GoG Uranium Debate Continues

Article taken from Sermitsiaq.AG 13th September 2022.
The U debate continues in the Greenland Parliament. It seems the option of a referendum on uranium mining was again proposed, but rejected by the presidency of the parliament.

Broberg is upset: Uranium vote rejected
Naleraq has proposed that a referendum be held on uranium mining.The proposal has been in public consultation, but it has been rejected from the agenda and will not be considered at the autumn meeting.

Only in the summer was a bill submitted for consultation on holding a referendum on uranium mining.
The former coalition party Naleraq is behind the proposal, which specifically calls for an indicative referendum to be held on 4 April 2023 on the repeal of the Inatsisartutlov on the ban on preliminary investigation, research and exploitation of uranium, etc.
READ ALSO: Pele Broberg wants a referendum on Uranium
The uranium ban was adopted during heated debate at the autumn assembly last year and was, among other things, carried through with votes from Naleraq. Since then, the then coalition disintegrated, and Naleraq is now in opposition.
Over the summer, the proposal for a referendum was submitted for public consultation, but it is not to be found on the public agenda for the autumn meeting.
Sharp criticism
Party chairman in Naleraq Pele Broberg states that the Presidency of Inatsisartut has refused to include the proposal on the agenda.
Sermitsiaq.AG has seen the notice of the rejection of the item. Bureau for Inatsisartut writes that a similar proposal was made during the debate on the uranium ban last year. Here the proposal for a referendum was voted down. However, the bureau also writes that it is up to the presidency whether the item should be on the agenda or not. And so it was a no.
Pele Broberg is not satisfied with that:
- Now it looks like politics is being used to secure the coalition's interests in the Inatsisartut presidency. I am puzzled why Inatsisartut is afraid of the people's vote, says Pele Broberg to Sermitsiaq.AG.
Atassat: Should have been motion for resolution
Party chairman for Atassut, Aqqalu Jerimiassen, is a member of the Presidency for Inatsisartut.
Aqqalu Jerimiassen was precisely behind the proposal for a referendum on the uranium issue during the debate on the ban last autumn. About Naleraq's proposal, Aqqalu Jerimiassen writes:
- Atassat went to the polls on the basis that there should be a referendum, so that all future elections would not be overshadowed by uranium. We also believe that it is a principled decision that must be taken by the population.
- It was a good idea of Naleraq to make a motion for resolution, not a bill, says Aqqalu Jerimiassen in a written comment to Sermitsiaq.AG.
Broberg: Naalakkersuisut has enough
Pele Broberg denies that it would be better if Naleraq had made a so-called resolution proposal, where politicians typically order Naalakkersuisut to do something.
- I do not want to make resolutions in this situation. In the case of a motion for resolution, you just drag it all out again, because then it is Naalakkersuisut who has to draft the bill, send it for consultation and so on.
- Naalakkersuisut has more than enough to do, says Pele Broberg.
The autumn collection begins on 24 September.
https://sermitsiaq.ag/broberg-aergreruran-afstemning-afvist