User avatar
Mortyman
Topic Author
Posts: 5741
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:33 pm

As most of you no doubt know, Norway is one of the few European countries that is not an EU member. We're only member of the economic part of it.

Personally, I'm happy that we're not a member. I feel that the EU is a good thing for the bigger nations, but not so much for the smaller ones. Norway would have very little to say in the EU against the bigger nations if we were to be a member.

Now, you can argue that Norway does'nt have anything at all to say when we're not a member. But atleast we can say no.


Why should Norway become a member in your opinion ?

Is it really that worthwile to be part of it. Ha it really been good for the various nations that are now part ?


Share your opinions here
 
TWFirst
Posts: 5752
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 5:30 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:42 pm

Your Nordic neighbors of Danmark, Sverige & Suomi are members. What value do they see that Norge doesn't?
An unexamined life isn't worth living.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Topic Author
Posts: 5741
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:47 pm

I don't think that our Scandinavian friends has gotten that much out of being members.

Norway's independence is also very important to us. it's not that old. We just don't like the idea of having to go with the flow in the EU.
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Membe

Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:55 pm

I'd say that you are sort of fooling yourselves by saying you're not an EU member. I mean that with good humor  Smile Of course, purely technically you are not, but you are an EFTA member since its founding in 1960 and EEA member.

Practically this means you already are a junior member of the EU, while that wasn't true when you first joined EFTA. Things have changed a lot since then. The EU didn't exist then and a number of other things.

Then Norway is also member of the EEA and Schengen. By being part of the EEA, Norway is required to adapt EU legislation in most policy areas, without the ability to protest or affect that legislation.

The bottom line is that Norway has already become an inseparable part of the EU, but without the ability to affect EU legislation. Granted, that isn't the end of the world and Norway has survived fine so far, but in my mind it is a losing position in the long run. In other words, inside the EU Norway would perhaps not have immense power by itself, but as it is Norway has no power at all and yet can't separate itself from the EU. The EEA was designed to make transition easier, but the final product was always to be full EU membership.

Finally, as an aside and relevant to the other thread about EU languages and translations, an EU membership would mean Nynorsk would gain a status as an official EU language and that in and of itself would secure it for a long, long time to come.

Of course, since most Norwegians speak Bokmaal, they don't care so much about Nynorsk, but I would say that Nynorsk is an important heritage and should be preserved as a living language by all means possible.

This is how I see it.  Smile

saludos

Asturias
Tonight we fly
 
User avatar
yowza
Posts: 4506
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:01 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:55 pm

Norway is not as developed, stable and fitting a candidate as Romania was and would not be allowed in the EU.

Signed,
Asturias

In reality the country is doing fine without EU membership, why change things?

YOWza
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:58 pm



Quoting YOWza (Reply 4):
Norway is not as developed, stable and fitting a candidate as Romania was and would not be allowed in the EU.

Darn shame I posted before you did, eh?  Smile

Norway has been welcome into the EU since 1972. If they say the word, they're in. Simple as that.

saludos

Asturias
Tonight we fly
 
VonRichtofen
Posts: 4294
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 3:10 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:00 pm

Is it something to do with Norway's substantial oil?

I don't know much about it, but I could understand if Norwegians were weary of being "raped" of their natural resources by some EU program.
 
[email protected]
Posts: 11681
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 2:03 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:01 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 3):
I would say that Nynorsk is an important heritage and should be preserved as a living language by all means possible.

Eg samtykker på det sterkaste!  Smile

[email protected]
"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Topic Author
Posts: 5741
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:02 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 3):
I'd say that you are sort of fooling yourselves by saying you're not an EU member. I mean that with good humor Of course, purely technically you are not, but you are an EFTA member since its founding in 1960 and EEA member.

Practically this means you already are a junior member of the EU, while that wasn't true when you first joined EFTA. Things have changed a lot since then. The EU didn't exist then and a number of other things.

Then Norway is also member of the EEA and Schengen. By being part of the EEA, Norway is required to adapt EU legislation in most policy areas, without the ability to protest or affect that legislation.

