Iceland parliamentary election

[politicus]

A new poll shows that the Progress Party might get an outright majority. A single party majority would be something completly new in Iceland. Given that Iceland has a 5% threshold a number of votes will be lost and 42% might be enough for an outright majority. Maybe even less if the Left-Greens and/or Pirates drop below 5%, they are both at 5,7 in this one.

The poll was carried out by television channel Stöð 2 and daily Fréttablaðið and published last night.

"The Progressive Party, chaired by Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson, is on a roll with 40.8 percent support heading towards the election in three weeks time, on April 27. In the last election, in 2009, the Progressive Party got 14.8 percent of the votes.
 
According to the results, the party will secure 31 seats, out of a total 63, one fewer than is needed to gain a clear majority. If the party’s popularity will continue to surge, it might obtain a clear majority in parliament and not have to forge a coalition with another party or parties.
 
The right-wing opposition Independence Party has the second highest level of support with 18.1 percent. In the last election, the party received 23.7 percent, its lowest score ever, and it was the first time in the history of the Republic that it was not the largest party in Alþingi.

The Social Democratic Alliance currently has a 9.7 percent support rating, down 20 by percent from 29.8 percent in the 2009 election.
 
The other party in the coalition government, the Left Green Movement, holds 5.7 percent support, down from 21.7 percent in 2009 and not far above the 5 percent minimum to earn a seat in parliament.

According to the poll, two new parties will get their members elected, Bright Future with 8.5 percent, and the Pirate Party with 5.7 percent. Six other parties were included in the poll and received ratings of between 0.4 and 2.9 percent".
 

Progress Party 40,8
Independence Party 18,1
SDA 9,7
Bright Future 8,5
Pirates 5,7
Left-Greens 5,7

[minionofmidas]

Don't take me too seriously. Sometimes I don't understand politics.

I wouldn't dream of taking seriously anyone who always understands politics. It's a clear mark of a derelict character.

I don't take things always seriously, though maybe I'm derelict.

Modified my sentence to make the meaning clearer. As you do not always understand politics, it is okay to take you seriously. Those who always understand politics are of derelict character.

[Zanas]

Okay, I'm officially un-loving political Iceland as of now... 15% for a left-wing coalition who, if not perfect, basically saved their asses without selling them to banks, that's very lacking gratitude... And this sudden and massive Progressive surge doesn't stick with the cliché of calm and level-headed Nordics...

However, looking at the other polls, this particular one could well be an outlier.

[politicus]

Okay, I'm officially un-loving political Iceland as of now... 15% for a left-wing coalition who, if not perfect, basically saved their asses without selling them to banks, that's very lacking gratitude... And this sudden and massive Progressive surge doesn't stick with the cliché of calm and level-headed Nordics... 

However, looking at the other polls, this particular one could well be an outlier.

It could, things are really volatile up there right now.

Its a bit of a myth that Iceland didnt pay anything to the banks, they actually repaid more per capita than any other country except Ireland. Ordinary Icelanders are heavily in debt and there has been a transfer of wealth from the general population to banks, pension funds and capital owners. It could have been much worse, but many people believed the left could create a just solution without transferring wealth to the rich and are dissapointed. There has als been massive cuts on health care and again many believed the left could "save the welfare state". And then all the EU membership nonsense.

Many of the pro-EU, business friendly right wingers left the Progress Party in 2011, so its back to being a social liberal centrist party closer to its rural roots, so its not such a massive right wing turn as it may appear on paper.

The Independence Party tried to relaunch themselves as a Christian party in March wanting to base their policies on "traditional Christian values", this was blocked by their youth movement, but apparently it backfired and I think it may be a reason the Progress Party is on a roll right now.
Besides having a youngish (late 30s) and energetic leader.

[Zanas]

Ok you cleared it for me. I was not saying they didn't repay anything to the banks by the way, just that they didn't sell the whole country to them as they are doing in Greece. Iceland's been better off than Greece, and that's probably thanks to this government among other factors.

But I figure that really this election is a return to a more traditional repartition of the electorate, about two thirds right wing and one third left-wing.

