The left should seek government – VG

Debate Left should in my view be a party that is open to discuss various samarbeidskonstellasjoner. Politics is to will and to accomplish, and then we should neither have allergies for the Fp or Ap.

ABID Q. RAJA, member of parliament (V)

Left to be on our profile 2.april land our regjeringsstandpunkt. I believe our first choice should be a government with ourselves, the Right Sector, with Erna Solberg as prime minister.

Abid Q. Raja.

Photo: TERJE BRINGEDAL

at the same time, it is clear that only the election in september may show whether this is a realistic possibility, and that is why I think that the party should not close for other opportunities in advance.

Various constellations

For me, the question is: Manager we best our velgeres votes and confidence by being limited to a possible government consisting of Right, Progress and the Left, or should we be more open in our attitude to cooperation?

the Left should in my view be a party that is open to discuss various samarbeidskonstellasjoner, provided that the cooperation we begin gives us the green light for the policy the voters have given us a mandate to carry out.

Policy is to will and to accomplish, and then we should neither have allergies for the Fp or Ap.

the Position to the Left in april should therefore be that we go to the options on that any regjeringsdeltakelse determined by what kind of attention we can get for our politics, and with a more open attitude about who we are as sentrumsparti can open the door. It is essential for the cooperation we begin is that it helps to ensure that we get the green light for most of our policies.

I want the debate about the party’s choices welcome, both internally in the party, but I also hope others from the outside will help – because our choice can be to determine the direction the Uk takes after the options.

Get more op-eds and comments: Follow the VG Opinions on Facebook!

Regjeringsdeltakelse everything now?

Because I think a debate about the Liberal choices are important, I prepared in connection with the party’s strategy meeting is held a note that outlined the various options and dilemmas we face in the election.

Unfortunately, pieces of this internal memo leaked to the media, so that it appeared as if I primarily wanted to go into government with the conservative party as quickly as possible.

It is not correct. I wanted to also take this option up as one of several possibilities that should be considered seriously before we finally conclude.

In a note about the way forward for the Left, what comes to regjeringsspørsmålet, it is necessary to take up all the possible scenarios. It is omit to discuss the possibility that the cooperation provides the Left, to enter into government at any point in time, would be a half-heartedly note.

also Read: Frithjof Jacobsen: Knut Arild Hareide crushes Erna’s dream

It is not out from the excitement to sit in government with Frp, I have presented some arguments that the Left had been earned regjeringsinntreden everything now. We have been in a committed relationship this regjeringsperioden. It has led to great attention, but with the starting point as samarbeidsparti in Parliament we take no part in the daily management of the majority politics.

This has, as I see it, some obvious disadvantages which must be weighed against the advantage of that the Left have a free position in the Parliament.

Amongst others, the progress party’s government ministers got a larger room to promote his rhetoric, in several cases, a rhetoric that is more suitable to divide people, than to build bridges and create dialogue across the cultural dividing lines.

the Government sets the agenda

Undoubtedly, we have Left got huge attention for a number of important issues in Parliament in the last three years. Among the examples I can mention no posed by oil activity in Lofoten, Vesterålen and Senja, a big bet on the better rusomsorg, huge investments in kollektivtilbudet and better access to cheaper, environmentally friendly cars for everyone who can’t use the collective in it daily. In addition, we have helped to initiate the major reforms that have been important for us, as jernbanereformen and kommunereformen.

We have thus obtained demonstrated the Liberal dilemma; we get more of our policies through with Frp rather than with the Labour party in government. But despite support in Parliament, a major step in the direction of a green switch as well as the important victories that free kjernetid and targeted svømmeopplæring in the nurseries, is the conservative party that sits in government with all the consequences it entails. For example, a minister of great power to set the agenda in the public debate.

This is especially Sylvi Listhaugs management of statsrådsposten its shown clearly. Listhaug follow up flertallsvedtak passed through the broad settlement, but through his rhetoric she makes fertile ground for an increased polarisation.

Listhaugs rhetoric is konfliktfremmende, and breed negative attitudes – it creates hverdagsrasisme – not hverdagsintegrering that the prime minister has admonished.

Should actively manage the land

If the Left had gone into the government now, we could demonstrated what formation and decency in the practice, and constituted a real difference in rhetoric and leadership. We would in that case not only be a part of the majority of the cases, but also the exercise of authority and the rhetoric from the government. The progress party would get clear expectations about shuffling the cards, prioritize the issues for the common regjeringsgrunnlaget and post about its pace and tone. For me it would have been a bonus that came at the top of the that the policy would have been better.

I therefore believe that we in the next four years should rather be to actively manage the land than to be a støtteparti for Frp-ers in government. It is my starting point for the debate Left now is to have, internally in our bodies forward against the congress in april, and also in public. The most important thing for me will always be there has been no breakthrough for the Liberal policy, for children and young people, on the climate and environmental sciences, within kunnskapspolitikken and integreringspolitikken, and not least when it comes to our responsibility to take care of the weakest in society.

I hope the debate will be open, open-minded, and constructive, so that the party in the community manages to land on a stand we can stand united about up to the important elections in 2017.