The bottom line is that Norway has already become an inseparable part of the EU, but without the ability to affect EU legislation. Granted, that isn't the end of the world and Norway has survived fine so far, but in my mind it is a losing position in the long run. In other words, inside the EU Norway would perhaps not have immense power by itself, but as it is Norway has no power at all and yet can't separate itself from the EU. The EEA was designed to make transition easier, but the final product was always to be full EU membership.

Norwegians are fully aware of these facts.

yet, the polls show an increase of people against the EU. It's been a long time since the polls here in Norway has shown it so clearly.
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:05 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Reply 8):
Norwegians are fully aware of these facts.

yet, the polls show an increase of people against the EU. It's been a long time since the polls here in Norway has shown it so clearly.

Well, that's all there is to it. If you are aware of these facts and decide against the EU, what's there to discuss?  Cool

saludos

Asturias
Tonight we fly
 
User avatar
OA260
Posts: 23813
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:50 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:05 pm

I think Norway has done well without the EU and should stay the way they are.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Topic Author
Posts: 5741
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:05 pm



Quoting VonRichtofen (Reply 6):
Is it something to do with Norway's substantial oil?

I don't know much about it, but I could understand if Norwegians were weary of being "raped" of their natural resources by some EU program.

This is a good point

Norwegians also like the idea that we can have our own foreign policy and not hAVE TO GO WITH THE FLOW IN THE eu
 
SQ325
Posts: 1302
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:54 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:15 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Thread starter):
Why should Norway become a member in your opinion ?

To be honest I don' t know!
Norway is financially and economically very strong why gibe it away?
Not that I am against financial solidarity with in the EU.
But this entire subsidies thing between the EU states, from the left pocket in the right and return is ridiculous and makes no sense.
Why should Norway risk its budget surplus by paying subsidies for Spanish tomatoes or wheat from France!
Not to mention the money going to Countries like Bulgaria and Romania where corruption is still a huge problem in all levels.
 
Toast
Posts: 1249
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:04 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:19 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Thread starter):
I feel that the EU is a good thing for the bigger nations, but not so much for the smaller ones. Norway would have very little to say in the EU against the bigger nations if we were to be a member.

Yup, the EU screwed us over. Nobody cares what we say and our economy has gone downhill ever since we joined.

Signed,

Luxembourg
Shit Piss Fuck Cunt Cocksucker Motherfucker Tits
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:22 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 3):
Norway is required to adapt EU legislation in most policy areas, without the ability to protest or affect that legislation.

I think they've heard that a million times already in Norway -- you have reinvented a standard issue of nonsense from the Factory. If you are an EEA member, you're a member of an economic union only, not of a political union that will soon have have a federalist founding treaty. There's a world of difference.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21506
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:26 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Reply 11):
Norwegians also like the idea that we can have our own foreign policy and not hAVE TO GO WITH THE FLOW IN THE eu

Such as...?
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:27 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Reply 11):
Norwegians also like the idea that we can have our own foreign policy and not hAVE TO GO WITH THE FLOW IN THE eu

Spaniards also like this, which is why we do it. Every EU country has an independent foreign policy. This is a union of sovereign nations.

It's fine to be against the EU, but why not use facts based in reality? Why make them up when there are plenty of negative things to say about the EU?

 Confused

saludos

Asturias
Tonight we fly
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:29 pm



Quoting AverageUser (Reply 14):
I think they've heard that a million times already in Norway -- you have reinvented a standard issue of nonsense from the Factory. If you are an EEA member, you're a member of an economic union only, not of a political union that will soon have have a federalist founding treaty. There's a world of difference.

Disregarding your guesses about where the EU will be in the future, there are obligations to adapt certain EU legislation by being an EEA member, while being an EEA member doesn't give the nation any opportunity to affect, vote with or against said legislation.

Are you disputing that?

asturias
Tonight we fly
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:31 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 17):
while being an EEA member doesn't give the nation any opportunity to affect

You always have the absolute veto option, which you might have heard of in the UN context. This is due to the fact the EEA states are by law independent non-confederated states.
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:36 pm



Quoting AverageUser (Reply 18):
You always have the absolute veto option, which you might have heard of in the UN context. This is due to the fact the EEA states are by law independent non-confederated states.

