Iceland

Iceland

“…With two referendums going against its Icesave strategy (i.e., seeking a negotiated solution with the United Kingdom and the Netherlands on the issue of banking guarantees; see Hardarson & Kristinsson 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, the credibility of the government was low.A ruling by the European Free Trade Area court at the end of January, which acquitted the Icelandic government of any claims made by the British and Dutch governments, may have destroyed any chance the two government parties might have had of turning the election in their favour. The intended facelift, however, was only partly successful as the government increasingly had the appearance of a spent force, with hardly any clear strategy before the election and weak control in parliament.…”

“…Although the government record in dealing with the crisis was favourably evaluated by both the International Monetary Fund and Icelandic voters (according to the Icelandic Election Study 2013), this proved insufficient to boost its electoral fortunes. With two referendums going against its Icesave strategy (i.e., seeking a negotiated solution with the United Kingdom and the Netherlands on the issue of banking guarantees; see Hardarson & Kristinsson 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, the credibility of the government was low.A ruling by the European Free Trade Area court at the end of January, which acquitted the Icelandic government of any claims made by the British and Dutch governments, may have destroyed any chance the two government parties might have had of turning the election in their favour. The Icesave ruling benefitted the Progressives -who had opposed all Icesave deals -and seemed to give more credibility to their bold election promises on reducing housing debts of families and abolishing inflation-indexing of loans.…”

Iceland

“…The left-wing government had invested a lot of political capital in the process of changing the constitution, including an extensive consultation process and popular election to a constitutional assembly (subsequently ruled invalid by the Supreme Court; see Hardarson & Kristinsson 2011: 1001-1002. The referendum was an optional and a consultative one since according to the constitution the procedures for making amendments are quite different (i.e., ratification by a parliamentary majority twice with a general election in between).…”

“…The referendum was an optional and a consultative one since according to the constitution the procedures for making amendments are quite different (i.e., ratification by a parliamentary majority twice with a general election in between). The left-wing government had invested a lot of political capital in the process of changing the constitution, including an extensive consultation process and popular election to a constitutional assembly (subsequently ruled invalid by the Supreme Court; see Hardarson & Kristinsson 2011: 1001-1002. Six issues were addressed in the referendum: whether voters wanted to base a new constitution on the proposals of the Constitutional Council; whether there should be public ownership of natural resources that are not privately owned; whether the constitution should contain a clause on a state church; whether preferential voting should be allowed to a greater extent than at present; whether votes in different constituencies should weigh the same; and whether a certain proportion of voters should be able to demand a referendum on an issue.…”

Iceland

“…Government support in the Althingi was thus down from 35:28 to 32:31. One MP from the Progressive Party (GuËmundur Steingrímsson) left the Progressive Party in 2011 and is forming a new party, Bright Future, along with some activists from the Best Party, which obtained a third of the votes in the local elections in Reykjavík 2010 (Hardarson & Kristinsson 2011).…”