Friday, February 8th 2013 - 23:59 UTC

Falklands will reply to Mr Timerman next month, when the referendum, said Governor Haywood

Falkland Islands governor Nigel Haywood said that the “Islanders will reply in next month’s referendum” whether Argentina could be in control of the Malvinas archipelago ‘within twenty years’, as was announced by Argentine Foreign Minister Hector Timerman earlier this week in London.

Haywood: referendum has the full support from the UK government

“The reply on the possibility that the Islands become Argentine will be given by the Islanders in the (March 10/11) referendum”, said Governor Haywood in dialogue with Argentina’s news agency DyN (Diarios y Noticias) Friday morning.

“And the decision to hold a referendum” on the current political status of the Falklands as a British Overseas Territory has the full support from the UK government”, added Mr. Haywood.

On March 10/11 the Falklands’ people will be saying Yes or No to the question: “Do you wish the Falkland Islands to retain their current political status as an Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom?”

Jan Cheek, Member of the Falklands elected Legislative Assembly was also interviewed by DyN and said that during the two-day referendum “there will be international observers from very respectful international organizations”, although preferred not to give names.

“Unfortunately the Argentine government will try to press them to withdraw”, said MLA Cheek who this week was in London together with MLA Dick Sawle and met with Foreign Secretary William Hague among other high level UK government officials and MPs.

The Argentine government has anticipated that it considers the referendum “illegal”, because as explained by Minister Timerman in London, “the UN declared that the organizing nation of the referendum is an implanted population in the Malvinas since 1833, when London forcibly expelled the Argentine inhabitants”.

Nevertheless the Falklands’ government is going ahead with the organization of the referendum which will have five balloting places, three in East Falkland, one of them mobile, and two in West Falkland, one of them mobile. The budget for the referendum was announced at £ 62.000 and volunteers have been called to help on the two days (March 10/11) and will be paid £ 7.89 the hour.

“The result will be announced immediately after the recount of votes is completed and verifies, and should be finished on the same night of March 11”, MLA Jan Check revealed to DyN.
 

26 comments Feed

Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Comments should refer to article. Thank you.

1 andy65 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:11 am Report abuse
Dam becareful Falklanders declaring that you will be paying helpers £7.89 per hour 25% of Argentines have to live on a 3rd of that amount per day you could get alot of Argentine applications for these two day post.
2 Raven (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:25 am Report abuse
A 100% turn out should be expected from the the Falkland Islanders to give a clear and unequivocal signal as to their intentions. That way, we will see just what the Islanders truly think.

Joe Bloggs et al, make sure you motivate everyone to have their voice in this.
3 golfcronie (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:40 am Report abuse
£ 7.89 per hour or 61.91 ARS or $us 12.40
Not bad for an hours work.
Peanuts to what it will be when 1st oil in 2017
4 José Malvinero (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:51 am Report abuse
“And the decision to hold a referendum” on the current political status of the Falklands as a British Overseas Territory has the full support from the UK government ”

That about sums it up, pibe. And the support of the canyons also ... if not for that .... In that I agree with timermann: squatters use for the purposes of the English.
5 Raven (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:56 am Report abuse
@4

If anyone knows about theft and squatting, it's you.

Descended from an amerindian tribe are you, or a European one? Most likely the latter, which puts you as chief squatter.
6 Gustbury (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:27 am Report abuse
El referendum es al pedo,of course you are British,so Islanders don't exist and dialogue must to be BILATERAL!!SO go to Britain and be british!1
:www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/bulldog-camerons-talk-of-war-keeps-falklands-solution-in-the-kennel-8487461.html
7 Marcos Alejandro (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 02:24 am Report abuse
6 Gustbury
Interesting article.
8 redpoll (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:01 am Report abuse
Cant you malvinistas ask Maximo to give you a new script? This one is becoming boring
9 dixie rebel (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 04:08 am Report abuse
It is very good the referendum in March. It will be solid evidence to show the world that the Falkleners can determine their own future. Of course the RGs are against it because as of now, there are some Argentine analysts that are saying that the result of the referendum will be a very tough issue for Argentina to argue against it. What Tinman said about the twenty years bit, I remind you, that over ten years ago, Pres. Menem said that the Argentine flag was going to fly in Malvinas by the year 2000. Today is 2013, and they are still repeating the same shit.
10 Lord Ton (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 04:57 am Report abuse
www.scribd.com/doc/106213592/Falklands-Wars-The-Expulsion-Myth

How come Argentina still tells lies abouts its history ??
11 Marcos Alejandro (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 06:58 am Report abuse
11 Roger
Your historians agree with us....until pressure to change it.