[Famous Mortimer]

If people really are mad at the Social Democrats for not being left-wing enough, I'm surprised they aren't giving the Green-Left a shot. After all, they almost came in second last time.

[Velasco]

[Modified my sentence to make the meaning clearer. As you do not always understand politics, it is okay to take you seriously. Those who always understand politics are of derelict character.

Ah, OK. Thanks, Lewis. For sure I make more unclear sentences, cause my little English command doesn't work always.

Many of the pro-EU, business friendly right wingers left the Progress Party in 2011, so its back to being a social liberal centrist party closer to its rural roots, so its not such a massive right wing turn as it may appear on paper.

The first paragraph of your post explains things clearly enough, in short. As for the Progressive Party, apart from being a centrist party, apparently is a populist one, isn't it? Do you have a personal opinion of the Progressive Party's leadership or some thoughts about the hypothetical skills of Prog politicians at the head of a government?

[ObserverIE]

If people really are mad at the Social Democrats for not being left-wing enough, I'm surprised they aren't giving the Green-Left a shot. After all, they almost came in second last time.

Well, Green Left were also in the government that wasn't left-wing enough...

[minionofmidas]

If people really are mad at the Social Democrats for not being left-wing enough, I'm surprised they aren't giving the Green-Left a shot. After all, they almost came in second last time.

Well, Green Left were also in the government that wasn't left-wing enough...

How about developping some genuinely leftwing alternative.

[politicus]

A few notes on the background for the dramatic changes in Icelandic politics:

The EFTA ruling in the Icesave case January 28 was a major blow to the government.  
Iceland was acquitted of all charges and since the government wanted to negotiate with the British and the Dutch it made them look stupid, while the Progress Party's risky strategy of going to court proved to be the right one.

Also PP is going populist. The Progress Party has promised to write off up to 20% of all price-indexed household mortgages, which would cost over 12% of Iceland's GDP!

The Progress Party wants to negotiate with the foreign claim holders of the defaulted banks and get them to pay for this write down against being allowed to move the money they have left outside of the Icelandic economy. At the moment the claim holders can not get their assets out because of capital controls. If the claim holders do not comply the Progress Party say they will simply tax them mercilessly to get the money.
 
A lot of economists say that this is probably not feasible. Prominent Icelandic economist Gauti Eggertsson, who is associate professor at Brown University, has described it as "sheer populism".

They fear that even if it was possible for the government to get 1.3 billion Euro from the claim holders, and either give it to households so that they can repay 20% of their mortgages or give it to the banks directly, the banks in Iceland would all of the sudden sit on piles of cash. Which could lead to either another housing bubble or hyperinflation.
 
But the "get tough" attitude against foreign creditors is popular, especially among young people.
 
Apart from The Icesave case, many people are angry that the new constitution did not get passed this term, so it could be voted on at the election.
This isn't a fair critique of the government since the Independence Party has used the Icelandic version of the filibuster to stall the constitutional bill by giving long speeches, but it seems that voters also blame the government for not pushing this through.

Apart from the "christian values" thing, The Independence Party is unpopular because they have proposed a flat income tax, which obviously would benefit the wealthy, and because their leader Benediktsson seen as untrustworthy, he was on the board of a company that had to be bailed out.
He was initially quite successful, but now his luck has definitely turned.
His family is ultra-establishment in Iceland and apparently this combined with the fact that he has taken the party too far to the right has been problematic.
Given that 10% of the population are party members polling at 17,8% is really extremely low and a disaster for the IP if it becomes the result, since the 23,x% result last time was already an all time low for them. So its not just the left that is in trouble, the right is doing badly as well.  

[politicus]

Many of the pro-EU, business friendly right wingers left the Progress Party in 2011, so its back to being a social liberal centrist party closer to its rural roots, so its not such a massive right wing turn as it may appear on paper.

The first paragraph of your post explains things clearly enough, in short. As for the Progressive Party, apart from being a centrist party, apparently is a populist one, isn't it? Do you have a personal opinion of the Progressive Party's leadership or some thoughts about the hypothetical skills of Prog politicians at the head of a government?

PP has always had an element of rural populism and been known as a pragmatic and unideological party. The rural/urban division is strong in Iceland since Reykjavik dominates the otherwise thinly populated country so much. The traditional core of PP were farmers + some fishermen with small boats from small ports (fishermen on big boats from big "urban" ports are IP core voters).
As the rural population declined they started adopting liberalism to attract urban voters. The old Liberal Party merged with the Conservatives to form IP in 1929, which became a nationalist Conservative party, so Liberalism was a vacant position. But like most Liberals they were split between social liberals and more classical liberals and the latter only dominated in the financial boom era.

I don't know if the present PP will be any good at governing, a number of young and/or inexperienced people would likely be part of their government.

If they don't get a majority, there is also the question of who they will align with. I doubt PP and IP will form a coalition, since PP is currently controlled by its left wing and IP by its right wing. 
A prominent IP politician has also just warned Icelanders against "another left government under the PP".
Bright Future is their most likely partner, since it is centrist, but it is a mixed back with both  former SDAs, PPs and people from the joke Best Party, maybe they will be unwilling to accept government responsibility. This leaves PP with the option of trying to gain support from the ex-government. 

[Famous Mortimer]

In early 2009, the PP, with the same leader it has now, offered to form a government with the Social Democrats and the Green-Left. The Social Democrats turned them down though because they knew they could win an election on their own. So there's that.

[politicus]

In early 2009, the PP, with the same leader it has now, offered to form a government with the Social Democrats and the Green-Left. The Social Democrats turned them down though because they knew they could win an election on their own. So there's that.

Yes, this might influence their decision.

In The Reykjavik Grapewine pundit Kari Tulinius gives the following description of PP and IP leaders and ideology (or lack of ideology). It is probably fairly accurate. All though I dont know where she got the idea that PPs traditional ideology was "agrarian socialism" from.

"Considering how unpopular Republicans are among Icelanders, it has been a bit weird seeing the Independence Party identifying with the American right-wing. Recently its youth wing released an ad calling for an offensive against socialism, featuring—alongside pictures of Icelandic and European political leaders—President Obama. Which has to be the most incongruous political poster since someone put a picture of Bert the Muppet on a pro-Osama Bin Laden poster. To further the ideological link-up, the chairperson of the party, Bjarni Benediktsson, went to this year's Republican National Conference, along with Ragnheiður Elín Árnadóttir, the party whip. In the political sense of the term, sadly.

Surely they have nothing to learn from a political campaign designed to make charisma-free Mitt Romney seem interesting?

Funny you should say that, because the Independence Party has its own Romney in Bjarni Benediktsson. Like the Republican, he was born wealthy, has a shady business reputation which is offset somewhat by the perfectness of his hair, and has been forced to change his opinions to suit party hardliners. That said, he has nothing like the Bond villain-type riches of Romney. His personal wealth has been estimated at about a hundred million krónur, or just shy of one million dollars, though he stands to inherit a lot more. That still makes him plenty rich by Icelandic standards, and one of the five richest sitting MPs.

Let me guess, the wealthiest politician is some namby-pamby champagne socialist 
progressive politician.

The wealthiest MP, ten times richer than his nearest colleague, is the chairperson of the Progressive Party, Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson. His wealth has been estimated at well over eleven hundred million krónur, or a little less than ten million dollars. Which is weird considering that until fairly recently the ideology of the party he leads was agrarian socialism. However, in recent years the Progressive Party has been a party searching for an ideology like a two year old kid looking for Waldo, getting bored after five seconds and running to the nearest adult to ask them to change their diaper because they did a doo doo, which is sort of how they ended up with Sigmundur Davíð as chair".

SDGs wealth is inherited as his dad was a prominent businessman who among other things were chairman of Icelandair. His own resume prior to being an MP is fairly elitist by Icelandic standards, but without any real administrative or managerial experience:

BS degree of Business and Economics at the University of Iceland + part-time studies in Mass Communication.

Exchange student at Plekhanov University in Moscow and studied international relations and public administration at the University of Copenhagen.

DPhil in economics and political science at Oxford University, with a focus on connectivity and economic development planning.

Worked as a journalist and reporter on RUV 2000-2007.
 
Member of Reykjavik City Council 2008-2010.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Wow, the IP is even more pathetic that I thought. I hope they stay at this level of support (or fall even more, if that's possible).

[politicus]

No less than 14 parties are running in this election. Most of them don't stand a chance, but I will try to give a short description of the lesser known, since we have already covered the "Big 4" and the Pirate Party is basically just the same as all the other Pirates around Europe.
The deadline for getting on the ballot is not until 9/4, so the number of parties might get even higher.

Left wing

The Peoples Front of Iceland

Hard left party (mostly Communist). Strongly anti-EU and Euro.

Wants to socialize the infrastructure and the financial sector, which should be run "for the benefit of society".

Better conditions for immigrants and refugees

The Rainbow

Breakaway group from the Left Greens. Very strongly anti-EU, pro "a society driven by sustainability". Wants better welfare, human rights and nature conservation.

The Humanist Party

Wants to "prioritize human beings before money". The economy should be at the service of the people.

All bankrupt companies should be converted into workers cooperatives. Pro interest free banks.

Against "the European Union of Banks" and the Euro. Wants a stop to private banks issuing money.

Natural resources should be under the control of the state. Pro a reduction in economic growth (hardly a popular position during a major crisis...).

Dawn

Sympathizes with the international 99% movement.

Pro abolishing price indexing on household loans and wants a cap on interest rates. No official view of the EU and the Euro as they "want the people to decide". "Strongly pro the new constitution".

The amount of party splitting on the Icelandic left wing is simply ridiculous.

How about developing some genuinely leftwing alternative.

As you can see, they have plenty of those.


Liberals

Bright Future

Describes their ideology as "Liberalism with a twist", the twist being environmentalism.

Pro-EU and the Euro, wants to create more industrial variety and a more efficient labour market.
Pro the new constitution.

Libertarians

Right Green Peoples Party

Libertarian environmentalists (a very Icelandic combo...), wants to create a new currency, the riksdalur, which should be pegged to the US dollar to prevent the destabilizing effect of the enormous amount of off shore kronar.

Wants a 20% flat income tax, pro smaller government but wants to preserve the core of the welfare state through increased efficiency (the strange idea that you can keep welfare with much lower taxes just by cutting bureaucracy is a pet idea among Scandinavian libertarians making them rather untrustworthy), wants to create an Icelandic equivalent of TARP and reduce index linked housing loans to November 2007 levels. Wants to combat "the vulture funds strangling hold on the Icelandic banking system", not sure how.

Others

The Household Party

Breakaway group of moderates/populists from IP. Started at April 1, so the Icelandic media first thought the party was a joke.

Aims to free Icelanders from debt slavery, but are rather vague on how they going to do it, wants to revoke the banks license to print money and are pro increased banking regulation, wants  lower taxes but based on Keynesian arguments, pro resource extraction (seems to be slightly anti-green).

The Republicans which was a splinter group of moderate Conservatives/trade union Conservatives from IP is one of the groups behind the party.

Iceland Democratic Party or Democracy Watch

Mainly a single issue party created as a protest against IPs attempts to stall the new constitution, which 67% of Icelanders said they wanted implemented in a 2012 referendum. Mostly people who havent previously been involved in politics, but also some moderate Conservatives who are fed up with the present IP leadership.

Regarding EU they want to finish the negotiations and "let the people decide", pro increased use of referendums.

Anti-establishment, consider the privatisation of the banks 1998-2003 to be a corrupt "Russian style takeover" orchestrated by political fat cats.  

[politicus]

A couple of historical things I forgot which may be helpful in understanding the current situation.

- The Icelandic trade union movemet was (and to some extent still is) split between Communists/Socialists (from 1956 connected to the Peoples Alliance - now split between many parties), Social Democrats and the IP. The existence of Conservative trade unionists were because of the importance of the Keflavik military base question and NATO-membership as a political cleavage in Iceland, with many workers being pro-American/NATO and anti-communist.
IP seems to be losing parts of this group with their present right wing turn, but then again they where polling in the mid 30s a couple of months ago. It may just be temporary.

- The welfare state in Iceland was never at mainland Scandinavian level, its more comparable to pre-Thatcher Britain with the national health care traditionally being seen as the centerpiece of the welfare system.

- Icelandic SD has at times (mid 80s-mid 90s) had economic policies to the right of PP. Parts of the party were also inspired by New Labour and there is still a strong "Blairite" fraction in the SDA. The strong position of the right wing was the main reason why the Left Greens dropped out of the Alliance.

[Zanas]

(the strange idea that you can keep welfare with much lower taxes just by cutting bureaucracy is a pet idea among Scandinavian libertarians capitalist ass-licking liberals, moderates and socialists worldwide.)

Fixed.

[politicus]

PPs answers to a recent quistionaire in the Reykjavik Grapewine online magazine. It confirms my impression that their campaign is fairly left wing (by PP standards) and is not aiming at a coalition with IP. Several of their proposals will be totally unacceptable for the right wing in IP. Its also relatively friendly towards the government.  

Notice the talk about cooperatives. IP also denies there are any problems with gender inequality in Iceland and this is fairly feminist (by centre-right standards).

3. Is there a foreign sister party that you identify with, one that international readers might identify with?

The Progressive Party has multiple sister parties, among them the centre parties in the other Nordic countries and the Democratic Party in United States of America.

4.    What do you consider the most important issue facing Iceland today? How about the most important issue to consider in this election?

The Progressive Party considers job creation, the removal of indexation on consumer loans and correction of consumer loans that have grown abnormally (because of the financial collapse and the indexation) to be the main focus both in the election and for the next four years to come.

5.    What do you admire about the current coalition government and what it accomplished in the last four years? What do you dislike? What will you do better?

The current coalition government formed by the Social Democratic Alliance and Left Green Movement have passed measures encouraging the unemployed to go to school. The next step is to motivate the creation of new private sector jobs. The Progressive Party intends to take the much-needed next step to encourage that as well as removing the laws about indexation.

6. Was the financial crisis in 2008 and the problems Iceland now faces in some way caused by government policy and action or the lack thereof? Is your party in some way responsible for this? Why or why not?

As the current Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir said after Icesave verdict was delivered, now is not the time to look for someone to blame. However, deregulation in the years preceding the crash went a step too far and it would have been sensible to enact laws and regulation prohibiting the banks from overextending their lending.

7. Specifically, how do you plan to bring Iceland back to economic prosperity?

The Progressive Party believes that a balanced system of cooperative firms, private firms and the public sector will provide the best results for Icelandic prosperity.

In the last four years, there have been about 200 changes to the tax system. The Icelandic economy has to be stable, transparent and trustworthy to create an environment where initiative, hard work and social justice are the primary objective.

For that to happen the tax system needs to be relatively simple to approach and competitive. Trust in government also needs to be high to allow for the creation of long term plans of both individuals and companies.

8. Do you want to weaken, strengthen or keep unchanged the regulation of the financial industry and other business activity in Iceland?

Creating the right environment for small and medium sized companies to flourish is most important as they employ the largest number of people. The Progressive Party will look to that statement in setting its regulation agenda.

9. Do you plan to increase or decrease the total tax burden in Iceland?

In the last four years there have been about 200 changes to the tax system. The Icelandic economy has to be stable, transparent and trustworthy to create an environment where initiative, hard work and social justice are the primary objective.

For that to be a reality the tax system needs to be relatively simple to approach and competitive. The Progressive Party believes in a tax burden that reflects the standard of healthcare and other public services we´d like to see. But first and foremost there needs to be private and cooperative employment to increase tax revenue.

10. Do you believe in the Icelandic króna? Or will you work to adopt an alternative currency? If so, which one?

If in government, we will work to establish the króna again as a valued currency as it is our currency for the foreseeable future.

11. Do you support the newly passed law removing an expiration date from Iceland’s capital controls? Will your party work to lift these controls? Does it have a timeframe in mind?

Lifting capital controls is important to Iceland’s economic health, but it must be done cautiously so that there won’t be an outpouring of currency. As the Progressive Party considers the króna the currency for the foreseeable future, the timeframe is sooner rather than later.

12. Do you believe that the collapse was more than an economic one? If so, what else failed in 2008 and does it still need fixing?

There was a failure of institutions as described in the SIC report and was dealt with in part by a parliamentarian conclusion. That work is ongoing.

13. How can the government best serve Icelandic homes?

Give the nation the tools to succeed; Iceland is rich with resources, resources that should enable all Icelanders to be fairly well off.

14. What is your stance on Iceland’s application to the European Union? Do you ultimately think Icelanders' interests would be best served by being part of this coalition?

Icelanders' interests would be best served by staying out of the EU.

15. What is your stance on the new constitution that was called for in the wake of Iceland’s financial crisis? Are you for or against pushing the current draft through parliament? Why or why not?

We think that the constitution should be revised and want it to be finished by the end of next term, but it has to be done soundly and in agreement with the majority of the nation. It should not be forced through parliament. The current draft should be used as a template for a revised constitution.

16. Will your party do something to protect the land and its resources? Is a more stringent regulative framework needed to ensure conservation of the environment?

The Progressive Party believes that it is important to include an article in the constitution that puts resources within Icelandic territory into the national ownership.

17. Is gender equality a problem in Iceland? If so, what does your plan to do to ensure equality?

There are still some issues that need to be dealt with. The Progressive Party would like work against negative gender stereotypes, prepare both genders during their early years to work together in society, secure gender equality in the distribution of public funds and, last but not least, to reach pay equality for women.

18. Where do you stand on immigration issues?

The Progressive Party has historically been a pioneer in terms of immigration issues in Iceland, leading the foundation of alþjóðahús (“intercultural centre”), fjölmenningarhús (“multicultural centre”) and establishing the flóttamannaráð (“refugee council”) during its time in government.

Today, The Progressive Party believes that it is important to enable immigrants to be vital members of Icelandic society and considers knowledge of the local language key to doing this.

19. Does your party harbour any ideas about the role of religion in governance?

The Progressive Party sees Christian values as the foundation of Icelandic culture and supports the national church as it is set in the current law.

20. Are there any parties that your party will not work with in a coalition government? Why?

No. The Progressive Party Chairman Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson has said that he and the party are willing to form a government with the party/parties that support the Progressive Parties ideas about job creation, the removal of indexation on consumer loans and correction on consumer loans that have grown abnormally (because of the financial collapse and the indexation).

IPs responses to the same questions.

http://www.grapevine.is/Features/ReadArticle/Sjalfstaedisflokkurinn-The-Independence-Party-Interviewed

[DC Al Fine]

Yeah, that doesn't strike me as very IP friendly.

[politicus]

New poll from MMR (8/4). Probably more realistic than the last one, and slightly less catastrophic for the government. Six parties above the threshold.

EDIT: Another one from Félagsvísindastofnun (10/4) - in the second row - its a little worse for IP and Pirates and more votes for the small leftist parties and brighter for Bright Future.
 
Left-Green Movement 8.1% 8.8% (6)
Social Democratic Alliance 12.7% 12.6%  (9)
Bright Future 9,2% 10.9% (7)
Pirates 7.8% 5.6% (4)
PP 30.2% 30.9% (24)
IP 21.2% 18.9% (13)

Dawn 1.9% 1.4%  
Democracy Watch 3.6% 3.0%
Right Green Movement 2.2% 2.7%
Households Party 1,0% 1,9%
Other 2.0% 3,3%


About the MMR poll

Most of the wasted votes are on the left wing, so there is room for improvement for the Left Greens if left wingers decide not to waste their votes. Maybe DW makes it in the end.
Its about 15% left wingers and DW + Dawn would be in if they hadnt split.
Right Greens look lost after it was discovered their leader doesnt pay income tax in Iceland.

The poll has PP + Bright Future at 39,4% and the rest at 49,8%, 10,7% are wasted votes.

Looks like PP will have to form a minority government with support of SDA (and perhaps Bright Future) if this is the result. Their problem is that both SDA and BF are pro-EU.
          

[politicus]

One element that explains part of the leftist governments decline in the polls is the media situation in Iceland.

Its largest media corporation by far is 365 Miðlar which is 90% owned by Ingibjörg Pálmadóttir, the wife of London based businessman Jon Asgeir Johannesson, the richest "financial viking" from the boom era. Its well known that Jon Asgeir has been using his influence to change stories about himself (see http://grapevine.is/Home/ReadArticle/Jon-Asgeir-Pressures-365-Journalists), but he has also used it against politicians he perceives as "unfriendly to investors" (read leftists) .
 
The second large private media corporation in Iceland is the one centered around Morgunbladid, which used to be the only daily in Iceland and has strong ties to IP. Its dominant shareholder is Gudbjorg Matthiasdottir, who is on the Top 5 of the richest persons in Iceland. She owns a large fishing enterprise and a lot of valuable fishing quota. Editor in chief is no other than Mr. David Oddson, ex IP prime minister (1991-2004), chairman of the board of governors of the central bank (2005-2009), and generally viewed as more responsible for the banking crash than any other politician in Iceland. All though Morgunbladid is nominally independent conservative this translates as Independence Party conservative and the paper is highly biased against the government.

Its of course not uncommon that rich right wingers own the media, but in a small country like Iceland the effect becomes stronger.

[You kip if you want to...]

One element that explains part of the leftist governments decline in the polls is the media situation in Iceland.

It largest media corporation by far is 365 Miðlar which is primarily owned by the wife of Jon Asgeir Johannesson, one of the "financial vikings" from the boom era. Its well known that Jon Asgeir has been using his influence to change stories about him, but he has also used it against politicians he perceives as "unfriendly to investors" (read leftists) .
 
The second large media corporation in Iceland is the one centered around Morgunbladid, which used to be the only daily in Iceland and has strong ties to IP. Its dominant shareholder is Gudbjorg Matthiasdottir, who is one the Top 5 of the richest persons in Iceland. She owns a large fishing enterprise and a lot of valuable fishing quota. Editor in chief is no other than Mr. David Oddson, ex IP prime minister, ex governor of the central bank, and generally viewed as more responsible for the banking crash than any other politician in Iceland. All though nominally independent conservative this translates as Independence Party conservative and the paper is highly biased against the government.

Its of course not uncommon that rich right wingers own the media, but in a small country like Iceland the effect becomes stronger.

Basically your bog-standard Murdoch type oligarch then?

[politicus]

One element that explains part of the leftist governments decline in the polls is the media situation in Iceland.

It largest media corporation by far is 365 Miðlar which is primarily owned by the wife of Jon Asgeir Johannesson, one of the "financial vikings" from the boom era. Its well known that Jon Asgeir has been using his influence to change stories about him, but he has also used it against politicians he perceives as "unfriendly to investors" (read leftists) .
 
The second large media corporation in Iceland is the one centered around Morgunbladid, which used to be the only daily in Iceland and has strong ties to IP. Its dominant shareholder is Gudbjorg Matthiasdottir, who is one the Top 5 of the richest persons in Iceland. She owns a large fishing enterprise and a lot of valuable fishing quota. Editor in chief is no other than Mr. David Oddson, ex IP prime minister, ex governor of the central bank, and generally viewed as more responsible for the banking crash than any other politician in Iceland. All though nominally independent conservative this translates as Independence Party conservative and the paper is highly biased against the government.

Its of course not uncommon that rich right wingers own the media, but in a small country like Iceland the effect becomes stronger.

Basically your bog-standard Murdoch type oligarch then?

Oligarchs for sure since Iceland has a small and closely knit economic elite, but not Murdoch style as they didn't make their money in the media business and its not even their main business area (unless you consider Jon Asgeir's wife an independent operator), but there is significant owner influence on editorial policies, much stronger than its usual in Scandinavian countries where such practices are generally frowned upon.

[politicus]

One more reason the government of Iceland is unpopular: Failing to pass the constitution that should replace the old one, which is just an amended version of the 1874 constitution from the Danish era (revised a bit in 1920 after independence and with the presidency clauses added in 1944).

The new constitution needed to be passed by two consecutive parliaments, but the government cut a deal with PP and IP deciding that it can be passed if the next parliament approves it with a 2/3 majority and 40% of the population approves it in a referendum. These terms makes it almost impossible to get the bill ratified since it abolishes the disproportional representation of rural constituencies (a bulwark against total Reykjavik domination), a change many rural MPs obviously do not like.

The process:

A. A National Assembly was convened comprising 950 individuals selected at random from the national registry. Every Icelander 18 years or older had an equal chance of being selected to a seat in the assembly.

B. From a roaster of 522 candidates from all walks of life, 25 representatives were elected by the nation to a Constitutional Assembly to draft a new constitution reflecting the popular will as expressed by the National Assembly.

C. The Supreme Court (with 8 of its 9 justices having been appointed by the Independence Party) annulled the Constitutional Assembly election!

D. Parliament appointed the 25 candidates who got the most votes to a Constitutional Council which in 2011 drafted and unanimously passed a new constitution.
The main new elements were:

- Electoral reform securing full proportionality by making Iceland one constituency.
- National ownership of natural resources - including the sea and the underground.
- Direct democracy through national referenda - if 10%  of the electorate demands it.
- Freedom of information.
- Environmental protection.
- Checks and balances.
 
E. Various politicians then started to undermine the bill for various reasons.

- Not liking the idea that the National Assembly and the Constitutional Council  intrudes on their turf.
- Rural MPs worried about their reelection prospects. (mainly PP)
- Fearing that national referenda might be undermining their power. (some SDA and PP, IP)
- Fearing exposure of their dirty deals under a freedom of information act. (mainly SDA, PP and IP)
- The fishing lobby that wants to preserve the privileged and very profitable access to the  fishing grounds for owners of big vessels. Since Big Fishing is one of the main donors in Icelandic politics this is crucial. (mainly IP)

F. In a national referendum on the bill on 20 October 2012 where 67% of the electorate supported the bill. National ownership of natural resources got 83% support, direct democracy 73%, and electoral reform 67%.

G. After an e-mail campaign organized by ordinary citizens 32 out of 63 members of parliament declared their support for the bill and wanted to vote on it.

H. The president of the parliament then decided to postpone the vote (this decision might have been illegal).

I. A majority of the MPs then put the bill on ice and furthermore decided to require a 2/3 majority for any constitutional change in the next Parliament + a majority representing min. 40% of the population approving in a referendum.

In her farewell address outgoing Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir called this decision "the saddest day of my 35 years in parliament" but her government originally had 34 seats in Parliament and many voters feel she could have pushed the constitution through if she had been more forcefull and had acted tougher against reluctant members of her own party - it was mainly rural SPAs joining the opposition that prevented the bill from passing.

[Antonio the Sixth]

One element that explains part of the leftist governments decline in the polls is the media situation in Iceland.

Its largest media corporation by far is 365 Miðlar which is primarily owned by Ingibjörg Pálmadóttir, the wife of London based businessman Jon Asgeir Johannesson, the richest "financial viking" from the boom era. Its well known that Jon Asgeir has been using his influence to change stories about himself, but he has also used it against politicians he perceives as "unfriendly to investors" (read leftists) .
 
The second large private media corporation in Iceland is the one centered around Morgunbladid, which used to be the only daily in Iceland and has strong ties to IP. Its dominant shareholder is Gudbjorg Matthiasdottir, who is on the Top 5 of the richest persons in Iceland. She owns a large fishing enterprise and a lot of valuable fishing quota. Editor in chief is no other than Mr. David Oddson, ex IP prime minister (1991-2004), chairman of the board of governors of the central bank (2005-2009), and generally viewed as more responsible for the banking crash than any other politician in Iceland. All though Morgunbladid is nominally independent conservative this translates as Independence Party conservative and the paper is highly biased against the government.

Its of course not uncommon that rich right wingers own the media, but in a small country like Iceland the effect becomes stronger.

The left should have passed a Media Pluralism Act of some kind when they had the opportunity.