Reykjavík Grapevine


Reykjavík Grapevine - 03.02.2017, Blaðsíða 22

Reykjavík Grapevine - 03.02.2017, Blaðsíða 22
▵ ▹ ▿ ◃ ◇ ▿ ◃ ◇ ○ interests, while a lot of people were being left out. I think this is a com- mon feeling. We've seen a decrease in voting in the last decades, where a lot of people feel disenfranchised; that politics have become the domain of certain types of people working through certain forms of parties that were quite richly set up. This process is not only disenfranchising, but also limiting to itself. So I think the crash itself, and the creative reaction of Icelanders to the crash—because we didn't have the culture for an actual violent revolution—this opened up the idea that if we're not going to burn everything down and start build- ing from the ground, at least we can shake it all up and try to work it in different ways. Given that Bright Future was formed with the intent of shaking things up and pushing back against special interests, do you find it difficult then to be in a coalition with a party associated with crony politics and catering to the wealthy? In some ways, it is strange to be in power, and to be in a coalition. Bright Future was set up with a strong sense of responsibility. Not only striving for influence for the sake of having influ- ence, or holding all the strings. That is to say: politics is not only about power, but about the responsibility of government. We discussed this within the party, that we would stand up to this responsibility of trying to form a government. So how do you do that? By negotiating, and getting an agreement with other parties that obviously have a different platform, culture and history. You say the Inde- pendence Party has a history of being associated with cronyism. But is also has a history of being the largest, most popular party amongst Icelandic voters, and they have been for a very long time. So in that way, the party has other elements. I understand that. It's just that when you talk about shaking things up, a new way of running Iceland, to join up with a party that is literally the status quo... Well, that is the question, because I'd say the Independence Party is not nec- essarily literally the status quo. In the joint platform that we made in this government, we see a lot of liberal thinking, and a more deliberate will for a more open and consensus-based way of working in politics than we've seen before. And this is not only my interpretation. All three parties agree on this. So I think that's the reason we took part in forming this govern- ment. A large majority of our party voted to go this way, with the expecta- tion and the belief that the agreement we reached is progressive, and it is the base for the government. That said, this agreement is the end result of eleven weeks of political talks between not only these three parties, but pretty much all parties in Parliament. We've been seeing a shake-up of the powers in Icelandic politics that have been quite strong since at least the late 70s; what we call here the "two towers of govern- ment"—the Left tower and the Right tower. They have fought, and most of the time, one of them has ruled and the other has been in opposition. But this election shook that up, with the Pirates, the Reform Party and Bright Future coming in quite strong. Parties formed after the crash, in response to the failure of the old cro- nyism of Icelandic political parties. So I think that in the end, this new gov- ernment with this most traditional of Icelandic parties, the Independence Party, but at the same time two new parties, formed and informed by a lot of new political thinking, is also the result of a deeper political discussion than before, because these two tradi- tional towers have been denied to us. I'm sure you're aware that Icelanders on the left have been less than satisfied with how things played out. Do you understand where they're coming from? Do you think it's a part of this "two towers" binary? I think part of it is, yes, but part of it is also a dissatisfaction that there's less change than people were hoping for after the crash. The crash made it possible to have different and very strong feelings in Icelandic poli- tics; feelings that had almost been thought of as impolite. Especially in the years leading right up to the crash, when dissenting politics were very much frowned upon, as you may remember. So there's been dissatis- faction with how slowly this change has been going. How constitutional reform hasn't been realised. I can well understand this. But I think the point we're missing is that since the crash, we've had two different governments; a leftist government and right-wing government. Both of them have tried to impose their strong will onto the situation, their own ideas of change, without opening up to the fact that it's hard to reach past this sense of what is acceptable in Icelandic poli- tics, even if you manage to get some kind of majority for it. Change needs to come from a majority, but also needs to take into account the 49% that are not in power. The minor- ity has the right to be a part of the discussion. It has a voice that needs to be listened to. I think that's one of the guiding lights for the politics of Bright Future—this idea of working with others, and trying not to impose our "brilliant ideas" onto others, but being conduits for what a broader consensus would look like. That certainly makes sense, and it looks like whether you like it or not, you'll have to work that way, having a majority of just