Obviously, however I didn't think of mentioning it because within the framework of the EEA such a thing is inconceivable.

As a sovreign nation you can do anything you like, but then again, you can't while still upholding the EEA agreement. Only theoretically you can veto.

Now back to Earth:

And I pose the question again:

"there are obligations to adapt certain EU legislation by being an EEA member, while being an EEA member doesn't give the nation any opportunity to affect, vote with or against said legislation.

Are you disputing that?"

asturias
Tonight we fly
 
User avatar
SAS A340
Posts: 862
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 5:59 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:36 pm

There are of course + and - by being a member at the EU,personaly i like it more now than earlier, i also think that we see alot more what's going on in the EU in terms of debates an so on then Norway. I think that the Scandinavian region would have a lot in terms of "things to say" if Norway was a member due to the fact that we have in big terms the same values and lifestyles. I read a couple of moths ago that Denmark opinion is in favor for for the Euro currency and i think that if this would be the case,Sweden also would make a 360 in that question....don't know if that would have any effect on Norway and there Krona thou.....Anyhow i like to be a member!  highfive 
It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
 
DYflyer
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 3:06 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:44 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 3):
By being part of the EEA, Norway is required to adapt EU legislation in most policy areas, without the ability to protest or affect that legislation

I think we can refuse to adapt to many of the legislations. It is just that our politicians don't have the balls to do it. It is actually a bit ironic, that Norway is better adapted to the EU than many of its members.

Quoting VonRichtofen (Reply 6):
Is it something to do with Norway's substantial oil?

I don't know much about it, but I could understand if Norwegians were weary of being "raped" of their natural resources by some EU program.

I think a lot has to do with the referendums have been at the "wrong" time. First referendum in the seventies was when the oil-adventure was just beginning, and people were pretty optimistic. The second referendum in the nineties, and again the Norwegian economy was very strong, and getting stronger, while the EU-economy was fairly poor.

As for the natural resources, this is also a factor. Particularly the fish. There are worries that EU-trawlers will come up and clean out the waters like they have done other places.

Quoting SQ325 (Reply 12):
But this entire subsidies thing between the EU states, from the left pocket in the right and return is ridiculous and makes no sense.
Why should Norway risk its budget surplus by paying subsidies for Spanish tomatoes or wheat from France!
Not to mention the money going to Countries like Bulgaria and Romania where corruption is still a huge problem in all levels.

We are already paying huge sums through the EEA agreement. If we became full members of the EU, any increase would be insignificant.
Life is like a book. If you don't travel, you only read one page.
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:46 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 19):
Obviously, however I didn't think of mentioning it because within the framework of the EEA such a thing is inconceivable.

And who says so? The Factory?
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:50 pm

Quoting DYflyer (Reply 21):
We are already paying huge sums through the EEA agreement

If your government decides to withdraw from the mutual development funds (which you will be referring to) they can do it next thing tomorrow

Quoting DYflyer (Reply 21):
There are worries that EU-trawlers will come up and clean out the waters like they have done other places.

How could they possibly have done such a thing anywhere? That's quite inconceivable, and insulting.

[Edited 2008-03-06 11:54:50]
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:53 pm



Quoting AverageUser (Reply 22):
And who says so? The Factory?

I don't know what you are talking about. What is 'the Factory'?

Refusing to comply with the EEA agreement ends the EEA agreement. Is that simple enough for you to understand?

Now full EU membership may or may not be beneficial to Norway, I don't know nor pretend to know.

However EEA membership is obviously very important to Norway, because the people and parties of Norway have never even toyed with the fact of ending that agreement.

That is reflected very well in the complete compliance to the EEA shown by Norway. It isn't a 'problem country' for the EU. Far from it.

asturias
Tonight we fly
 
jcs17
Posts: 7376
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:13 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:03 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 3):
Of course, since most Norwegians speak Bokmaal, they don't care so much about Nynorsk, but I would say that Nynorsk is an important heritage and should be preserved as a living language by all means possible.

