In Norway we've had two referendums about EU membership. One in 1972 and another in 1994. Both times the people voted no. Norway, Switzerland Liechtenstein and Iceland are the only west european countries that aren't members of the union. Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway are members of the The European Economic Area (EEA). The EEA is an agreement between member states of European Free Trade Association (EFTA), the European Community, and all member states of the European Union. It allows these EFTA countries to participate in the European single market without joining the EU.
This means that Norway is practically subject to many EU laws without having any particular political power in decisions made inside the union.
There are also many disadvantages followed by a EU membership. The Norwegian agriculture has no chance against the large scale food production in mainland Europe if the import restrictions are removed.
Iceland do now consider a bid for EU membership. This means that Norway and tiny little Liechtenstein (Not even visible on the world map) probably will be left as lonely members of the EEA.
Norway and the European Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here are more detailed info from Wikipedia:
In favour of membership
Interdependence prevents conflict
Since the Dark Ages, European countries have frequently been at war with each other. The increasing interdependence of EU member states makes war an unlikely option. Generally speaking; when a country joins the Union, more continuous dialogue relaxes relations and prevents conflicts.
Unity against external threats
In e.g. a potential cold war scenario, unity and solidarity amongst member states could be important. It is reasonable to assume that Norway as an EU member would experience greater solidarity by other member states in such a situation. Today, NATO doesn't cover all of the EU, and military cooperation between EU members is expected to be deepened.[11] Former Prime Minister Thorbj?rn Jagland has argued that Norway would have a stronger position within NATO if it had an EU membership.[12]
Influence over decisions that affect Norway
Since its signing in 1994, the European Economic Area (EEA) agreement between EFTA and the EU has been under fire by both the Pro-EU and eurosceptic camps in Norway. It has been criticised for being an undemocratic intrusion upon Norwegian law due to the lack of any Norwegian participation in the formulation of legislation. Norway has a right to abstain, but has never used it. If Norway became an EU member, it would take part in the shaping of the laws and have a vote on EU decisions making in general.
Adopt the single currency
If Norway became a member it could legally adopt the euro in line with recommendation of the European Central Bank, as opposed to adopting it unilaterally. A 2007 report suggested that Norway would benefit from doing so because the Norwegian economy is very similar to that of the Eurozone. The swap of currency would be especially positive for the export industry.
Little reform needed
Norway is already compliant with most additional requirements that EU membership would imply, to the point that a few years ago Romano Prodi, then president of the European Commission, commented that "Norway is already the best member of the EU".
Participation and influence
The EU is emerging as an economical and political counterbalance to the United States and rising Asian economies on the world stage.
Economic security
When the oil and gas alongside the Norwegian coast has run out, membership in the European Union might offer economic security and solidarity.
Norway losing cash by staying out of EU
Norway annually loses out on ?180 million by not being an EU member, according to the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.
Reduction in subsidies, cheaper food and alcohol
Those opposed to Norway's heavy subsidies for farming point out that protectionism by import barriers in this sector has led to very high prices in food for consumers, and increased competition would lower them. Opening to the EU market may also require Norway to reduce its heavy taxes on alcohol.
Securing Nynorsk Nynorsk- and Bokm?l-Norwegian are the two official languages in Norway. Nynorsk is the least used, but would most likely obtain status as an official EU language,[citation needed] in the same way as Irish did in 2007. Such a status would mean that legislation approved by both the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers would be translated into Nynorsk, and interpretation from Nynorsk would be available at European Parliament plenary sessions and some Council meetings.
Against membership
Further sharing of sovereignty
Norway would have to amend its constitution to become a member. It would have MEPs and its own European Commissioner, but would have to rely on the opinions of other members states in more policy areas than with today's EEA agreement.
Democratic deficit and little transparency
Currently, many EU decision makers, such as the European Commissioners, are appointed by member states' governments, and not directly by EU citizens. When national ministers gather in the Council of the European Union, their process of deciding have been criticised for not being transparent enough.
It should however be noted that the proposed Treaty of Lisbon, which is expected to come into force in early 2009, empowers the directly elected (by the people of Norway also, had it been a member) European Parliament, partly at the expense of the Council. The new treaty also requires all meetings of the Council to be held in public.
Agriculture and fisheries
In case of EU membership, Norway would have to take part in the Common Fisheries Policy. Norwegian fishing quotas would have to be shared with the rest of the EU. Some claim the coastal areas of Norway, which rely heavily on fishing industry, would suffer from a reduced share of the catch.
The often steep Norwegian topography is unfavourable for agriculture. Some fear that Norway's relatively small farming industry would be disadvantageously exposed to competition from other parts of the Internal Market. Some fear state subsidies to Norwegian farming and fisheries would be made illegal, furthermore depopulating rural areas.
Reduction in economic self-determination
Euro adoption is de jure obligatory for all new member states of the European Union, and the European Central Bank would control Norway's interest rate and monetary policy. This would, for example, make it impossible for the Norwegian government to use the rate as a political tool. In 2008, a DnB NOR economist said that Norway would not benefit sufficiently on adopting the euro due to the impact of high oil-prices on Norway's economy.
What should we do if we in the near future will have a new referendum here in Norway? Should we vote ja or nei (yes or no)?
I'm on the "Ja" side!
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace