As I recall jensen of Siumut party has clearly stated that Kvanefjeld should pass if it meets and passes the conditions that it has... previous statements 2021 and 2020.....
Jensen on the Uranium Ban at 100 has stated that they would not make changes to the ban to have some continuity...
However IMO that does not apply to GML based on his previous statements....
Further Naaja Nathanielsen when questioned in the parliament about a referendum quite clearly stated that it was not necessary.
She also did not give full disclosure on her decision making...
Pele Brobergs latest story from the Sermitsiaq newspaper 6 days ago:
ENGLISH TRANSLATION:Broberg calls for answers: Why don't parties want a uranium referendum?
Naleraq's Pele Broberg lacks answers from Siumut in particular as to why they will not consider his proposal to hold a referendum on uranium mining. Siumut chairman Erik Jensen rejects the criticism: - We do not pursue zigzag politics, he says.
- If there is a majority for a proposal to be included as an item, then it must be taken up. That is why I have approached Siumut, because it is stated in their party program that they would like to have uranium extraction, says Pele Broberg.
HOMAS MONK WEIRUM
Friday, 28 October 2022 - 11:56
A new ban on uranium mining was passed by a narrow majority last autumn. Naleraq voted through the ban together with then-coalition partner IA.
However, Naleraq chairman Pele Broberg has raised the issue again when over the summer he had a bill submitted for consultation on a referendum on uranium mining.
The proposal was made clear, but Inatsisartut's Presidency decided that the proposal should not be considered at this meeting.
This upsets Pele Broberg, and he tells Sermitsiaq.AG that he continues to work to have the proposal processed, and he misses an answer from the coalition party Siumut in particular as to why they will not participate in processing his proposal in the hall.
Will avoid it becoming a theme in the election campaign
Pele Broberg points out that according to Siumut's party programme, the party is in favor of uranium extraction, and now the party has the chance to hold a referendum on the subject. According to Broberg, a proposal must be taken up if a majority of the members want it:
- If there is a majority for a proposal to be included as an item, then it must be taken up. That is why I have approached Siumut, because it is stated in their party program that they would like to have uranium extraction, says Pele Broberg.
According to the Naleraq chairman, the overall aim is to avoid uranium again becoming a major theme in the next election campaign:
- Naleraq wants the uranium issue not to be made an election campaign theme, but for the people's voice to be heard. Unfortunately, Siumut has now publicly indicated that it does not want to explore the possibilities of the raw materials industry in the future, and listen to the voice of the people, says Pele Broberg.
Jensen: Referendum could have been passed last year
At Siumut, chairman Erik Jensen flatly rejects the criticism from Naleraq:
- Firstly, I would like to point out that it is Naleraq itself that, in its own way, rejected a referendum on uranium last autumn under point 23 in Inatsisartut, says Erik Jensen.
He refers to the fact that during the processing of the uranium ban last autumn, a proposal to send the ban to a referendum was up for grabs. Still, the ban was passed without a referendum by Naleraq and IA in Inatsisartut.
- We tried to compromise, and our party was willing to talk about different options. Naleraq itself rejected the referendum, and that half a year later they blame us for not wanting one or the other, it must be at Naleraq's own expense, says Erik Jensen.
-
Will be frivolous governance
The Siumut chairman also refers to the fact that, in connection with Siumut entering into a coalition with IA, he stated that the uranium issue will not be taken up again in this election period:
- We do not pursue a zigzag policy. We respect decisions taken by a majority in Inatsisartut.
- Our starting point is now that the uranium issue must be put to the people, and not put between the parties, which is also evident from the coalition agreement. I must also refer to the rules of procedure for Inatsisartut which Siumut respects and follows - subjects that have already been discussed and decided in Inatsisartut cannot be included again on the agenda during the election period cf. Formal requirements.
Regarding the formal requirements for Pele Broberg's bill, Sermitsiaq.AG has seen the rejection of the proposal. Here, the Bureau for Inatsisartut writes that the proposal is "right on the border of what is formally acceptable", and that it depends on whether the Presidency wants it taken up at the meeting. The Presidency could choose to either reject or take up the item.
Erik Jensen emphasizes that Siumut basically sees raw material extraction as an opportunity to make the social pie bigger and get more income for the country, but that it would be frivolous governance and untrustworthy for investors to change legislation at short intervals.
Responses to the article:
Below 2 responses I was able to translate
A:My God, nuclear power is an important element in the green transition away from fossil fuels. So just get on with that uranium mining!
B:
Spørge-Jørgen alias Pele Broberg is - as in the story - unbelievably ignorant, but unlike the origin of Spørge-Jørgen, Pele Broberg has a demagogic, cunning political goal with his questions.
Completely independent of the context and relevance of reality, Broberg and his party seek to sow ** between social groups as well as elevate possibly ill-considered ambiguities and/or statements open to interpretation as evidence for the national romantic agenda.
Politics in the traditional sense, the party and its chairman have nothing of - or will not disclose such because they are afraid that the voters will have to understand what a mess the party is in a real political context.
I have not posted the names attached to the responses but all can be checked in the Sermitsiaq
"Compromise and Collaboration"
"Go Thor"
(20min delay)