Nynorsk has very little heritage compared to Bokmal, and its use is steadily decreasing. It doesn't make too much sense to have two standards for Norwegian, especially for new Norwegian speakers. I learned Bokmal and it's still very difficult to understand Nynorsk.
America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:05 pm



Quoting Asturias (Reply 24):
Refusing to comply with the EEA agreement ends the EEA agreement. Is that simple enough for you to understand?

That's sheer Factory propaganda. Article 112 of the Treaty:


Article 112
1. If serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties of a sectorial or regional nature liable to persist are
arising, a Contracting Party may unilaterally take appropriate measures under the conditions and procedures laid
down in Article 113.
2. Such safeguard measures shall be restricted with regard to their scope and duration to what is strictly necessary in
order to remedy the situation. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of this
Agreement.
3. The safeguard measures shall apply with regard to all Contracting Parties.


http://secretariat.efta.int/Web/Euro...ent/EEAAgreement/EEA_Agreement.pdf

Besides, you can have any number of intergovernmental agreements and nobody's forcing you out of them. Speaking of Norway in particular, nobody is going to be evicting a well-paying member. Money talks, and Norway does just fine as it is.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:09 pm

I guess as long as you dont mind paying money into the EU but having no say in what happens in it there is no reason at all why you should bother to join ( interestingly the Swiss also feel charitable in this way - not people who are usually noted for being reckless with their money so I guess you both must be on to something )


BTW what are you going to do when your oil runs out ?
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:10 pm



Quoting JCS17 (Reply 25):
Nynorsk has very little heritage compared to Bokmal, and its use is steadily decreasing. It doesn't make too much sense to have two standards for Norwegian, especially for new Norwegian speakers. I learned Bokmal and it's still very difficult to understand Nynorsk.

Ivar Aasen sure though it made sense to have two standards for Norwegian  Wink

As for myself, I learned both Bokmaal and Nynorsk in less than three years. Of course I have a good capacity for learning languages, but the difference between them is less than you claim, but more than it seems.

As a cultural heritage, Bokmaal is irrelevant compared to Nynorsk, which is despite its name closer to actual Norwegian spoken before union with Denmark.

asturias
Tonight we fly
 
TWFirst
Posts: 5752
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2000 5:30 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:17 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Reply 2):
I don't think that our Scandinavian friends has gotten that much out of being members.

I see... so they are not as smart as Norway? If they haven't gotten that much out of being members, why haven't they withdrawn? They must see some benefit.
An unexamined life isn't worth living.
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Posts: 11183
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:36 pm



Quoting TWFirst (Reply 29):
I see... so they are not as smart as Norway?

Well, that's a well established fact  Silly  duck 
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Membe

Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:38 pm



Quoting AverageUser (Reply 26):
That's sheer Factory propaganda.

Are you the sort of person who can't understand a question unless posed several times in a row? What is 'the Factory'?

As for the treaty I point towards Articles 111 and 113 as well, which clarify the matter discussed in 112.

111(3) - applied in serious seemingly unsolvable dispute - :

If the EEA Joint Committee in such a dispute has not reached an agreement on a solution within six months from the date on which this procedure was initiated or if, by then, the Contracting Parties to the dispute have not decided to ask for a ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Communities, a Contracting Party may, in order to remedy possible imbalances,

- either take a safeguard measure in accordance with Article 112(2) and following the procedure of Article 113;

- or apply Article 102 mutatis mutandis.


Now article 102(3) makes it perfectly clear that the participants of the EEA agreement *must* come to a compromise if there are any disputes.

102(3): The Contracting Parties shall make all efforts to arrive at an agreement on matters relevant to this Agreement.

The EEA Joint Committee shall, in particular, make every effort to find a mutually acceptable solution where a serious problem arises in any area which, in the EFTA States, falls within the competence of the legislator.


A veto on one side is not possible according to this agreement. Such action would in effect break the agreement, which will not be done. That much history has already shown.

Article 113(2) is very clear as well on this matter:

The Contracting Parties shall immediately enter into consultations in the EEA Joint Committee with a view to finding a commonly acceptable solution.

Even a layperson can see that the agreement gives no room for a unilateral veto, but rather describes methods and procedures how a compromise will be approached.

