Talk Elections

Greenland will be holding an early election on November 28 after its government has collapsed. The Inatsisartut has 31 members elected using the open list version of PR with the country as one large constituency.

The following 6 parties will compete:

Main adversaries:

IA (Inuit Community) is the old Inuit nationalist and socialist party founded by radical students in the 70s, but is now a moderate Social Democratic party with focus on achieving independence through a stronger economy and better education. It is the choice of most of the well educated urban elite and is fairly green. Ruled Greenland 2009-2013 in alliance with the Democrats.

Siumut (Forward) is a the party of power, which has ruled Greenland 1979-2009 and 2013-14. Its nominally Social Democratic, but pragmatic and populist. Supported by strong clientilistic networks and dominant in the settlements and (most) small towns in Western Greenland.

Small parties

Atassut (officially translated as Solidarity, but literally "the link") is the old liberal and unionist party, which is now mainly supported by elderly people after they dropped most of their ideological profile and became the junior partner of their old rivals in Siumut. Still more pro-private business than Siumut.

Naleraq (Indicator) is a splinter party from Siumut founded by former PM Hans Enoksen, who was a settlement store keeper before entering politics - and is fiercely proud of not speaking Danish. "Inuit-populist", anti-urban and anti-elitist.

Inuit Party is a small nationalist, anti-Danish left wing party founded by people who thought IA had gone soft and skipped their original ideals.

The Democrats is a social liberal party focused on liberalising, privatising and modernising the economy, which they claim is the basis for eliminating poverty. Supported by affluent young and youngish Greenlanders in the towns and most Danes. Fairly unionist.

I don't want to be seen as criticising the people of Greenland but on November 28th 2014 but according to Geoclock (a computer programme that shows global times) the sun never rises over the town of Thule or Scoresbysund, there is only 4 hours of daylight in Sondre Stromfjord and Ammasalik and there is only 6 hours of daylight in Nuuk. They can't run a general election in those conditions surely!

Sure they can, its not like the country shuts down during the dark period - they do have electric light! Plus even though the sun sinks below the horizon its still fairly light during the hours when its just below horizon, not pitch black.

lol, in Grise Fiord ans Resolute has short daylight only 3-5 hours in Nunavut election day 8 am to 9 pm

btw qujanaq (thank u) for the post this

Out of curiosity, how is turnout in Greenland?

74,2% last time.

You can have a First World country in the darkness.

Siumut's MP in the Folketing Doris Jakobsen (35) has declared her candidacy for the party chairmanship running on a program to unite the two big parties - citing that the two parties have similar values, goals and aspirations (which is true, but their approach to politics is fundamentally different - since Siumut is populist, tactical and clientilistic and IA rationalistic, strategic, and ideological).

After first backing Hammond and trivializing the affair and then turning around and demanding her resignation the next day Jakobsen is seen as a turncoat by many, so I doubt she will be successful.

EDIT: The independent auditors inquiry into government abuse of funds (also going back to the former government) has been stopped, since the Audit Committee responsible for overseeing this has been dissolved. Hammond has tried to accuse IA of wanting to cover up their own abuse by stopping the investigation, but IA and Atassut has denied this and say the inquiry will proceed after the election.

Acting PM Kim Kielsen is now also running for the Siumut leadership, emphasizing traditional Siumut virtues like solidarity and equal development in all parts of the country. Claims he has broad support among local party chapters across the country (which is likely true).

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/greenland-calls-election-over-20k-spending-scandal-1.2785300r

Fixed the link:



The Arctic Journal has this and a few other pieces about different aspects. They will likely be the English language media with the best coverage.

http://arcticjournal.com/politics/1053/polls (http://arcticjournal.com/politics/1053/polls)

At bit about Greenland's  current situation:

Hammond and Siumut have tried to develop a platform for independence by opening up for big mining projects and oil exploration, but no projects have been realised so far - even though a few mining operations are under way - and no oil has been found. Scottish Cairn Oil that is one of the major players has even giving up its exploration for this year.

Greenland's  economy is in poor shape and is challenged by three factors:

1) The population is getting older. Greenland's  population exploded in  the 1950s after the eradication of tuberculosis, which had been the big killer beforehand, and for the first time the country will have a huge generation of  pensioners.

2) The Danish state grant of 3,7 billion kroner (roughly 650 million $) a year is losing purchasing power. According to the autonomy agreement of 2009 it remains fixed at the same level adjusted for Danish inflation rate, which is much lower than the Greenlandic. So since 2009 its value has decreased from 29% of Greenland's  GDP to 26%.

3) Shrimp fishery, which is the most commercially important, is declining.