one seat. Exactly, and I've said it before that I think we actually have a chance now of working politics more across the aisle. I think the fact that there's a thin majority makes it more neces- sary. I think that's an opportunity for everybody. I've been in talks with ev- erybody across the political spectrum in these last months, and everybody is thinking about this same thing. I think all parties have been talking about this, and have realised the need for this change. Doesn't mean that it'll happen naturally, or that everyone will agree on exactly how it is done. Obviously, everyone will have their own ideas on how to do it or how not to do it. And probably we will have to fight about how to become friends. But I think there is a possibility, and that's what I read from the election results. That the voters were telling us to get away from the old way of doing things. Moving on to your position as Minister of Health. We all know this is a burning matter in the hearts of most Icelandic voters. What is your vision for improving the healthcare system in this country? My vision is partly set out in the joint platform, and it is the only issue that was put forward as a priority. The voters are there, and I think all the parties are there, too. The concept that healthcare should be universal, and that private costs should be re- duced, that we need an investment in the system is obvious, especially with building the new hospital. But also, we need to look at the health system holistically. We need to invest in primary care. We also need to incor- porate mental health care. We need to do what the McKinsey report on the healthcare system advised, that is to look at the whole system and how it works not only to address serious illness and hospitalisation, but also be preventive and be the backbone of a healthier life for everyone. I could sit here for half an hour and tick off points that need to be addressed. But this is my bigger vision. Why was this position important to you? Why healthcare? For me, personally, simply because I take very seriously the idea that work- ing in politics is a service job, and it should not be a career. Maybe I take a lot of that from having attended high school in the US, but I love this idea of government for the people, by the people; that politicians should be rep- resentatives and not have a personal agenda. So my thought has always been to take on jobs in fields where fate sends me. I also find that the nerd in me finds it's good to immerse yourself in something that you're not necessarily an expert in beforehand. The reason I chose health is that it's at the forefront of what people are thinking about. It basically touches everyone, directly and indirectly. With all the reform and changes that need to be done, especially with this emphasis on a universal and egalitarian healthcare system, where is this money going to come from? Well, that of course is the eternal headache of the politician. Certainly, but Iceland has some of the lowest taxes on corporations in Europe. Yet I didn't notice any plans in the platform for raising taxes, so I presume this money is going to come from elsewhere. So is privatisation, or private management, of healthcare going to be a part of this? Privatisation is not a driving force here. Actually quite a lot of Icelandic healthcare is already run outside the government, mostly by independent NGO-like organisations. Increased privatisation is not a deliberate agenda of this government, but at the same time, we are not against differ- ent forms of providing service. That the tax system is there to help fund government services is strongly set forth in the joint platform. So from there, our big headache is to put the money where our mouth is. That's ba- sically what we'll have to be working on over the next few months. One thing that has gotten a very positive response with regards to Bright Future is where en- vironmentalism is concerned. I think a lot of Icelanders are used to seeing heavy industry being a fundamental part of the Icelandic economy. Do you The Reykjavík Grapevine Issue 02 — 2017 22 “Change needs to come from a majority, but also needs to take into account the 49% that are not in power. The minority has the right to be a part of the discussion, it has a voice that needs to be listened to.”
Blaðsíða 1
Blaðsíða 2
Blaðsíða 3
Blaðsíða 4
Blaðsíða 5
Blaðsíða 6
Blaðsíða 7
Blaðsíða 8
Blaðsíða 9
Blaðsíða 10
Blaðsíða 11
Blaðsíða 12
Blaðsíða 13
Blaðsíða 14
Blaðsíða 15
Blaðsíða 16
Blaðsíða 17
Blaðsíða 18
Blaðsíða 19
Blaðsíða 20
Blaðsíða 21
Blaðsíða 22
Blaðsíða 23
Blaðsíða 24
Blaðsíða 25
Blaðsíða 26
Blaðsíða 27
Blaðsíða 28
Blaðsíða 29
Blaðsíða 30
Blaðsíða 31
Blaðsíða 32
Blaðsíða 33
Blaðsíða 34
Blaðsíða 35
Blaðsíða 36
Blaðsíða 37
Blaðsíða 38
Blaðsíða 39
Blaðsíða 40
Blaðsíða 41
Blaðsíða 42
Blaðsíða 43
Blaðsíða 44
Blaðsíða 45
Blaðsíða 46
Blaðsíða 47
Blaðsíða 48
Blaðsíða 49
Blaðsíða 50
Blaðsíða 51
Blaðsíða 52
Blaðsíða 53
Blaðsíða 54
Blaðsíða 55
Blaðsíða 56
Blaðsíða 57
Blaðsíða 58
Blaðsíða 59
Blaðsíða 60
Blaðsíða 61
Blaðsíða 62
Blaðsíða 63
Blaðsíða 64
Blaðsíða 65
Blaðsíða 66

x

Reykjavík Grapevine

Beinir tenglar

Ef þú vilt tengja á þennan titil, vinsamlegast notaðu þessa tengla:

Tengja á þennan titil: Reykjavík Grapevine
https://timarit.is/publication/943

Tengja á þetta tölublað:

Tengja á þessa síðu:

Tengja á þessa grein:

Vinsamlegast ekki tengja beint á myndir eða PDF skjöl á Tímarit.is þar sem slíkar slóðir geta breyst án fyrirvara. Notið slóðirnar hér fyrir ofan til að tengja á vefinn.