Jonsson and his son Jon Asgeir Johannesson founded Bonus, which would later merge with Hagkaup to become Hagar and then become closely associated with Johannesson’s Baugur Group.
Following bankruptcy, Hagar came into the ownership of Arion Bank which took the surprise decision to keep Johannes Jonsson on the board and guarantee him the right to purchase ten percent of Hagar shares when the company re-lists
Welcome to Gimli, where the Icelandic flag is as proudly raised at sunrise on the lawns of modest family homes as it is tattooed on the limbs of young men; where fishermen flex their muscles hoisting hearty whitefish from the expansive lake; and where groups of elderly congregate at Amma's Café to converse in Icelandic and indulge in kleinur and pönnukökur alongside their hot coffee. Such is life in the Rural Municiplality of Gimli, in Manitoba, Canada.
In the midst of some particularly harsh economic conditions and a nasty eruption from Mount Askja in the 1870's roughly a quarter of Iceland's population – which then totaled a modest 72,000 people – emigrated from their motherland in the North Atlantic to seek greener pastures abroad. After a group of roughly 300 Icelanders, who had set their collective sights on Canada, grew fed up with a couple years of unfavourable weather and housing conditions in northern Ontario their plight caught the eye
Welcome to Gimli, where the Icelandic flag is as proudly raised at sunrise on the lawns of modest family homes as it is tattooed on the limbs of young men; where fishermen flex their muscles hoisting hearty whitefish from the expansive lake; and where groups of elderly congregate at Amma's Café to converse in Icelandic and indulge in kleinur and pönnukökur alongside their hot coffee. Such is life in the Rural Municiplality of Gimli, in Manitoba, Canada.
In the midst of some particularly harsh economic conditions and a nasty eruption from Mount Askja in the 1870's roughly a quarter of Iceland's population – which then totaled a modest 72,000 people – emigrated from their motherland in the North Atlantic to seek greener pastures abroad. After a group of roughly 300 Icelanders, who had set their collective sights on Canada, grew fed up with a couple years of unfavourable weather and housing conditions in northern Ontario their plight caught the eye
Welcome to Gimli, where the Icelandic flag is as proudly raised at sunrise on the lawns of modest family homes as it is tattooed on the limbs of young men; where fishermen flex their muscles hoisting hearty whitefish from the expansive lake; and where groups of elderly congregate at Amma's Café to converse in Icelandic and indulge in kleinur and pönnukökur alongside their hot coffee. Such is life in the Rural Municiplality of Gimli, in Manitoba, Canada.
In the midst of some particularly harsh economic conditions and a nasty eruption from Mount Askja in the 1870's roughly a quarter of Iceland's population – which then totaled a modest 72,000 people – emigrated from their motherland in the North Atlantic to seek greener pastures abroad. After a group of roughly 300 Icelanders, who had set their collective sights on Canada, grew fed up with a couple years of unfavourable weather and housing conditions in northern Ontario their plight caught the eye
Welcome to Gimli, where the Icelandic flag is as proudly raised at sunrise on the lawns of modest family homes as it is tattooed on the limbs of young men; where fishermen flex their muscles hoisting hearty whitefish from the expansive lake; and where groups of elderly congregate at Amma's Café to converse in Icelandic and indulge in kleinur and pönnukökur alongside their hot coffee. Such is life in the Rural Municiplality of Gimli, in Manitoba, Canada.
In the midst of some particularly harsh economic conditions and a nasty eruption from Mount Askja in the 1870's roughly a quarter of Iceland's population – which then totaled a modest 72,000 people – emigrated from their motherland in the North Atlantic to seek greener pastures abroad. After a group of roughly 300 Icelanders, who had set their collective sights on Canada, grew fed up with a couple years of unfavourable weather and housing conditions in northern Ontario their plight caught the eye
In a long and detailed article, Orebech investigates the current status of the still-unresolved Icesave dispute. The analysis is understandably complex and he acknowledges that Iceland has repeatedly promised to pay the money back; even though the terms of the repayment deal have still not been negotiated to all sides’ satisfaction.
In investigating the current
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
"How life evolves, how human life is created and how children are born. Where we come from, and where we are going. These are all very large questions, but the material that links them all in our current project is nylon. Nylon stockings to be exact."
Over the phone, The Icelandic Love Corporation's Sigrún Hrólfsdóttir explains what the three woman artist collective is currently pondering and investigating. Her words are a good reminder why the performance art collective has maintained a constant and fruitful presence on the Icelandic arts scene ever since forming in 1996, why Grapevine is intensely
The creative advertising competition received around 2030 'ads against poverty' from hundreds of participants across 34 different European countries. These entries were whittled down to 30 ads chosen to compete for the final prize, three of which were made by Icelandic
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
"How life evolves, how human life is created and how children are born. Where we come from, and where we are going. These are all very large questions, but the material that links them all in our current project is nylon. Nylon stockings to be exact."
Over the phone, The Icelandic Love Corporation's Sigrún Hrólfsdóttir explains what the three woman artist collective is currently pondering and investigating. Her words are a good reminder why the performance art collective has maintained a constant and fruitful presence on the Icelandic arts scene ever since forming in 1996, why Grapevine is intensely
ON THAT WHOLE MAGMA ENERGY/ HS ORKA THING
-What, in your view, is the Magma deal all about?