So without the expected oil and mineral boom and with increased expenses to pensions and healthcare Greenland faces some very though choices.

EDIT: A new report from Greenlands Institute of Nature in cooperation with international marine biologists recommends cutting the annual shrimp quota in Western Greenland from 85.000 tons (5.000 more than biologists recommended) to 60.000 tons next year to retain sustainability and reproduction. A 30% cut of Greenlands biggest export article would really hurt, so that's bad news.

Siumut's extraordinary convention to elect a new chairman will be held on October 18, so a little more than two weeks to go - not enough for the candidates to visit all important local chapters. They will "try" to get delegates from the whole country, but with all the money they have had to repay, that might be hard, since travelling is quite expensive in Greenland.

A bit more about Greenlands economy and what makes it difficult for them to achieve independence.

1. Public spending is very high compared to production. It amount to ca. 75% of GDP compared to ca. 50% in most Western countries.

2. Taxation is relatively low compared to many other developed countries (especially considered the amount of public welfare spending). Around a third of the value of production compared to 50% in most Western countries. A lot of costs are higher in Greenland (energy, transport etc.) and they have the same effect as taxes for the individual consumers, so you cant just introduce fx VAT, since it would lead to malnourishment and unacceptably bad living conditions for the poor. Still rich Greenlanders (incl. Danish business owners and the political and bureaucratic elite) get off cheap compared to Scandinavia.

3. The educational level is low, so you only have relatively few people in highly productive jobs, which leads to low income generation.

4. The private sector is relatively small, so private employment is low - roughly half of over all employment compared to 2/3 in Denmark.

5. The income distribution is uneven, they have a gini coefficient like the US despite high taxation and a big welfare state. It reflects the low level of education and people working in low productive sectors (like hunting and small scale fishing) and many being underemployed.

6. The population is spread thinly over a giant area and the standard of living is low in the settlements. Concentration would lead to lower expenditures and a higher taxation base - since there are more jobs in the towns, still some towns, especially Nuuk, is filled with administrative jobs and little productions and some settlements, especially in the north, are very productive, so its a mixed picture.

http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674protests_force_greenlands_premier_out_of_office/

"As for Greenland, the last great empty space in the western hemisphere, the huge island should remain permanently within the US defence perimeter, and eventually be formally annexed by the US."

 - Pat Buchanan

???

Pure trolling or is there a point?

It's just a funny quote re:Greenland's suitability for independence.

Chill.

()


()

IA wants a referendum about the permission to allow uranium mining if they win the election.

The last poll in mid September gave the anti-uranium parties 15 seats (14 IA and 1 Naleraq) out of 31, but with Siumuts troubles this number has likely increased, so it's not unrealistic to get a najority behind this.

A "no" to uranium mining, only a year after it was allowed, could jeopardize Greenland's reputation as a stable partner for mining companies so it's risky, but uranium mining is unpopular among large segments in the population. Another problem is that IA's normal partner the Democrats are pro-uranium exploration and it's not realistic for IA to replace them with undependable and populist Naleraq.

Acting chairman of Siumut and Mayor of Kujalleq (= Southern Greenland) Jørgen Wæver Johansen has declared that he isn't going to run for the chairmanship and supports Kim Kielsen, who now looks unbeatable.

Probably wise of JWJ, since he has previously been involved in favouritism (sale of public real estate to politicians and top civil servants at rock bottom prices) and would likely be toxic in the present political climate.

Former Minister of Education and Culture Nick Nielsen, who played a role in Hammond's downfall by leaving the government in protest, has declared his candidacy for Siumut chairman before the extraordinary party conference on Saturday.

He is running on a platform of "letting the free market forces roam free" and privatize Greenland's many publicly owned companies, which is very unusual for a Siumut politician. He hopes a free market approach will attract the necessary capital to develop Greenland's infrastructure with better harbours and two new international airports in Ilulissat and Nuuk to increase tourism among other things. Also in favour of a decentralized freight structure and better Greenlandic education for immigrants and Danish-speakers.

It is uncertain how much support he has. He only got 100 votes in 2013 and didn't enter parliament, but after Hammond brought him into her cabinet he has gotten a lot of  media exposure and his principled stand against Hammond's abuse has given him some popularity as well.

Nielsen will likely be seen as a traitor by the old guard for jumping ship before the government fell and his neo-liberal approach will turn off many traditionalists, but he is probably trying to appeal to dissatisfied younger members.

Yesterday Siumut chairmanship candidate Nick Nielsen reopened one of the biggest sores in Greenlandic politics when he announced the need for a national debate on Greenland's relationship with the EU, arguing that membership would be essential for the possibility of establishing an independent Greenland.

