Iceland review - 2015, Side 61

ICELAND REVIEW 59
this is a sensitive issue, how to control
or limit the number of people allowed to
visit certain sites. With attempts by sev-
eral private landowners, such as those at
Geysir, to charge for access to their land
being thwarted by the courts, Minister of
Industry and Tourism Ragnheiður Elín
Árnadóttir of the Independence Party pro-
posed a ‘nature pass’ which anyone wanting
to visit said Geysir, Gullfoss and numerous
other sites would be required to purchase.
The proposal faced serious opposition
from the beginning and caused widespread
debate in Iceland, with many in principle
opposed to having to pay for access to
places like Þingvellir National Park, and
Geysir (due to European Economic Area
rules, which forbid discrimination based
on nationality, Icelanders too would be
required to buy the pass), the government
in the end withdrew the plan. No alter-
native has yet been proposed but in May
the government announced that ISK 850
million would be allocated out of the gov-
ernment coffers to pay for infrastructure,
the equivalent of around USD 5 for each
tourist expected to visit in 2015.
The confusion was unhelpful, as was
the impression that the government had
no plan for dealing with what is already
Iceland’s largest and fastest-growing indus-
try.
VERY FISHY
With the clock ticking, the government
tried to pass several bills in the final days
of parliament before the summer recess on
July 3 on issues as diverse as a quota system
for mackerel fishing (opponents gathered
53,000 signatories urging the president to
veto the legislation), new housing policies
and permission to build new hydroelectric
dams (strongly opposed by conservation-
ists), with the result that this was one of the
longest parliamentary sessions in history.
The government accused the opposition of
deliberately stalling progress by prolonged
speeches in parliament (interestingly, the
French called the pirates of the Caribbean
‘filibusters,’ the term now used to describe
this tactic, one which is familiar to the
Pirate Party). Opposition came not only
from expected places, but from within
the ruling parties themselves, with the
Independence Party, for example, torpedo-
ing the Progressive Party’s flagship housing
policies.
With a tight schedule and many impor-
tant bills waiting, there were some notable
surprises. The government tried to pass a
bill transferring control over planning of all
international airports in Iceland (there are
three outside of Keflavík) from local gov-
ernments to the interior minister. Questions
were raised as to why the planning power
would be given to the interior minister
and not the environment minister, whose
portfolio includes planning. The waters
became even murkier the next day when
Minister of the Interior Ólöf Nordal of the
Independence Party refused to support the
bill. It’s not clear why the Progressive Party
tried to push the legislation, except to try
to wrestle control over the future of the
domestic airport in Reykjavík—which has
become one of the most contentious public
issues in Iceland in recent times—away
from the city authorities.
In short, the city wants the land where
the existing airport is located for construc-
tion of new housing, while opponents of
change think it benefits people from areas
outside of the capital to have an airport in
the center of Reykjavík. The debate has
become very emotional, with supporters of
the airport accusing opponents of risking
the lives of youngsters in the countryside
by making access to the national hospital
more difficult.
SUCCESS AT LAST, BUT THEN WHAT?
Triumph for the government finally came
on the last day of parliament when a bill
was unanimously passed to lift (or partly
lift) the currency controls that were intro-
duced following the economic collapse
in 2008. The currency controls made life
difficult for Icelanders with severe restric-
tions being imposed on individuals’ and
businesses’ access to foreign currencies, but
were imposed to prevent the króna from
going into freefall when foreign investors
were expected to exit investments worth
hundreds of billions of krónur. The agree-
ment reached by the government with
foreign creditors was an undoubted success.
It involves creditors offering payment of
a stability tax in return for being granted
permission to leave with their money, with
the revenue generated by the tax estimated
at up to ISK 682 billion, according to the
Ministry of Finance. This effectively takes
the pressure off the króna and brings a
resemblance of normality to the economy.
Strangely, though, the agreement does not
seem to have benefited the government in
opinion polls.
All of which brings us back to the recent
success of the Pirates in polls. Although the
Pirate label has nothing to do with seafar-
ing and everything to do with copyright,
the Pirate Party still uses a pirate flag as
their emblem. The pirates of the Caribbean
were originally ‘privateers,’ a private army
used by European nations who could not
afford to maintain fleets so far from Europe
to protect their settlements from Spanish
aggression. The pirates were savage and
brave, but as Philip Bobbitt writes in his
rather wonderful book Terror and Consent,
they had a remarkably modern liberal
setup. Pirate captains in the 17th century
were elected to their positions and could
be removed from office at any time. A num-
ber of captains were of African origin. All
members of the crew had a vote, regardless
of previous social rank or occupation. The
loot was split evenly between the pirates,
with the captain only receiving one-and-a-
half share. The frequency of homosexuality
among pirates was high, probably because
these communities were a lure for men
who couldn’t fit the heterosexual model of
a ‘successful’ citizen. There was even a form
of gay marriage within some crews. The
pirates had a formal system of compensa-
tion for the wounded, so, all-in-all, a soci-
ety much like our own modern democracy,
except with more equal wealth distribution.
Perhaps we would be no worse off being
governed by a real Pirate Party? *
Halldór Lárusson is an entrepreneur.
He has degrees in economics, philosophy
and history of science.
OPINION