Article 114 ends this particular part of the discussion, in my favor I might add:

If a safeguard measure taken by a Contracting Party creates an imbalance between the rights and obligations under this Agreement, any other Contracting Party may towards that Contracting Party take such proportionate rebalancing measures as are strictly necessary to remedy the imbalance. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of the EEA.

The interpretation being, that if one party refuses unilaterally and without compromise to comply, all other members are free to take proportionate rebalancing measures. Were such a way enforced to the end, then the inevitable conclusion would be the termination of the EEA agreement with the dissenting party - for indeed that party has shown no intention or will to accommodate or compromise to maintain the EEA agreement.

asturias
Tonight we fly
 
User avatar
Braybuddy
Posts: 6677
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 8:14 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:23 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Thread starter):
Personally, I'm happy that we're not a member. I feel that the EU is a good thing for the bigger nations, but not so much for the smaller ones.

It's entirely up to the people of Norway to decide for themselves whether they want to be a member of the EU, and it's nobody else's business, but it's clearly nonsense to think that the EU isn't good for smaller nations. The less-developed regions of the EU are helped with subsidies to reduce disparities with the more developed regions, which means that we (Ireland) received around 4 billion euro from the Structural and Cohesion Fund between 2000-2006. We've received the equivalent of 17 billion euro from the EU since we joined (the then EEC) in 1973.

Being a prosperous country, this probably wouldn't apply to Norway, but if the country's economic situation changed it would. Why do you think all the former communist countries of eastern Europe, the poorest on the continent, have all been queueing up to join since they gained independence?

Add to the financial benefits of the EU, we have the added ones such as the right to move, work and reside freely within other member states. We would have been crazy to have stayed out, but then our situation 35 years ago was very different to that of Norway today.
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:53 pm

Quoting Asturias (Reply 31):
The interpretation being, that if one party refuses unilaterally and without compromise to comply, all other members are free to take proportionate rebalancing measures. Were such a way enforced to the end, then the inevitable conclusion would be the termination of the EEA agreement with the dissenting party - for indeed that party has shown no intention or will to accommodate or compromise to maintain the EEA agreement.

The "proportionate rebalancing measures" in no way mean that the agreement is going to terminate because of a dispute. We are further convinced: "Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of the EEA. "

If, in a case of a dispute, priority is in fact given to the measures that will least disturb the EEA-EU cooperation, I find it very difficult to concur with an interpretation (as you quite right put it) emerging from an unknown source that an outright termination is what the Treaty has in mind here.

Your "terminator" interepretation was circulated widely back around 1994 in order to make the EFTA nations think the EEA was a wicked and akward thing, ahead of the EU referenda. Just as we now hear the Maastricht treaty was an ill-conceived and akward idea to have been signed, and only now, finally, do we have the ultimate and best imaginable treaty in the making ...

[Edited 2008-03-06 16:22:00]

[Edited 2008-03-06 16:24:29]
 
andaman
Posts: 2271
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 5:29 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:27 am



Quoting Mortyman (Reply 2):
I don't think that our Scandinavian friends has gotten that much out of being members.

Norway's independence is also very important to us. it's not that old. We just don't like the idea of having to go with the flow in the EU.

I think Finns take EU membership in rather pragmatic way: for a small country it's better be in that out, you just hope with the right diplomacy also the Big Boys listen you... There is no doubt the Euro currency was a good choice for Finland, it brought stability to the financial markets. Introducing the Euro brought some prices down, some up but I don't really miss the old currency, nor the time before EU.

Perhaps Norwegians are more patriotic then. First time I saw Norwegian tourists bringing huge Norwegian flags with them to a package holiday trip and hanging the flag from the hotel room balcony, I though oh Lord those must be neo-nazis!  Wink
Later I learnt it's just Norwegian habbit...
Chinese cookie in SFO: "You're doomed to a life of forever travelling abroad and to be able to afford it!"
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:49 am



Quoting Andaman (Reply 34):
I think Finns take EU membership in rather pragmatic way: for a small country it's better be in that out, you just hope with the right diplomacy also the Big Boys listen you

"Hope" is just the perfect word here.
 
sandrozrh
Posts: 2419
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:19 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:54 am



Quoting Mortyman (Reply 8):
yet, the polls show an increase of people against the EU. It's been a long time since the polls here in Norway has shown it so clearly.

