So, the government has just announced that the referendum on Icesave will be held on 6 March this year.
This will be the first-ever referendum in the history of the Republic of Iceland [despite the President's lofty declarations on the Beeb about referendums being a regular part of Iceland's democratic process].
Meanwhile, the Dutch Finance Minister says that no formal request has been received from the Icelandic authorities to return to the negotiating table. If I understand the report on RÚV correctly, he has completely ruled out re-negotiation until the results of the referendum are known [no surprise there].
And now if you’ll excuse me, I have two hundred zillion documents to go before I can make an informed decision. Will return on March 7.*
Till then!
[* not really]
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
>If I understand the report on RÚV correctly
Looks like you do. Although I can see another possible (if unlikely) interpretation of the following, Reuters agrees with you. Perhaps the source is crystal clear.
“But hopes of avoiding a vote were dealt a blow on Tuesday when Dutch Finance Minister Wouter Bos said the Netherlands had not received a formal request from Iceland to renegotiate and that it will not initiate such talks.
In a letter to the Dutch parliament, Bos said he understood the difficult situation in Iceland but that there was nothing to do but await a referendum.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60I13520100119
It’s one thing to be against the Icesave bill personally and it’s another thing to be asked to vote on the future of the country. All good wishes to Iceland and Icelanders.
Documents should explain the $10bn – $10,000,000,000 – which is double IceSave, that Landsbanki alone has written off in Iceland? P55:
http://www.lbi.is/Uploads/document/LBI_report_on_moratorium_021209.pdf
When you consider all the informed debate on this blog alone coming at the issue from so many different conflicting angles, plus other information that may yet come into the public domain, I can’t imagine how the f*** you are going to vote! But you do have one bill on the issue that has been ratified by Parliament, so when all is said and done, that will probably be the one that goes back to the negotiating table.
Two hundred zillion documents Alda? Why not just toss a coin and spend the extra time in the hot tub!
sylvia from viking wirral
This reminds me of another referendum of late, the constitutionally mandated new election for president of Afghanistan. This due their President Karzai having stolen the better part of the previous vote, and now conveniently, with his US overlords permission, neglecting to hold the second referendum.
I have much more hope for Iceland. If this is the first true referendum, it couldn’t have come at a better time. Also notable for being scheduled as soon, all the more perhaps because it was constitutionally supposed to. It betides possibly wonderful things for the people of Iceland. If they are and will pay a price for such a predicament, perhaps that bought in recompense a new unity and purpose that will do themselves and the future of Iceland proud.
Predictable result to this one
Referendum Question
Do you want your family of 4 to be hit with a bill of 48,000 euros.Despite having absolutely nothing to do with the ICESAVE thing (Bet you only found what it was when you switched the TV on lets be honest).
Please tick either the yes or no box only. Thankyou Have a Nice Day.
No Brainer
The Wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icesave_dispute cites lots of sources and strives to be neutral. As near as I can tell, it’s the best single reference on the subject, and it’s a much quicker read than trying to look up everything that’s been said on the subject.
Of course it can’t answer the really important questions, like what the outcome of each possible choice would be, or what the right thing to do is.
I offer to share the fruits of my reading with any voter who wants to know more. I’m limited to Internet resources in English, but I’ve read a lot of those.
(Isn’t this the second referendum, with the one on independence being the first? Or does counting begin after independence?)
I wish the Icelanders wisdom and foresight, and hope that unlike me they’re able to figure out what the best choice is.
I suppose, reading a zillion documents about the case in point would very likely result in a matching number of different views and opinions. So, the more you read and listen, the more you might get confused. Perhaps, you’d rather follow common sense.
Easy, just say to yourself – did I sign a contract to underwrite private banks? If yes, vote yes, if no, vote no.
So the Icelanders vote against the IceSave bill as negotiated between Iceland, Netherlands & UK. Then what?
“Then what?”
Taxpayers around the world say enough is enough, failing companies fail, incompetent organisations go bust, and new ones take their place. People become a bit wiser about where they put their money?
Hmm, the anniversary of the fall of the Alamo. Well, if I had a way to do it, I’d stand on the walls with you.
Michael. I think the question was, “Then what for Iceland?” But I doubt the result will be a removal of deposit guarantees in any country.
Nick. There’s some good stuff in the article & comments section of this one:
http://icelandweatherreport.com/2010/01/what-happens-if-icesave-rejected.html
But a basic summary might be this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60H0NP20100118?type=usDollarRpt
ichael, “Then what?” was rhetorical.
Much as I would love to see the outcome you have outlined I think a more likely outcome are the ones detailed in the links from Bromley86.
If the vote is “No” do you honestly see the Dutch & UK government (with an election coming up in May) rushing back to the negotiating table?. I cant see it happening but we can live in hope.
Sometimes, as we say in Australia, you are given a “shit sandwich” and you simply have to eat it (Alda, please don’t moderate this expression out, I am not deliberately trying to be offensive)
To those who believe Norway and Iceland is the best of friends. Remember that Norway do NOT have similar view on fishing rights in the North Atlantic (That is important in Norway and on Iceland).The view of some Norwegian fishers could be that there is no lost love between Norway and Iceland. That Norway is treating Iceland to nice when it comes to fishing rights.Being Norwegian I would say that it seems to me that Sweden has fewer conflicts of interest then Norway. (Myself being Norwegian))
Expect Norway to act according to it own best interest ( English summary at the end http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00067/IFS_Info_6_2005_67166a.pdf )
Norway has fired shots on Icelandic vessels.