Could they join NAFTA or EFTA instead?

Not NAFTA, since it would mean the Realm of Denmark being divided between two trade areas, but maybe EFTA since it is mostly EU light these days, but they already have a trade agreement with EU, so EFTA wouldn't really be much of an advantage in terms of access to the common market.

EDIT: Article 56 of the EFTA Convention specifies that EFTA is only for sovereign states. The Faroe Islands tried to join in 2005/06 backed by Iceland, but was turned down because they weren't an independent country.

Several Siumut chapters, among them Siumut Nuuk and Siumut Aasiaat (5th largest town), want former Prime Minister and current Chairman of Parliament Lars Emil Johansen (68) to return as chairman. Johansen says he is touched, but wont tell whether or not he runs before tomorrow when the convention starts. A bit coy of the old guy since he hinted about a possible comeback last week.

It is a bit of a middle finger to the three candidates, that big local chapters want the party's grand old man to step in and save them (might also be counterproductive since Siumut was not exactly free of scandals when Larsii was in charge..). Looks like it will be a chaotic day tomorrow, but I still expect Kielsen to get a comfortable majority in the end.

The 47 year old former sailor, policeman and social worker Kim Kielsen from Paamiut in southern Greenland is new chairman of Siumut getting support from 2/3 the 66 delegates (some voting by SMS from their home towns - the party economy is tight after all the money they have had to repay).
Former PM Lars Emil Johansen did run, arriving to Nuuk on the morning of the convention, being "begged" to run by the Uummannaq chapter (in the far north), humbly accepting and having the election delayed to 1 PM, so everything was staged for a spectacular comeback, but it seems the veteran had miscalculated the mood in his party entirely.

Result:

Kim Kielsen 44
Lars-Emil Johansen 17
Doris Jakobsen 2
Nick Nielsen 2
Blank 1

Former Mayor of wealthy Ilulissat (60% of Greenlands tourist sector) Anthon Frederiksen is joining the small Naleraq party. Frederiksen recently dissolved his own Kattusseqatigiit Partiiat, which was an attempt to form a conservative business friendly party. He has encouraged other party members to join Naleraq as well. KP was in government 2009-13, but failed to enter the Inatsisartut last year.

New poll from HS Analyse published in weekly Sermitsiaq. They will have another one out on November 21, but that is likely all we get. 2013 result in brackets.

Siumut 34,5% 11 (-3)
IA 40,8% 13 (+3)
Naleraq 9,6% 3 (+3)
Atassut 6,7% 2 (-)
Democrats 6,2% 2 (-)
Partii Inuit 1,6% 0 (-2)
Independents 0,6% 0 (-)
Total 100% 31

This is a lot better for Siumut than expected, so the voters seem to have received new chairman Kim Kielsen well. The big joker is that 30% are undecided and former Siumut voters are overrepresented among them. Since Greenlandic voters generally break heavily towards parties that are gaining Siumut breakaway Naleraq could very well get much higher.

IA is losing 1 seat compared to September and has been sliding since May when they polled 46%. Sermitsiaq speculates that a result like this could lead to an IA/Naleraq coalition as both parties are against uranium mining, but populist Naleraq would be a risky partner for IA.
IA and their former partner the Democrats lack a seat to get a majority.

Analysis of the election from Polarisk in Arctic Journal:

http://arcticjournal.com/politics/1092/editors-briefing-let-qinersineq-begin
 (http://arcticjournal.com/politics/1092/editors-briefing-let-qinersineq-begin)

Fine basic overview of the race. See also their portrait of Kim Kielsen or follow hashtags #GLvalg14, #qin14 and #qinersineq14.

Naleraq has opened the perennial language issues by saying Danish should be replaced with English in education, claiming that Greenland is not a bilingual society (which amounts to saying Nuuk isn't "real" Greenland). They also want Danish banned in the Inatsisartut (parliament), which is a veiled attack on IA since a couple of prominent female IA MP's don't speak Greenlandic (or only rudimentary Greenlandic).
So trying to be Partii Inuit light, but Hans Enoksen is a language fundamentalist, so it makes sense.

IA has opened another one of the very sore issues - the untenable budget situation. They want to simultaneously cut the public sector, eliminate tax breaks to home owners and tax the wealthy more. Despite having nominally socialist governments since 1979 Greenland doesn't have a progressive tax code and no property and inheritance taxes, mainly because it benefits the political-administrative elite not to have it.

Minister of Finance Vittus Qujaukitsoq from Siumut has finally - after massive pressure from the Democrats, IA and the Greenlands  Employers Association - released the revised budget numbers for 2014 and they show that Greenland will get a deficit around  275 million Danish kroner instead of the expected surplus of 21 million.

