Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
  1. I see that an independence referendum is being planned in Scotland. How would the people in Shetland react to that?
  2. Yes, it is a situation I recognise from some comunities here in Norway. It is very easy to just export the raw materials and get the jobs from that. It would be very beneficial for Shetland to refine at least some of those raw materials at home. It would open for many opportunities, and as such be a part of a Shatland brand building over several fields, as I mentioned above. Just making fish blocks of it wouldn't be enough. You would have to diversity in product range, ecological products, strong focus on quality, local specialities, etc. It could be very exiting. Of course, you do need a group of people with a vision on behalf of Shetland to get anywhere with it, but I think there are many possibilities for the islands if you are able to seize them.
  3. I would have thought that Shetland was full of potential. I also think prices and technology will keep the oil drilling going for longer than many fear. Then you have great opportunities for wind and wave energy. Compenies that now are involved in oil drilling could retool for these technologies. There is probably room for new companies as well. The local college should start an engineering education in clean energies and in so doing create a strong local competence in the field. I also think there is much potential in other fields, for example food production. Instead of "exporting" raw materials you should focus on spesialisation and on the protection of local dishes. There is a large market out there, especially in Asia, for products that might seem unusual in northern Europe... there are sea snails, shells, even jellyfish. If at least some, and preferably most, of this could be produced ecologically then that would be another advantage in the global market. There is also a trend, and a legal framework, in the EU/EFTA now to protect local spesialities so that they can only be produced there. This is the case with for example Parma and parmesan and parma-ham, and also a couple of products in my region of Norway. Such a status can again be used it marketing it as a quality product and building a market for it. All of this could again be an advantage in making Shetland more interesting as a tourist destination. Further I think you should play on your rich history, and there I also think the local college, and museum, has a role to play. A strong academic environment in history and local linguistics can be a part of a status lift for the islands. Work to get the treasure permantenly back to Shetland, again that would be important for tourism. There is also now a trend among very many people in urban areas to long for isolation, silence, a less hectic life. Again, here Shetland and tourism comes in. I also think Shetland should encourage artists of all categories to settle in the islands, and here I include artisans like wood boatbuilders, etc. It might not be the biggest cashcow, but it will play a part in the local economy, and again make the islands a more interesting place to visits. Looking at all of this together it seems to me that there is a great opportunity to build Shetland as a brand of quality environmentally friendly products. Use whatever transitional funds you can squeeze out of the government to seize all opportunities.
  4. Do you have a context, and perhaps an explanation of how it is pronounced?
  5. Oh, then they have merged in modern Norwegian. I figured it was a West Norse vs East Norse thing, but that was obviously incorrect.
  6. Kristiansund is bit further north, and now very much an offshore oil drilling hub.
  7. I'm not sure it is correct to translate "setr" to "farm". It is more like a pasture outpost of a farm.
  8. Surely Bergen is the logical choice...
  9. That was actually up to the member states. Some did implement transitional restrcitions (until economic conditions even out more IIRC). The UK chose not to. Take it up with Westminster.
  10. I'm not sure that is so relevant wih regards to, for example, Man, which already was a crown dependency, but you are are obviously correct in what you write. Well, I am actually pro-EU and would like to see my own country join. In the post you quoted I was just trying to present some facts for those who want to see Shetland have more of a say in its relationship to the EU. If the Shetlanders feel disenfranchised then they are the only ones that can act on it.
  11. This is a good point. In other words, there is actually a presedence for a political entity that has joined the EU as a part of a larger political entity to then leave after obtaining autonomy... without actually cutting all ties to the "parent country", one might add.
  12. Yes, we have had a two-way process in Europe in the last couple of decades. Integration at a European level, and devolution at a "regional" level. Of course, devoltion will only happen with the support of the people in that "region", so the answer to the question of where it ends is really when there is no longer support for it. Shetland is a little against the current when compared to the other "distinct" island communities of northern Europe. They differ in ther relationship to the EU, but neither the Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Ã…land, Greenland or Faroe Islands are like regular parts of the EU. The latter two are almost like non-members. They are able to do this due to their varying degrees of autonomy. If the Shetlanders want to have a voice with regards to their relationship to the EU, then the obvious answer is to begin to campaign for some degree of autonomy.
  13. Yes, and "Lia Polfor" is an anagram of "April Fool".
  14. Yes, this is correct. The treaties regarding Orkney and Shetland are very clear on this. Here is a shortened version of the former: http://www.rosslyntemplars.org.uk/orkney&shetland.htm As you can see it says; "...we, Christian, king of Norway, with consent and assent of the prelates, magnates and greater nobles of our realm of Norway aforesaid, give, grant, pledge and mortgage and place under assured pledge and security all and sundry our lands of the islands of the Orkneys with all and sundry rights..." , and: "...until whole and full satisfaction and payment is effectually made by us, our heirs and successors, kings of Norway, to the foresaid James, king of Scots, his heirs or successors, of the sum of fifty thousand florins of the Rhine remaining of part of the dowry..." The treaty with regards to Shetland is very similar, but I haven't been able to find an online source for it. Freyr is correct. The 1814 Treaty of Kiel does exclude the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Greenland, but not Shetland or Orkney. To quote the Swedish version of the treaty: "Dessa Biskopsdömen, Stift och Provinser, innefattande hela Konunga-Riket Norrige med alla dess Inbyggare, Städer, Hamnar, Fästningar, Byar och Öar utmed hela detta Rikes kuster, tillika med deras tillhörigheter (Grönland, Ferröarne och Island här under likwäl icke inbegripne);" This translates roughly into: "These bishoprics, dioceses and provinces, including the whole Kingdom of Norway with all its inhabitants, towns, ports, fortresses, cities and islands along this realm's coasts, likewise with their possessions (Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Iceland here nevertheless not included);" So, any theoretical historic right to redeem Orkney and Shetland still lies with the king of Norway. I suppose they could have looked into it, although I must admit that I find it hard to believe, but the relevant documents would have quickly led them to the conclusion that it was a Norwegian matter. Yes, I have seen this before... on Wikipedia, I believe. I would like to second this. The future of Shetland should obviously be in the hands of the Shetlanders. I like to get the history right though. Yes, as I have said in other threads on these boards I think it would make sense for Shetland to look into some sort of observer membership of the Nordic Council. Oops, what a long post...
  • Create New...