“Falkland Islanders have criticised the Government's official history of the 1982 war, claiming that it contains a series of ”serious“ errors which make it too sympathetic to Argentina's claims to the territory”

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/7331547/Official-British-history-of-the-Falklands-War-is-considered-too-pro-Argentina.html
12 reality check (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:40 am Report abuse
MA
Another cock up, why wasn't this author at the Embassy reception, or did he refuse to take part in your pathetic stunt?
Lord Ton
Argentina never lies, ask the 18 European delegations who attended the above? What was it 90% Argentine ex pats, purporting to be European, should not be surprised though, absolute masters at Fraud, only have to look to the IMF to evidence that.
13 Anglotino (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:44 am Report abuse
I'm laughing so hard. Gustbury and Marcos don't understand that in a true democracy the media isn't state controlled and can publish their own opinions without the government closing them down.

Mark Donne's article quoted by Gustbury is a case in point.

Marco's article is even funnier because historical documents that actually EXIST have shown the official government position was incorrect.

I especially love this paragraph:
“Professor Sir Lawrence Freedman, the book's author and also a member of the Chilcot Inquiry panel which is investigating the 2003 Iraq war, said he was ”happy to accept the corrections“. ”

Imagine that he is HAPPY to accept the corrections. A government representative that is HAPPY to be corrected for getting something wrong.

HAPPY not HOUNDED by brown shirts.

I understand this confuses them considering how the media works in less democratic countries such as Argentina.

But thank you guys for highlighting this.
14 golfcronie (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:36 am Report abuse
@11
Perhaps as you are so intelligent you could point out the serious “ errors” and take it to the ICJ. After of course the referendum.
SELF DETERMINATION is the No 1 Priority
15 Troy Tempest (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 08:36 am Report abuse
@6 gusty

With Gustbury's limited English skills, how could he e en understand the article he posted a link to?

It is really a non-article with barely a link to Cameron at all, and fails to make any proper references to war - empty verbiage.

Great review Gustbury.
Who assigned this for you to post?
16 HansNiesund (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:07 am Report abuse
@10 Lord Ton

In a rather discreet development, it seems there is movement on the expulsion myth.

They produced a pamphlet for this recent conference which is available on the site they have set up at apoyoamalvinas.cancilleria.gob.ar/page/2

In the section on 1833, the pamphlet states :

“On 1 January 1833, the United Kingdom expelled the Argentine authorities, the military garrison, and their families, forbidding their return”

I guess we can look forward to a more public correction now.
17 Islander1 (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:45 am Report abuse
16- they cannot even get the date right! It was Jan 3rd 1833. Malvanistas have seen the lists on mercopress of who was deported - AND- who stayed of their own free wish - even Think accepts that list.
18 HansNiesund (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 09:59 am Report abuse
@17

Umm sorry, the date is a transcription error of mine.
19 Domingo (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:11 pm Report abuse
Once this free democratic referendum has taken place & its results are known, one presumes the UK as the lawful Administrating Country of the Non-Self-Governing Territory of the Falkland Islands shall report its political status has been freely determined by its population & also what the political aspirations of the population to develop self-government in their chosen framework are to the C24 with regard to the implementation of resolution 1514 & Article 73 in the Falkland Islands by the UK as the Administering Country?

If so, shall the C24 obey its terms of reference & report the UK's implementation of resolution 1514 ^ Article 73 to the General Assembly? If not, shall the C24 exceed its remit & instead abuse its fora to make politically prejudiced comments about the Falkland Islanders? If the C24 does exceed its terms of reference what censure shall apply?

Since its inception 67 years ago, the UN International Court of Justice has never upheld any Argentine claim to sovereignty to the Falkland Islands, South Georgia, Sandwich Islands, British Antarctica & their maritime spaces

It is interesting now in its legal position as a third party to the process of decolonization on the Falkland Islands, i.e. the ending of the British colonial government on the Falkland Islands and free association of population, that Argentina so much of the UN Resolution 2065 phrase:

“interests of the population of the Falkland Islanders”

to ignore their wishes, to disenfranchise the Falkland Islanders & to argues for the ethnic cleansing of the population by their forced deportation to Britain, when two other important requirements are stipulated, namely:

1. the provisions and objectives of the UN Charter
2. General Assembly Resolution 1514(XV)

with which Argentina's position is incompatible & why it terminated negotiations began by Resolution 2065

Thus further Argentina interference with decolonization in accordance with UN Charter Article 73 shall be subject to censure
20 Conqueror (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:23 pm Report abuse
@7 Yup, a very interesting article. Written by a leftie anarchist. He might not be popular with YOUR government. He likes to speak out. CFK wouldn't like that. And, supposedly, he's very keen on workers' rights. Only two things missing from his article. FACTS amd TRUTH. But that's because he's spieling the malvinista and argie “government” line. And do be sure to note the response that he got from British people!
@11 Simple response, dumb dumb. The Falkland Islanders were THERE when your PIGS invaded. The writer of the British government “history” wasn't. Not the first time you've quoted that 3-year old article, is it? So you can take that “point” and shove it where the monkey shoves its nuts!
21 Pete Bog (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 01:13 pm Report abuse
@19
Exactly, while the Argentines keep whining that resolutiion 2065 etc etc etc support their claim, they cannot understand that ethnically clensing the Islanders is not in 'the interests of the population of the Falkland Islanders”

Also the references in the resolution to independence clearly imply that an independant FI would make discussion unecessary.

And 'according to the provisions of the UN charter,' clearly points to those provisions which support the Fakllnd Islanders.

As the islanders interests cannot be discounted (it says so in the resolutions) then there is nothing that states they cannot be present at negotiations in the resolutions.
22 niphotos (#) Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:33 pm Report abuse
In reply to some of the Argie comments on this page , the people of the Falklands will have their say in March in a true and democratic way , more than can be said for the Argie people who are stuck with a bankrupt and corrupt government .......Forever Falklands ....Forever British !!!!
23 Domingo (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:43 am Report abuse
@ 21 Yes.This referendum shall end Britain's obligations to the population of the Falklands Islands under Article 73 of the UN Charter because the population shall have been granted independence & decolonised; the entire purpose of the listing of the population of the Falkland Islands as a non-self-governed-territory was to grant to the population the benefits of self-rule free from alien subjugation

In 1965, Argentina brought its claim of its sovereignty dispute to the UN General Assembly under UN Charter Chapter VI Pacific Settlement of Disputes under Article 33 but Argentina did not negotiate a pacific solution which satisfied

1. the provisions & objectives of the UN Charter
2. resolution 1514
3. the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands

Rather Argentina chose to terminate negotiates in March 1982 in favor of ending its dispute by use of force in April 1982 to annex the Falkland Islands & its dependencies by its armed attack & invasion. This Argentine act of war was a breach of its obligations under Article 33, to settle its dispute by pacific means. Britain invoked its right to self-defense under article 51 & recovered sovereignty by uti possidetis; to challenge the status quo post bellum Argentina must claim at the UN International Court of Justice

The application of Article 73 & resolution 1514 to the Question of the Falkland Islands does not prevent Argentina submitting its post-1982 war sovereignty claims at the UN ICJ, subject to the rigor & scrutiny against the standards of law. The UN ICJ can consider the merits of Argentina's claim & also consider whether these claims are subject to extinctive prescription

When Argentina next complains at the UN about the application of the Article 73 decolnization process to the population of the Falkland Islanders, it should be reminded that fault lies with Argentina for the failure of negotiations to find a peaceful settlement & that Argentina's ex judicial opinions do not apply to Article 73
24 Shed-time (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 01:05 pm Report abuse
@23 I agree with all of it. Where it all falls apart is when we consider that the argentinians are pathological liars (treaty of perfect friendship), pathologically incapable of admitting blame (war of 1982) and don't understand that there are consequences to any action (wanting the negotiation position of 1970s). They fear the scrutiny of a court and the existence of the islanders like a vampire fears a crucifix.

They are unlikely to go anywhere, but like a cat in a corner they will keep lashing out.
25 GFace (#) Feb 10th, 2013 - 09:13 pm Report abuse
@19 Trouble is, Dom, is that once C24 looses the FI as one of their high-visibility items, they will have only Gibraltar left and EU provides a something of a publicity firewall for that cause. The other situations have either put egg on its face (the embarrassing Tokelau double referendum lemon of which they still try to make lemonade) or are otherwise at a mutually equilibrium with their sponsor states. With the FI, the issue is sexier because AR makes it its Validation Cause #1 and they can paint it as a “White against... uh... White...” ok... let's try “North against South” conflict so they can pretend that they are still fighting against colonialism instead of now fighting for it -- or to be more accurate, fighting for their relevance. Before this they could just rest on the Mexican Standoff and stay on the relevance gravy train. But now, the C24 may be more afraid of the March referendum than Argentina.
26 Shed-time (#) Feb 11th, 2013 - 01:04 am Report abuse
@25 all piss-pot states are scared of referenda / people / tea houses.

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!

Advertisement

Get Email News Reports!

Get our news right on your inbox.
Subscribe Now!

Advertisement