Election day tomorrow, this may be a gamechanger, but Siumut had a (surprising) lead in the last poll.

The last poll  by HS from November 21-23 with the previous poll from the start of the campaign in brackets:

Siumut 36,7% (34,3) 12
IA 34,5% (38,5) 11
Democrats 11,2% (9,2) 3
Naleraq 10,2% (10,8) 3
Atassut 6,0 (6,0) 2
Partii Inuit 1,4% (1,2) 0

So the big loser during the campaign is IA, and the winners are Siumut and the Democrats. IA has lost support because they advocate a referendum on uranium mining, but will still close the big mining project at Kvanefjeld in Narsaq in Southern Greenland even if the voters say no to banning uranium mining. IA claims that the two matters are unrelated, because Kvanefjeld is too close to inhabited areas and an agricultural zone, but their opponents have accused them of not accepting democracy and being hypocrites.
Many IA voters below 30 have apparently defected to the Democrats and with a trustworthy "man of the people" type as Kim Kielsen in charge Siumut has regained a bit and is now ahead. This is the worst IA result since May.

I heard one explanation, and I hope by God it's true, that Greenlandic polls can't be trusted (because of the small population and how heterodox the population are from settlement to settlement).

HS was somewhat off in 2013 and it is tricky to poll Greenland, but I think the overall tendency will hold. It has been a presidential election between folksy, down to earth Kim and academic, rational Sara and he has won the hearts and minds game by a wide margin. I don't think that there has ever been so wide a difference in personality between the leadership candidates in a Greenlandic election.

Add the uranium debacle, where Olsvig made a rational distinction between a concrete project and a general principle, that was all too easy to abuse by her opponents. IA has also been too honest about the sort of cuts Greenlands dire economic situation necessitates. Basically I think Olsvig may be a bit too honest and principled to be an efficient campaigner, which is a shame because those are admirable qualities in a politician.

But lets hope the "budget bomb" will swing some voters in the last moment.

http://knr.gl/da/nyheder/f%C3%B8lg-valget-live-her-stemmer-reaktioner-billeder

Live update here with pictures, turnout percentages, and when the polls close, TV live streaming and results.

One thing I found interesting in the covering of Greenlandic election and the background, is how much everybody in Denmark, who deal with Greenland, really despise Hammond, and it's not just her anti-Danish attitude, there have other who is and have been worse ("cough cough" Hans Enoksen), but they never disliked those people as much as they dislike Hammond.

Yes, really a pitty that the very talented and honest Olsvig is having such a hard time. I really hope that the polls are wrong, but it seems like another folksy person from Siumut might win this :(

lloqqortoormiut (Scoresbysund) on the east coast, where 205 voted.

Inuit Ataqatigiit 34,6
Siumut, 33,7  
Partii Naleraq 16,6
Atassut  11,2
Democrats 0,5
Partii Inuit 0,0
Others 0,5
 

()
Exit Poll - If this hold, it will be a huge defeat for Siumut

Seems like the exit poll was a bit off...

Not necessarily, they start with the small places and IAs strength is in the larger towns.

Aasiaat, 5th largest  town with 3500 inhabitants are in:

IA 50,2%
Siumut 19,5 %
Naleraq 10%
Democrats 8,7 %
Atassut  6,2 %
Partii Inuit 2,9 %

Half the votes counted. 9 out of 74 polling stations are still out incl. Nuuk with 30% of the population

Atassut: 1619 = 7,9%

Demokraatit: 1414 = 6,9%

Inuit Ataqatigiit: 5892 = 28,8%

Partii Inuit: 376 = 1,8%

Partii Naleraq: 2749 = 13,4%

Siumut: 8176 = 40,0%

Independents: 7

IA ahead with 2/3 counted. They got 35,7% vs. 29,9% to Siumut.


   

Unofficial final result according to KNR:

Siumut 34,3 (11)
Inuit Ataqatigiit 33,2  (11)
Democrats 11,8 (4)
Partii Naleraq 11,6 (3)
Atassut 6,5 (2)
Partii Inuit 1,6 (0)

Only 193 votes for former PM Lars Emil Johansen, that is a regular humiliation of the old boy, who thought he could make a comeback as chairman a month ago.

With 45,9% Naleraq + Siumut did better than the 42,8% Siumut got last time. So a net gain for the two "Siumuts", but Enoksen may prefer IA as partner.

The last regular poll turned out to be fairly close to the result, much closer than in previous elections. All differences inside the margin of error. Biggest difference was that Siumut lost 2,4% compared to the poll, which is logcal given the budget deficit.

