MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
The Falkland Islands brace for oil wealth; the Norwegian experience
By Brian Swint (Bloomberg - Businessweek) - On March 10 and 11, Falkland Islanders voted in a referendum on whether to remain under British rule. Of its 2,563 citizens, only three voted no. The victory set off howls of indignation in nearby Argentina, which fought a brief, disastrous war with Britain over the South Atlantic islands in 1982. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesNo wonder certain prolific posters are so upset on missing out.
Apr 08th, 2013 - 01:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0He/she/they positively reek of sour grapes at missing out on being part of this.
This is an old article but it's still relevant. Some still are drinking the 'falklands oil bonanza“ kool-aid, while many already understand it's a scam, created by the brits (even exxon and shell know that, two giant ”hedge funds“ who are hiding behind the ”we are an oil company” message)
Apr 08th, 2013 - 03:41 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://eyreinternational.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/proof-that-cameron-lied-over-oil-find-in-the-falkland-islands/
Wordpress?
Apr 08th, 2013 - 05:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0PMSL
http://stopalienabductions.wordpress.com is a much better read!
Take no notice of Fido he still thinks the Brazilian transexual he picked up in France is a woman
Apr 08th, 2013 - 08:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0Fido is also trying to save money to get his teeth fixed.
Apr 08th, 2013 - 08:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0I bet she is leaking Botox reading this.
Apr 08th, 2013 - 09:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0@2 Fido
Apr 08th, 2013 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0If you believe this anti-semitic bullshit (quote ZIONIST NEW WORLD ORDER unquote) then you are even more deluded than I thought.
Next you'll be leaving links to Fortean Times
Margaret Thatcher has died. RIP. She defended Britain and Britons everywhere. Well done Margaret.
Apr 08th, 2013 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@8 Musky
Apr 08th, 2013 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes just seen it on the news. RIP Maggie, you were definitely one of the greatest leaders the UK has ever had.
Looool @ Fido
Apr 08th, 2013 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0with all that money maybe send CFK a small cheque to have some beauty treatment?
Apr 08th, 2013 - 01:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, flags at half-mast in the Islands today sadly. She was - to the Falklands what Winston Churchill was to Great Britain in 1940:
Apr 08th, 2013 - 01:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The right person - in the right place - and the right time - and did the right thing.
Fully appreciate there are those in UK on the other political side whodo not think she was such a good PM - but she sure was when the chips were down for us in 1982.
Sad to hear that Mrs Margaret Thatcher has passed away peacefully.
Apr 08th, 2013 - 01:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0My condolence to the family. Hope she gets a state funeral.
hilst a sovereign wealth fund that makes every man, woman and child worth a theoretical $147,000 in capital – and gives an investment income of $20,000 per person per annum - certainly has its advantages, be under no illusion that it is all a bed of roses. Very low unemployment combined with relative prosperity means that wages in Norway are spiralling out of control as employers fight to employ people. Immigration to Norway is desperately needed, yet few immigrants can even consider moving to Norway, because of the high costs of living .. and even if they could afford it, unless they are from Norway’s immediate neighbours (Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, the UK and Ireland) they wouldn't feel particularly welcome. It has gotten so ridiculous now that most households are so comfortably off that it is quite common in the major cities, even for main income earners, to work 2.5 or 3 day weeks.
Apr 08th, 2013 - 01:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But there is a very real risk that the party is about to turn sour in a quite spectacular fashion as more and more Norwegian firms are upping sticks – or are planning to do so – and moving their entire operations abroad, because wage pressures are simply making it impossible to remain competitive. That leaves the country and the economy almost entirely dependent on oil and generating electricity for the UK .. so it won't take much for the oil-funded boom to turn into a deep depression that rapidly squanders all that wealth at a time that the country has no other means of stimulating the economy, because all the other employers have buggered off to greener pastures.
Granted, it is still a massively better position than Argentina's, but be under no illusions that the storm clouds aren't looming menacingly for Norway's economy.
