Jump to content

Talk:Norway–European Union relations

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 74.78.98.109 (talk) at 00:48, 20 April 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconInternational relations Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconNorway B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:European Union

This should definitely be longer. Doesn't anybody notice that Norway is conspicuously absent from the European Union? Or does nobody care? BirdValiant 23:50, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the latter. 'Norway? Isn't that a town in Sweden?' Joffeloff 15:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I notice and care, but it seems nobody cares I care. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 18:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Noway? Don't you mean Nor-walk in Southern California? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.25.164 (talkcontribs)


Reduction in economic self-determination: being subject to the economic policy of the EU would compromise Norway's ability to determine its own economic development, particularly with respect to rural needs and natural resources. Whaling is often given as an example of an industry whose existence would be threatened in case of EU membership (whaling is however insignificant for Norway's economy).

This is simply a stupid example, why not mention the fisheries and the consern about fishing rights and controle with Norwegian Economical Zone instead which is a much stronger issue for those against membership, which affects rural needs, natural resources and self governing.


It's interesting to notice that the list of reasons in favour of joining the EU on this page is far longer and with more facts backing them than the reasons against. Also there are some major arguments left out. The only place fisheries are mentioned is as a pro EU reason because Norwegian fishermen would gain access to all EU waters. It's "well done" making that a pro argument, when not even mentioning fisheries in the list of reasons why not to join. The area traditionally most dependent on fisheries is the three North-Norwegian provinces. In all three more than 70% voted against membership, one of the main reasons was that other EU fisheries would gain access to Norwegian waters. Because of rich Norwegian fisheries, gaining access to all EU waters is generally seen as no benefit when it also involves opening Norwegian waters to others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.27.95.199 (talk) 12:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion polls?

Are there any opinion polls on EU membership in Norway that could be mentioned here? (58.188.97.134 07:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Opinion polls are publicized regularly. Around 2001-2003, as Norway was going through a minor economical crisis (along with the rest of world) and the EU was expanding to include Eastern European countries, the polls were in favour of joining the EU. However, as the political problems within the EU increased and Norway regained its economical strength, the polls have suggested around 60% against and 40% in favour of joining. As long as Norway keeps doing well economically, large parts of the population will probably be uninterested in joining.

argument against: end of self-sufficiency in food

I'm sorry but since when is this the case? this country is heavily reliant on foreign food imports ever since the 19th century. 84.90.16.244 (talk) 17:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arguments

I believe the arguments section is tilted towards a positive conclution on membership. The positive arguments are more numerous and better composed. The negative arguments even contain counter arguments and are riddled with cite tags. The section could as it stands do with an NPOV tag.Inge (talk) 08:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

clarification?

"To avoid a new debate on EU, anti-EU parties usually require "suicide paragraphs" in government-coalition agreements: if some party in the coalition officially begins a new debate on EU, the government will fall." Can somebody clarify this? Is a 'suicide paragraph' the same as a sunset provision? The government falling due to debate on the EU, I don't understand that at all. 74.78.98.109 (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]