Final result. 2013 in brackets.

Siumut: 34,3 (-8,5) 11
Inuit Ataqatigiit: 33,2 (-1,2) 11
Democrats: 11,8  (+5,6) 4
Partii Naleraq: 11,6 (new) 3
Atassut: 6,5 (-1,6) 2
Partii Inuit: 1,6  (-4,8) 0
Independents: 0,1 (+0,1) 0

Kattusseqatigiit Partiiat (KP) which got 1,1% last time didn't run, but their leader Anthon Frederiksen was elected for Naleraq.

Democrats are now the biggest centre-right party by far and have also gotten some young well educated urban voters from IA. Dissatisfied Siumut voters have probably mainly gone to Naleraq - keeping it in the family. Looks like Naleraq has also swallowed the KP vote with Frederiksen and gotten a big chunk of the Partii Inuit vote, but PI voters have likely gone to anywhere else than the Democrats, it was a very heterogeneous group. Atassut just keeps on sliding - young Greenlanders call it "the pensioners party", being in government with Siumut didn't help them, but they kept the second seat.

Regarding why the exit poll was off. They only conducted it in the four largest towns, which basically makes it pointless to make one.

As the leader of the largest party Siumut gets to try to form a government first. The "populist bloc" (Siumut, Naleraq and Atassut) has a narrow majority of 16 seats, but there may be too much bad blood betwen Enoksen and some of his old colleagues in Siumut for this to work, though Kielsen and Enoksen are personal friends, which will make it easier.

IA and the their usual allies in the Democrats have 15 seats, so they need Naleraq to join them. Naleraq are against uranium mining as IA, so this may make it easier to agree. One of the three Naleraq MPs is former Ilullissat mayor Anthon Frederiksen whose now dissolved KP party were in coalition with IA and the Democrats in 2009-13, so he has good relations with leading IA and Democrat politicians.

Basically Enoksen is the kingmaker and whoever he chooses gets to govern.

Among Danish politicians and Greenlandic business organisations, journalists etc. there is a widespread hope of a broad IA-Siumut coalition to sort out the economic problems and create structural reforms, but I doubt IA will want this. There isn't the necessary trust in Siumut.

Atassut may be reluctant to join a Siumut led coalition after yet another defeat, but they can't really join the other side either, since they become totally irrelevant if they are on the same side as the Democrats.

Good analysis of the campaign by Arctic Journal:

http://arcticjournal.com/politics/1168/editors-briefing-fall-and-rise-siumut (http://arcticjournal.com/politics/1168/editors-briefing-fall-and-rise-siumut)

Siumut, Atassut and the Democrats have agreed to form a government with a 5/2/2 distribution of portfolios and Kim Kielsen as PM (or Chairman of the Nalaakkersuisut as is the correct title). This is an unusually ideologically consistent government for Greenland uniting the three most right wing parties against the leftists in IA  (Naleraq is impossible to place on a left-right scale). It also unites the pro-uranium mining parties against the more environmentally conscious IA and Naleraq, and this seems to have been important in luring the Democrats away from IA. The coalition has 17 of 31 seats, so it looks fairly stable, though it will be a problem for Siumut that Naleraq can attack their fishing policies from the outside and demand an abolition of quotas on most (or even all)  commercially attractive species, which will likely rip Siumut apart, since many of their MPs from the settlements would agree with Naleraq. 

Anyway, the previous urban vs. "rural" blocks in Greenlandic politics have been unravelled and the new coalition unites coastal settlement interests in Siumut and Atassut with the Nuuk based Democrats and this is in itself a good thing.

Interesting coalition if I remember correctly Atassut was also the most "pro-Danish" party before the Democrats, but what I think is good news is the continued support for the uranium mine, while it won't save the Greenlandic economy, it may start making Greenland more attractive for mining companies.

Yes, Atassut means the link (to Denmark) (or more literally the roof raft the keeps a house together) and it was the moderate pro-Community of the Realm option in the 80s and early 90s when it was still an ideologically consistent liberal and unionist party, but when the party started to decline they skipped unionism and most of the liberalism in favour of a populist approach and cooperation with Siumut to cater to clientilistic networks in the (relatively few) settlements where they still have some strength.

Turned out Naleraq was promised to be part of the government and the four parties had already drawn up a 23 page detailed constitution agreement, then their negotiators went back to discuss things with their board and local politicians. In the meantime Siumut got cold feet and decided to ditch them. According to party chairman Hans Enoksen he wasn't informed about this and read it online. Cheating Naleraq like that is bound to backfire later on.