@11 What do you suggest? A shovel?
Apr 08th, 2013 - 06:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@14 That's a great shame. Perhaps the Falklands will learn from Norway's errors. Might things have been better had the investment income been reduced to around £5,000 per person per annum? With the rest being re-invested?
14- very interesting- probably one of the reasons why our Govt is keen to find out how to do it from Norway - AND - what to do different to avoid the pitfalls - as we know there will be plenty!
Apr 08th, 2013 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@15 Conqueror,
Apr 08th, 2013 - 09:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Stop it, you're making me giggle.
“A shovel” ha ha
copy and paste
Apr 09th, 2013 - 01:56 am - Link - Report abuse 0Whenever there's a 99.8% yes vote in a referendum, it's a pretty safe bet that something dodgy's going on. And despite David Cameron's insistence that the North Korean-style ballot in the Falkland Islands – or Malvinas as they're known in Argentina – should be treated with “reverence”, that rule of thumb clearly fits the bill in this case.
Which is not to suggest that the ballot boxes were stuffed. No doubt 1,514 island residents really did vote in favour of continued British rule. The only surprise was that three islanders dared to spoil the rousing choruses of Land of Hope and Glory by voting against.
It's that the poll was a foregone conclusion and designed to miss the entire point of Britain's dispute with Argentina over the islands – which began 180 years ago when one of Lord Palmerston's gunboats seized them and expelled the Argentine administration.
What other result could conceivably be expected if the future of the islands is put in the hands of the tiny British settler population, most of whom weren't born there but are subsidised to the tune of £44,856 a head to keep them in the Rhodesian retro style to which they are accustomed?
By giving the colonists a veto on any change in the islands' status, the British government is trying to pre-empt the issue at the heart of the conflict. But it won't be recognised by Argentina or Latin America, or Africa, or the UN – which regards this relic of empire as a problem of decolonisation – or the US, which is neutral on the dispute. All call for negotiations on sovereignty, which Britain rejects.
But surely the islanders have the right to self-determination, it's argued, even if they're 300 miles from Argentina and the other side of the world from Britain. They certainly have a right to have their interests and way of life protected, and to self-government. But the right of self-determination depends on who is deciding the future of what territory – and since the dispute is about whether the isla
@18 hipolyte,
Apr 09th, 2013 - 09:05 am - Link - Report abuse 0What you meant to say, l'm sure was that one ship, not gunboats, expelled a trespassing crew of murdering rapists who had only been on the islands for 2 months.
On an island that belonged to someone else, not them & certainly not Argentina.
The owners returned & rightfully ejected them.
Get it right, Thank You.
@18 hipolyte
Apr 09th, 2013 - 11:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0you copy and paste - 'if they're 300 miles from Argentina and the other side of the world from Britain'
The thing is, if they were 300 miles from Britain and called for self determination, they would get it. Three hundred miles is a hell of a long way over the sea.
and you copy and paste,'most of whom weren't born there.'
And how many Argentinians were not born in Argentina? And I don't want a preportion or percentage, because it is not The Falklanders fault that they have just started to try and build up their population in recent history.
I bet the number is greater than in the Falklands.
and you copy and paste,'right of self-determination depends on who is deciding the future of what territory.'
Well there is a piece of first class gibberish... I give you the UN.
”In the immediate political context of the drafting and the diplomatic lobbying leading on to its adoption, the Declaration was generally understood as being directed to “salt-water” Colonialism – occupation of the lands and territories of indigenous, native or aboriginal peoples, in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean, who were physically separated by the oceans from their colonial Powers. There is nothing in the language or the spirit of resolution 1514 (XV) inhibiting its legal extension to situations involving relations between European colonial Powers and other European or European-derived peoples overseas.”
Looks like the Falklanders have self determination to me, a lot stronger case that the colonials that lived in Spanish run South America.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!