Interestingly enough, we see the same trend here in Switzerland. Now what does that tell us?

Quoting SQ325 (Reply 12):
Norway is financially and economically very strong why gibe it away?

One more thing we have in common with our nordic friends, now if we just had their girls Big grin

peronally, I don't see why Norway should join the EU, just like i don't see why Switzerland should. We wouldn't want to get rid of those thousands of signs at European immigration checkpoints would we? EU citizens, Norway & Switzerland Big grin
 
User avatar
Asturias
Posts: 1977
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Membe

Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:56 am



Quoting AverageUser (Reply 33):
The "proportionate rebalancing measures" in no way mean that the agreement is going to terminate because of a dspute. We are further convinced: "Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of the EEA. "

The wording here is important, as it is in all agreements. "Proportionate rebalancing measures" is used to indicate that similar action may be chosen to combat the unbalancing measures by the first party. The word 'proportionate' isn't there by accident.

Essentially it means, if a country vetoes or refuses to assume legislation as required by the EEA agreement, other participants of this agreement may at their discretion choose to cancel, nullify or otherwise put aside legislation with the country in question in a similar fashion in order to rebalance proportionately the noncompliance of the first country in question.

When that ball starts rolling downhill, it won't stop.

The second sentence you quote: "Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of the EEA." only indicates the EEA, not the relations between the EEA and the hypothetical non-complying country.

Of course it is not the intention of the EEA agreement that the collective of individual member countries disrupt the EEA by using "appropriate rebalancing measures" against the individual country causing the imbalance. Rebalancing measures would not even exist as a term in the agreement if it wasn't expected that such measures could in theory be taken. Needless to say, by their very nature 'proportionate rebalancing measures' will be damaging to some extent to the relations between the EEA and the hypothetical non-complying country, however it need not be damaging or hurtful to the EEA as a whole.

Especially if the country in question can be either brought back in line, or pushed out - instead of being in a non-fruitful economic alliance.

That is all it says. There are measures in every intra-national economic agreement on how it can be dismantled, but a solid way to achieve that every time is by breaching the contract. By not fulfilling it.

It is patently absurd, what you are suggesting, that an EEA country can choose to ignore the EEA agreement without starting the process of severing itself from the EEA. It is not a smorgasbord or a salad-bar. It is not a pick and choose. It is all or nothing within the scope of that agreement.

Saying a country can choose not to honor the EEA agreement and still continue to exist within the EEA is not true.

Quoting AverageUser (Reply 33):
If, in a case of a dispute, priority is in fact given to the measures that will least disturb the EEA-EU cooperation, I find it very difficult to concur with an interpretation (as you quite right put it) emerging from an unknown source that an outright termination is what the Treaty has in mind here.

Of course it is an interpretation, since this has never been tried in court. There is no precedence for what you are suggesting. Priority is given to measures that will least disturb EEA function, remember the EEA consists of EFTA (minus Switzerland) and the EU. It means that measures taken to respond 'proportionately' to the dissenting country will affect the EEA minimally as a whole regardless, while the problem is being sorted out. It is mentioned, so control won't be lost and the big picture forgotten: the well-being of the EEA is not to be jeopardised to sanction a non-complying country.

That's 29 countries continuing business as usual, with one country causing some trouble.

Quoting AverageUser (Reply 33):
Your "terminator" interpretation was circulated widely back around 1995 in order to make the EFTA nations think the EEA was a wicked and awkward thing. Just as we now hear the Maastricht treaty was an ill-conceived and awkward idea to have been signed, and only now, finally, do we have the ultimate and best imaginable treaty in the making ...

Most experts in European law agree with my interpretation. Or rather, I agree with their interpretation. Reading the agreements themselves helps solidify my agreement with them. There is no clearly defined exit-strategy from the EEA agreement, it just wasn't conceived like that. It was to be a one way street with a final stop as a full EU member.

