In Oslo, the FRP has become the non-party – VG

JØRAN KALLMYR, Progress Party

The success factor is as always:

• Cheerful and accommodating local politicians who care about the daily lives of the people in their township.
• Politicians who speak a language they understand, but who are also serious and are perceived by all popular groups as decent representatives of them.

It is not without reason that Øygarden and other teams, especially in the western part of Norway, are doing very well.

But the teams that have not done well are, for example, Oslo. Oslo was once the stronghold of FrP. At that time, Oslo FrP was not a national conservative party. They were a party to make life easier for people. Many FrP have arisen because FrP supported them in building a garage, or because the company we helped build made sure that both the boss and the employees understood that we are the party for most of the people.

Today in Oslo, the FrP has become a party that has taken over the conservatives and wants to avoid the densification of the city. We have become the non-party that is negative for almost everything new. It’s as if FrP in the early 80’s shouldn’t have been for longer store opening hours, elimination of Televerk’s monopoly, open to channels other than NRK, etc. etc. But it was FrP who started talking about these issues, and was the driving force. That was what differentiated us from the rest, we were Progreso (the party). This is the backbone of FrP, freedom for the individual, use of new solutions and technology.

To you who are supporters of anti-globalism. I don’t think you understand what you’re talking about. Let me emphasize that we are five million people and we have completely depended on international agreements. NATO gives us security, the EEA gives us market access for Norwegian companies. UN – fully agrees that the UN does not function optimally, but it is actually in Norway’s interest to work for peace and human rights. This does not mean that we agree with the way it is done and, for example, we will. Has trade, does not help (uhjelp). But the “anti-globalists” are also against it, they don’t want trade.

A few years ago, the anti-globalists were the gang that called itself Attac, a radical left-wing socialist group that threw stones into the streets.

Some believe that the EEA / Schengen agreement provides for more immigration of third-country nationals. Actually, this is completely wrong. Schengen cooperation means that many of those who come to Norway as asylum seekers can be returned to other Schengen countries. We couldn’t have done it without this agreement. It is first and foremost Norwegian law that has been the problem of the right of asylum. There have been 100 austerity measures since the FRP came into office. And the result: there are around 1,200 asylum seekers a year, compared to 10 to 12,000 in the years before 2013.

And no, it is not Schengen that allows foreigners to seek asylum in Norway. Norwegian law and the Refugee Convention provide for this, and support 75 percent of the Storting, only the FrP once asks questions and challenges it. The fact is that we can build a wall around the whole of Norway, but if a foreigner comes and says, I am applying for asylum, that person must be able to enter according to Norwegian law. It has nothing to do with either Schengen or the EEA.

But those who believe that FrP will not let a single refugee and asylum seeker in are directly wrong. We have always said that we will accept some. Previously, it was quantified in the match program. We are not opposed to foreigners in Norway, but the problem is the number of people who come at the same time. It is the consideration for integration that governs FrP’s immigration policy. We cannot accept more than we can integrate into our society. Those who come then, we will also welcome them in a good way.

I am not in favor of EU membership, on the contrary, I am strongly opposed. And I think that the EEA agreement means that we have to swallow too many strange directives and regulations. But that does not apply to immigration. Norwegian law, the Refugee Convention and European human rights govern the field of asylum. This has nothing to do with the EEA. Removing the EEA agreement to reduce immigration is therefore a completely meaningless statement. But Norwegian trade and industry are completely dependent on the EEA. Perhaps western Norwegian counties see this better than Oslo residents, who are sitting in their own bubble at the office, while western Norwegian counties make a living exporting.

And then to some beloved conspiracy theories: the UN’s global impact on migration is not a supranational agreement that forces Norway to accept refugees and asylum seekers. It is an agreement that encourages countries to have legal routes (such as students and work permits in Norway), but Norway is completely free to decide on Norwegian law itself. And Norway has not liberalized anything as a result of this agreement, on the contrary, we have implemented a series of adjustments since the agreement entered into force. But it is important that you also say that all countries are obliged to receive their own citizens, and it is important that foreigners return if not to be here. In fact, we depend on international efforts to return them, we cannot parachute them from the plane or force other countries to accept them. We must cooperate with other countries to further promote Norwegian interests.

To promote the interest of Norway is to put Norway first. Norwegian companies need international trade agreements (if they don’t know, we live off exports) and we need security through NATO.

We have the same population as part of New York or London. We need allies, both in trade and security. And to put it this way, we have done very well with the EEA agreement, the Norwegian business has had a fantastic development from the EEA (with all its flaws and shortcomings). Without allies, we are p. Eg hopeless against countries like China and Russia, both economically and in terms of security. Putting Norwegian interests first means looking beyond the tip of your nose.

It is not the fault of FrP when the rest of the parties in the Storting do not want to do what we want, like p. Eg to reduce the number of refugees from the quota. So the FrPs should not demand that FrP take responsibility for what the other parties do not want. Some, both Storting politicians and others, need to be more concerned about why we are political, that is, about getting results for our citizens. Because we think our policy is good. We cannot have politicians who only count personal likes on Facebook when they stand out at the expense of the party.

The post was first published on Kallmyr’s Facebook page and is reproduced here with permission.