDIT: As to "why not"; it's fishing. That's the main concern for iceland, that the EU will chop up their quotas, drive away the local fishermen and overfish, thus emptying their banks....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

EDIT: As to "why not"; it's fishing. That's the main concern for iceland, that the EU will chop up their quotas, drive away the local fishermen and overfish, thus emptying their banks....

---

Too late! :drummer:

For, because the more the EU expands the more likely it will be to potentially implode.
Against, because I dislike the EU and don't want it expanding in the chance that it has a power increase because of it.

Choices...

It's up to them, if they say they want in I say they're welcome.

The fishy issue is worrysome, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

The fishy issue is worrysome, though.

---

Fishery is an unmitigated environmental catastrophe.

Short-sighted local interests means that the EU fishing quota are set at unsustainable levels. I have some hope Iceland could talk some sense into other countries. Hopefully, but not likely. Which is why the Icelandic Green Party voted 'no' today.

As it stands, any proposed lowering of fish quota to sustainable levels is met everywhere within the EU with furious allegations of intrusive 'Brussels bureaucracy', out to destroy fishing communities. No amount of structural funds to support other means of income can placate the fury. They'll fish and fish until everything is gone.

In Iceland fish stocks are as depleted as foreign bank accounts. For the foreseeable future, fishery won't save Iceland I think. Doesn't matter. All nations that have joined the EU were bankrupt and in need of economic re-structuring upon joining (except the class of 1995). It is what the EU specialises in.


For the sake of fun:

Cod Wars.

The wars that raged after WWII between Iceland and the UK over fish. Iceland's navy vs the Royal Navy. Iceland won.

There raged a similar war between Norway and Iceland I think.

Quote:

---

Fishery is an unmitigated environmental catastrophe.

---

Yes, it is.

Quote:

---

As it stands, any proposed lowering of fish quota to sustainable levels is met everywhere within the EU with furious allegations of intrusive 'Brussels bureaucracy', out to destroy fishing communities.

---

Until last year the fishing quota for tuna in the mediteranean was actually very close to what's considered sustaintable. The problem is that most countries have fishing fleets capable of easily exceeding this amount on their own. The fishing quota is a farce; Italian fishermen justify their behaviour by pointing out that the French and Spanish are doing the same. And none of those countries are interested in enforcing the rules.

One of the arguments against Icelandic entry, from their own perspective, is that their own fishing regulations are at least as good and are enforced properly.

Of course, I have some hope that today's vote will have an impact on another small Atlantic Island state...

Almost equally in the grip of fast money made from lax financial and taxation laws, and left almost as ravaged because of it. :idea2:



@Kralizec. Yes, it only ever takes a handful of angry fishermen for Paris or local authorities to cave in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Of course, I have some hope that today's vote will have an impact on another small Atlantic Island state...

Almost equally in the grip of fast money made from lax financial and taxation laws, and left almost as ravaged because of it. :idea2:

---

Of course, Ireland's problems would be alleviated somewhat if they joined her neighbours to the east, who reside in splendour in the English Ocean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Of course, Ireland's problems would be alleviated somewhat if they joined her neighbours to the east, who reside in splendour in the English Ocean.

---

Why didn't I think of that!? :wall:

Instead of 'Lisbon: for or against', give them this referendum:
A) Join Europe, free and independent.
B) Join England.

:idea2:

Would be interesting to see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

As there are only some 300.000 of them, chances are rather low....

EDIT: As to "why not"; it's fishing. That's the main concern for iceland, that the EU will chop up their quotas, drive away the local fishermen and overfish, thus emptying their banks....

---

Papa always says the Norse (including the insane Vikings in that particular colony) are better at managing fish than anyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Fishery is an unmitigated environmental catastrophe.

Short-sighted local interests means that the EU fishing quota are set at unsustainable levels. I have some hope Iceland could talk some sense into other countries. Hopefully, but not likely. Which is why the Icelandic Green Party voted 'no' today.

As it stands, any proposed lowering of fish quota to sustainable levels is met everywhere within the EU with furious allegations of intrusive 'Brussels bureaucracy', out to destroy fishing communities. No amount of structural funds to support other means of income can placate the fury. They'll fish and fish until everything is gone.

In Iceland fish stocks are as depleted as foreign bank accounts. For the foreseeable future, fishery won't save Iceland I think. Doesn't matter. All nations that have joined the EU were bankrupt and in need of economic re-structuring upon joining (except the class of 1995). It is what the EU specialises in.


For the sake of fun:

Cod Wars.

The wars that raged after WWII between Iceland and the UK over fish. Iceland's navy vs the Royal Navy. Iceland won.

There raged a similar war between Norway and Iceland I think.

---

The problem is not quotas, it is the failure to establish no-fish zones, and the way the caps encourage trawlermen to throw back excess of one species and keep fishing, instead of filling up and returning to port with a full hold.

If th EU established large no-fish zones and prosecuted trawlermen found in those zones stocks would begin to recover quite quickly. Instead, we have totally useless quotas.

Edit: I'd like to point out that the Cod Wars hark back to a time when we had 22 Frigates to spare. :thumbsdown:

Iceland. Geo-thermal energy production champion of the world.

Cute, yet sturdy girls.

We shudda offered 'em Statehood.

Dang.

I think we need to start a bidding war for those Icelandic women. NAFTA should make a bid.

Voted: "I'm Icelandic but support a Gahyser Union"

because it's not my place to tell the people of iceland what political groupings they should join.

they did very well outside the EU, however the current financial crisis has obviously made icelandic politicians value security more than opportunity, we shall see if the icelandic people hold the same view come the referendum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Why didn't I think of that!? :wall:

Instead of 'Lisbon: for or against', give them this referendum:
A) Join Europe, free and independent.
B) Join England.

:idea2:

---

Is that a joke? Free and independent in Europe? Joint something with Tony Blair as the first President once everyone gets crushed by the re-votes until they get the "right" answer?

Joining the EU is akain to going to a loanshark in difficult times. Sure, you get the money and a big smile, but then you find you've sold your future.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Is that a joke? Free and independent in Europe? Joint something with Tony Blair as the first President once everyone gets crushed by the re-votes until they get the "right" answer?

Joining the EU is akain to going to a loanshark in difficult times. Sure, you get the money and a big smile, but then you find you've sold your future.

~:smoking:

---

We in England respect democracy. Once a vote is held, its result matters. However, we may whip you into compliance to ensure the right result comes through.

Yes, but the government also reserves the right not to vote if it feels it might loose, and hence on some decisions best not give the populace the vote who might vote incorrectly and instead roundly whip the politicians to do the "right" thing... and considering the number in the EU bureaucracy who are washed up domestic MPs or wives (the Kinnocks anyone?) it's hardly a bad thing.

And although the result matters, issues can be "revisited" which amounts to trying to overturn a previous decision.

After all, this is the reason we hadn't yet had an election as by delaying Brown is definitely in power, by holding one he's probably not.

~:smoking:

It is now up to the EU to negotiate terms. I say hit 'em while they're down. My list of demands of puny Iceland:

- Higher education on the island of Iceland must be forbidden. Instead, it will be cumpulsory for all women aged 18-24 to spend these years abroad for their adult education.
- Meanwhile all Icelandic men aged 18-24 must perform compulsory military service in Iceland and do something useful involving ice caps or polar bears or something.
- An end to whaling.
- A treaty that finally settles all territorial disputes with the UK, involving a public statement by Elisabeth II that the Royal Navy was defeated by Iceland.
- Agriculture will not be subsidized. Subsidized agriculture in Iceland is as sensible as subsidized skiing resorts in Sicily.
- Iceland must agree to the following stimulus package and economic restruturing: the EU in Brussels and Strasbourg will need interpreters from Old Norse to and from the other twenty-odd official languages of the EU. This will permanently employ half of the Icelandic working population.

Iceland already got fleeced by politicians, bank officials & business leaders taking advantage of finance deregulation *boy that sounds vaguely familiar too, if only I can put my finger on it*. If those are the terms, I wouldn't be surprised if the Icelanders vote to fart in the EU's general direction.~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

fart in the EU's general direction.~;)

---

You are just envious they came running to us instead of to you. :book:

But then, we've always had that effect on Viking godesses.


I have not felt this superior since my girlfriend's cat hurt its wee little paw and then rushed over to me for consolation instead of to her. She sat purring on my lap for hours. So I threw her off to see to the cat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

You are just envious they came running to us instead of to you. :book:

But then, we've always had that effect on Viking godesses.


I have not felt this superior since my girlfriend's cat hurt its wee little paw and then rushed over to me for consolation instead of to her. She sat purring on my lap for hours. So I threw her off to see to the cat.

---

And i was under the impression that in the past it was the vikings carrying your women to their ships while their husbands were performing a strategic retreat or something akin to that. Silly me.:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

You are just envious they came running to us instead of to you. :book:

---

Hah, they came running to us first!

Re: Iceland's economy. I agree on the fishing issue, it's way overdone and quotas must be lowered across the board.

Iceland needs to jump on two things it has going for it.

First, it's experience and movement towards being near totally independent from fossil fuel needs. I think they want to be self-sufficient by 2050 but are on target for 2030. Geothermal is a biggie. The sleeping giant that I am hoping for is proof that hydrogen-based personal and public transportation is doable. Still, it'll never happen in the US until Exxon and the other big oil companies can figure out how to monopolize it and charge just as much, if not more than now, for hydrogen than gas.

Second, tourism. Specifically eco/geo-tourism. Where others see barren wastelands, I see gorgeous natural landscapes and tons of active volcanoes. There is a LOT of pure, untouched, unspoiled land there that. If the price were right, I'd absolutely go visit for a chunk of time. They need to figure out how to make that attractive and cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whacker

Re: Iceland's economy. I agree on the fishing issue, it's way overdone and quotas must be lowered across the board.

---

And the EU, one one issue where a united implementation would make sense... let individual states set quotas.

The EU isn't there to make hard, unpopular choices! :dizzy2:

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

And the EU, one one issue where a united implementation would make sense... let individual states set quotas.

The EU isn't there to make hard, unpopular choices! :dizzy2:

~:smoking:

---

The EU would love love love to make hard, unpopular choices. It can't, owing to the national choruses of 'undermined sovereignity!'. Is there a country where the fishing lobby does not accuse the EU of destroying their livelyhood?

National ministers of fisheries go into the European negotiations with the interests of their fishing industry in mind, not that of fishing in general. Each one trying to get as large a share of the dwindling stocks for his own country as possible.

The fight, in the popular press, is between an evil European bureaucracy that is out to destroy fishing communities and strip them of their sovereign rights to fish 'as they've always done'. Whereas the real fight is that between the one viable solution: pan-national agreements, enforced at that; and the shortsighted interests of fishing industry, otherwise known as plunder, which has unfortunately managed to present its interests as 'national interests'.

This is precisely why I want the EU to move forward. That it can make hard, unpopular choices without having to cater to all these short-sighted national interests.

Quote:

---

has become an event almost as traditional as Christmas itself. Each year, just before the holidays, the European Union's fisheries ministers gather to hash out the next year's permitted catches in EU waters.

And each year, the politicians find themselves snagged between the demands of scientists to protect stocks - particularly cod - and those of fishermen to protect their livelihoods. (See, for example, our stories on the meeting from 2004 and 2003.)

The 2006 meeting proved no different, reaching a middle-ground compromise that pleased neither camp. The EU Fisheries Minister Joe Borg said: "The result was a proposal that has been severely criticised by all sides for being too drastic for some and too weak for others." He argues the new quotas represent a "gradual but sustained approach to delivering sustainable fisheries".

But Tom Pickerell, at wildlife campaign group WWF, said: "The scientists must wonder why they bother with their surveys. It amazes me that world-class survey results are treated with such disdain, while anecdotal views from [fishermen] with vested interests in maintaining quotas are often given credence. We will now need a miracle to save cod."

David Read, Vice President of the Royal Society - the UK national academy of science - added: "Yet again we have seen scientific advice on cod quotas being compromised by political decisions. Given the already alarming condition of stocks, European Fisheries Ministers should be clear that they may be presiding over the total collapse of cod in the Atlantic. And if this does happen, we can't be sure that there is any possibility of recovery."

A major study, published in the journal Science in November 2006 predicted that all commercial fisheries may die out by 2050.

---

newscientist.com