It is clear that individual member countries would be subject to 'rebalancing measures', i.e. limited sanctions. Such actions would indeed 'terminate' that countries ties to the EEA sooner than later , because clearly the grounds for cooperation don't exist any more if a compromise *cannot* be reached.

This isn't hard to understand if one has basic knowledge of law and politics.

asturias
Tonight we fly
 
AFKLMLHLX
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 3:49 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:41 am

It seems kind of redundant that Norway is not part of the EU. They are an extremely developed country actually ranked the #1 most developed country for a number years and although I do not know enough about the history of Norway's reasoning of declining the opportunity to join the EU, it only makes sense that they would. All of their surrounding countries are part of the EU and Norway is part of the Schengen. If Norway joined, its residents could now hold an EU passport. Although Europe is not a sovereign state, it has a unique system of combing clcose economic cooperation, open borders (for most EU countries), and similar politics which really helps make Europe as a whole have the highest GPD of any region in the world. So, why doesn't Norway join? Them not joining is almost like the kid you never notice who one day ruins the field trip for the whole class by forgeting his permission slip. Norway is making more of a bad statement by not joining if they were just to join and enjoy a mesh wih all of their European neighbours. They are an extremely prosperous country but not in the way where they stand out in the world.
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4732
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 6:03 am

The reason Norway doesn't join is simple: they want to have their cake and eat it too. All the benefits of being a member of the EU without the downside.How on earth the EU allows that is beyond me.

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 11):
Norwegians also like the idea that we can have our own foreign policy

Now that is one thing where EVERY EU member is absolutely allowed to go their own way.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
Rara
Posts: 2308
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:35 am

I think it's alright that Norway is not a member. They have a very specific economic situation, with their oil supplies paying for their welfare state and social services. Norwegians fool themselves when they think that non-membership is advantageous for them, because, as already pointed out, they are a de-facto EU member just without the power to influence decisions in Brussels. But they do alright without full membership, so let them continue!

In the long term, they will of course join the EU, as will Switzerland. European countries simply cannot afford staying out of the union forever, even if they don't feel like participating in the process. See Great Britain as an example. Also Switzerland and Iceland will eventually join. But in the case of Norway, that might still be 30 or 40 years ahead, and until then, there's no need to change the situation IMO.
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:50 pm

Quoting Asturias (Reply 37):
Of course it is not the intention of the EEA agreement that the collective of individual member countries disrupt the EEA by using "appropriate rebalancing measures" against the individual country causing the imbalance

But why do you at the same time keep insisting, page after page, that such a "terminator" clause is there, when there's none in actuality.

Quoting Asturias (Reply 37):
Most experts in European law agree with my interpretation.

First of all, there needs to be no interpretation, just reading out aloud the text of the Treaty.

Your "experts" are the same people that manufactured the 1994 EFTA referenda propaganda. What mattered the most then was to break the unity of the EFTA. Magically, the Factory initiated the referanda from those countries that were most favourable towards the Maastricht treaty, and were hoping the domino effect would topple Norway -- but she stood proud. This has remained a thorn on Factory's side.

That was also the time when my eyes were finally opened to see that the real popular opinion means nothing to the Factory -- Putinism at work well before the time of Mr Putin. We're witnessing a slow death of western democracy in Europe where people may occasionally be allowed to vote, but only if they're known to cast their votes correctly well in advance.

[Edited 2008-03-08 05:01:35]
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15079
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:55 pm



Quoting Toast (Reply 13):
Yup, the EU screwed us over. Nobody cares what we say and our economy has gone downhill ever since we joined.

Signed,

Luxembourg

and Ireland (begorrah).
and Portugal (och aye, or whatever they say in Portugal)  Smile
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:31 pm



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 39):
The reason Norway doesn't join is simple: they want to have their cake and eat it too.

That's very, very naughty of Norway indeed. Needs to be stopped, calling in the headmaster!

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 39):
Quoting Mortyman (Reply 11):
Norwegians also like the idea that we can have our own foreign policy

Now that is one thing where EVERY EU member is absolutely allowed to go their own way.

No they are definitely not, because they have accepted the Maastrich Treaty that establishes the Common Foreign and Security Pillar of the EU. Since then, that pillar has been extended into the European Security and Defence Policy.
Currently, we have a resolution worded thus:


“PROTOCOL
ON PERMANENT STRUCTURED COOPERATION ESTABLISHED
BY ARTICLE 28 A OF THE TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION

THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,
HAVING REGARD TO Article 28 A(6) and Article 28 E of the Treaty on European Union,
RECALLING that the Union is pursuing a common foreign and security policy based on the achievement of growing convergence of action by Member States;

(...)
(my emphasis)



http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2008/01...treaty-of-lisbon-security-and.html



You should inform your countrymen in Portugal of the treaties their government have signed, and are about to ratify.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Topic Author
Posts: 5741
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:37 pm



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 39):
The reason Norway doesn't join is simple: they want to have their cake and eat it too. All the benefits of being a member of the EU without the downside.How on earth the EU allows that is beyond me.

Norway pays alot of money to the EU annually for being allowed to be part of your economic part. We are also one of the best to implement EU directives. Much better than most EU members. Because of our weth, we pay an enourmous amount of money.


It's Ironic, I know - but it's true.


I know that Norway is looked upon as a arrogant nation going on a free ride by alot of people in the EU countries, however Norway pays a heavy price for not being a member and we rarely whine about it.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Topic Author
Posts: 5741
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:47 pm



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 39):
Quoting Mortyman (Reply 11):
Norwegians also like the idea that we can have our own foreign policy

Now that is one thing where EVERY EU member is absolutely allowed to go their own way.

The EU is to busy pleasing the United states and don't have a foreghn policy of it's own. The Israel / Palestine conflict is a good example of this. The EU is to afraid to go against the US and just tags along...
 
Rara
Posts: 2308
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Membe

Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:53 pm

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 44):

I know that Norway is looked upon as a arrogant nation going on a free ride by alot of people in the EU countries, however Norway pays a heavy price for not being a member and we rarely whine about it.

Absolutely. And as I said, this situation won't go on indefinitely.

Quoting AverageUser (Reply 43):

No they are definitely not, because they have accepted the Maastrich Treaty that establishes the Common Foreign and Security Pillar of the EU. Since then, that pillar has been extended into the European Security and Defence Policy.

Show us one example then where foreign policy has been conducted by the EU against the explicit will of one of its member states.

[Edited 2008-03-08 05:53:37]
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 2:22 pm



Quoting Rara (Reply 46):
Show us one example then where foreign policy has been conducted by the EU against the explicit will of one of its member states.

If everyone is such a free and sovereign country, why was there a need to formulate a common foreign policy at all? The EU states are not "absolutely free" in their coordinated foreign policy, to claim otherwise is a bit like denying your own mother.

In case you have not noticed, the foreign secretaries are meeting regularly ("informally", so nobody knows how they voted -- if they've voted at all) in their meetings in various places across the Union. See e.g. http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/eur...ters-gymnich-07-08.09.07_9786.html
 
AverageUser
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:21 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 2:36 pm



Quoting Mortyman (Reply 45):
The EU is to afraid to go against the US and just tags along...

Norway really seems have more degrees in freedom in this respect, see for instance:

http://www.norway.org.ps/Press+Relea...n+reaction+to+violence+in+Gaza.htm (04/03/08)


“Israel has the right to self-defence. However, I deeply deplore Israel’s disproportionate use of violence in Gaza and the terrible suffering it is inflicting on the civilian population there. I urge Israel to exercise the utmost restraint and to refrain from any actions that further escalate the level of violence,” said [Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs Jonas Gahr] Støre.

 
User avatar
Mortyman
Topic Author
Posts: 5741
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norway & EU - Why Should Norway Become A Member?

Sat Mar 08, 2008 2:58 pm

Norway is also the only country left that is still against the rocket shield. A year ago most of the countries in the EU were against it. Now you have all fallen for the US charm and says yes. Incredibly weak. Unfortunetly, Norway alone can't stop it...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Francoflier, kalvado, Starfuryt and 33 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos