Shut up, dog! Congratulations, Blacksheeps!

Last night, the band Blacksheeps from Nesseby in Finnmark, Norway, won the Nordic MGP Jr contest with their great tune about the obese dog Kamilla. The song's title, "Oro jaska beana", is Sami for "shut up, dog!" Congratulations to Blacksheeps - well deserved! "Oro Jaska beana" can be heard and seen on Youtube.

Harr harr! - modern day pirates

Since I was a kid, I've been fascinated with pirates. I used to love reading about them. One of my favorite stories was about the famous pirate Edward Teach. Teach, better known as Blackbeard, fired up pieces of hemp in his beard to seem more fearful and demon-like to his enemies. Buccaneers, Swashbucklers and Privateers, hmmm, those must have been the days.. Since I've started blogging, I haven't really seen any natural opportunity to write anything about pirates. But now, with all the buzz in the media about pirates, I'm not going to relinquish on the chance to finally comment on piracy!

The last year or couple of years, the coast off Somalia and around the bay of Aden has become a real hot-bed for piracy, and a real hazard for ships passing through. The last year, pirate assaults off the east coast of Africa has increased by 75%. Just this week, on Thursday, a band of Somali pirates demanded a ransom of 25 million US dollars for the Aramco-owned oil tanker Sirius Star. And on Tuesday this week, a Greek cargo ship with a crew of 20-odd was also caught by Somali pirates.

The piracy in this area is a scourge for the shipping industry, and has forced several shipping companies to send tankers and cargo ships travelling between Asia and Europe around the Cape Good Hope instead of through the Suez Canal as they will have to pass through the bay of Aden the get there. One of those is the Norwegian company Odfjell, which weekly has got 2-3 ships passing through this area. For Odfjell this is a decision based on the crews safety, and will imply a large jump in costs due to the increased distance to be travelled.

The Norwegian Union of Ship-Owners (norsk rederiforbund) is frustrated that not enough is being done to rid this and other areas of piracy. The Union wants the Norwegian government to deploy military forces in the area to combat pirates. That might well be done, as the navy recently has been training on pirate-combating tactics. But even if Norway contributed to an international force, this would have to be huge, as the area in question is enormous - 6.6 million square kilometers. And also, of course the growth of piracy has its roots in the conditions in conflict-ridden Somalia itself. Without bettering the conditions in the country, solving the piracy-problem might be near impossible.

Political advertising..

Although political advertising is allowed in some media in Norway, it is not allowed in television. The ban on televised political ads has been a matter of some debate in Norway, and arguments both for and against lifting the ban has been put forward.

The strongest of the arguments is that to allow this would give the political parties with the most financial backing (i.e Labour and the Right Party) an unfair advantage in reaching more people with their message. The smaller parties like the Coastal Party (Kystpartiet) and even the Socialist Left Part (SV) would not be able to fund as much political advertising on TV. To lift the ban on televised political ads would be to subject the politics to the mechanisms of the capitalist market.

To a certain extent I do agree with this argument. Televised advertising is expensive, and only the largest and wealthiest parties would be able to afford to advertise enough for it to be effective. If it were to be allowed, it could be that this would lead to political parties being more driven to seek funding from private business. I do not believe that anyone gives away money for free. Funding comes with a price. So, if we could avoid that, it would be good.

All good arguments for upholding the ban aside, I still think it is a real democratic problem that the political parties are not allowed to present their political agendas and programmes in any unfiltered way on TV. Sure, we do have a good coverage of politics in the news, and politicians do partake on political TV-debates and other TV programs. But these are all filtered by journalists or debate-show hosts, often seeking to make their shows more interesting by focusing on the more sensational aspects and on conflict than necessarily on the parties' political programmes. And it is the journalists and show-hosts that decide exactly what is discussed.

It could be argued that the parties are allowed to present their message elsewhere, like e.g on their websites and in other media where they are allowed to advertise. But TV is still most people's main channel of information about politics, and will probably remain so for the foreseeable future.

Maybe in this matter we could get some ideas from the UK. Political advertising is not allowed in any laissez-faire fashion there either, but the parties are allowed a certain amount of free political TV advertising. This could be a way of solving this that we could contemplate as well. Each political party could be allotted a certain time for presenting their policies and their programmes on the state owned NRK (the same amount for each party or based on their number of seats in the Parliament). There could even be a minimum timeframe to avoid the parties presenting their policies in a too simplified way. Even "negative ads" could be allowed, by which I mean ads that point out weaknesses in the opposing parties' policies - this is a very effective way of unveiling inaccuracies etc. in such information.

Even if we take into account all the arguments for keeping a ban on political ads in TV, it is in my opinion very peculiar that we want to prevent our political parties and politicians from presenting their own policies. Instead of doing everything we can to educate the voters on the policies they are voting for or against, we are de facto limiting the range of information that voters are allowed. And in my mind, we are banning one of the most important sources of information.

About a road..

I have moved back to Norway. Back to my home town up in the cold, high north - the district of Finnmark. And that is the main reason that no posts have appeared the last couple of weeks. Even though I started this blog as a way to keep myself somehow informed and mentally occupied with things happening back home when I was living abroad, I will continue along the same lines from inside of Norway. In a way, it might be more a view from "the inside." But Finnmark is far far away from the more densely populated south, so it will be in some ways a view from afar still..

Since I have moved up here, it might be appropriate that I start out with a current issue from Finnmark - the controversies about a road being built to an even more remote and smaller village than the one that I am living in. The issue touches on an issue that I have brushed on before, the relationship between Samis and non-Samis.

The tiny village of Nervei has long been without any proper road connecting it to "the rest" of the world, but has relied on a ferry arriving from time to time. Not being quite happy with that, understandably, the people of Nervei has done a great job in collecting money and organizing the building of a road of about 20 km themselves, the work on which is going on now.

The problem with the road and the work arises partly from the fact that the road runs through land that is used as grazing lands for reindeer. So, Reindeer Grazing District Number 13 has taken this to court trying to get the roadworks stopped, or alternatively and much better to get some economic compensation. This issue really exemplifies that old joke that the two Norwegian terms that the Samis bother to learn are "our Sami rights" and "compensation." Many non-Samis see this whole story as a Sami knee-jerk reflex to get even more compensation.

The reindeer-herding Samis do rely on lands all over Finnmark for grazing, and some of their claims are legitimate. The lands are not very fertile, and are easily grazed down. Thus, herding the reindeer around is essential both to feed them and to avoid damaging the lands used for grazing. But in this particular situation, their claims ring terribly hollow. We are talking about an improvement of an already existing tractor trail, which means it is not a case of destroying any grazable areas. And it is also not a case of a heavily trafficked road that will disturb the reindeer.

Personally I think issues like this, where a small part of the Sami reindeer-farmers are trying to exert their influence to wring some more compensation out of the State coffers, are having a detrimental effect on the relationship between Samis and non-Samis in Finnmark. Non-Samis are being annoyed and aggravated over what they perceive as exerting their power just for the sake of it.

For more information about this road, take a look at this blog (in Norwegian: På vei til Nervei