It is a very important case for Iceland. An international corporation is trying to buy up the exclusive rights to our natural resources. We were warned almost immediately after the banking collapse that this would happen, for instance by Paul Hawken and Joseph Stiglitz. Naomi Klein also discusses this kind of situation thoroughly in 'The Shock Doctrine'. It is widely known that nations that find themselves in trouble get besieged by vultures that want to take advantage of their situation and make an easy profit. They start off being all nice and reasonable, gaining the locals' trust – "here to help" – and then...
You know all about Magma's history in Peru, right? It is swaddled with human rights violations and disrespect to local customs, unions, law and regulation. The list goes on... Some might say that Magma making rotten deals with Peru is irrelevant, that Iceland is no Peru. "We are not a third world country." But the deals we've made with them are just so bad; a large part of Magma's downpayment comes in the form of a bullet loan from HS Orka itself with 1.5% interest for seven years, with HS Orka shares as collateral. It's a joke.
Not only that, but Magma are also attempting to negotiate with several other energy companies around the country, as I explain in my letter, and they're doing it behind our backs. It's rather evident that they want to take over pretty much everything if we let them. They won't stop at HS Orka.
This sale will likely determine how we deal with such matters in the future, for instance regarding water rights. We have to formulate a clear position as a nation—what we want—before we start selling off our resources to international corporations, at bargain rates, no less.
ON XENOPHOBIA AND CUTTING GOOD DEALS
-Some people want to write off the opposition to Magma as xenophobia...
I think that's an absurd interpretation. If anyone's been lucky working with foreigners, it's me. A majority of the people I've worked with throughout the years have been foreigners, people that have been extremely honest and good to work with. As I say in my article, the people that have treated Icelanders the worst are, in fact, Icelanders.
I feel this talk of xenophobia is an attempt to sidetrack the discourse. The real question is whether it is a good idea to privatise and sell off our energy resources at this point. We as a nation are badly burnt after the collapse, and we are not in a good position to negotiate. We have to make a clear strategy that we agree on, to prioritise, so we are in a better position to negotiate with the outside world.
Getting past the collapse and all the bankruptcies and unemployment follow will take us a few years, and once we've done that, our resources are really the only thing we have to guarantee a good future. And if we manage to lose them now, we will become a third world nation.
-Do you believe the people behind Magma are bad people? With evil intentions?
No. I mean, were the banksters bad people? They are just trying to cut a good deal, and now we are a good deal. There is a certain sociopathy behind it all... is that evil? Well... I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Let's just say that they are businessmen willing to cut a good deal at whatever cost. They care about their profit margin, and if we or our country stand in the way, then too bad for us.
-You have drawn some pretty snarky, even downright ugly criticisms in Iceland for drawing attention to these matters. People are talking about your financial affairs, your taxes and the like...
I answered some of those in an interview with RÚV [Icelandic State Radio] today, for the first time. I noticed my father defending me on some blog earlier and I thought that maybe it was time for me to answer for myself, to let him focus on something more interesting.
This is a banal discussion, and I do not like going into it, but some people seem to want me to justify myself.
I felt bad about maybe coming off like I was bragging, but I brought up on the radio that my share of all my Icelandic record sales have always gone to Smekkleysa. In this way, I can support Icelandic music. I feel this has had more value than taxes.
-Do you regard these criticisms as an attempt to silence you?
I'm not sure. Most people don't really understand how the music business works; they don't understand 'publishing deals' or the difference between performance royalties and sync fees and merchandising. They understand taxes, and if they hear "oh, she's not paying taxes in Iceland," they are easily sidetracked. Maybe my paying or not paying the tax revenue from my business in Iceland isn't the only way to measure my contribution.
ON TAKING THE FIGHT
-In light of some of these reactions: How can you be bothered? What is it that makes you exert yourself like this?
It does take a toll, and being in the spotlight and under scrutiny. This is definitely not my favourite thing, I can promise you that. But with all this media attention, it's been like this throughout the years, good and bad, I've gotten used to it and learned to accept both sides. You have to take the negative aspects along with the positive ones.
Speaking up on cases like these isn't really a choice for me; I do not have the option to remain silent or neutral. If I do not harness the media attention that's available to me and use to raise awareness of what's going on, it is a crime, plain and simple. It would burden my conscience.
In that regard, I face a bit different situation than your average Stjáni or Gunna who might also feel strongly on issues like nature conservation. I know I have a greater chance than the average person of getting people to attend a press conference, of getting them to listen and pay attention—to try and prevent what I believe to be a catastrophic event. Not using that opportunity would mean disregarding deeply held beliefs of mine. My choice is thus: either I commit a crime, or I take this all the way. And I've made my decision.
I am a musician, and I get deeply involved in my work, but I still try and follow what's going on in the world. And some things are more important to me than others. For example, I followed the SIC report case closely, but that isn't something I should get involved with. Like I said, I am trying to focus on writing songs and working on my music. However, issues of nature and nature conservation are something that get me going. I can't even work, I get so upset. When I see nature endangered, it offends my sense of justice, my very core.
I don't think I am alone in wanting to ensure that future generations of Icelanders get to enjoy the unspoilt nature that we have. The common Icelander seems to be of the opinion that the privatisation of our natural resources needs to be investigated further, and thought about more. If it were only me and ten of my friends that felt this way, I feel it wouldn't be justifiable for me to put this into the spotlight, but since there are so many of us I feel am acting more as a mouthpiece for these beliefs, the views and opinions of a large group of people.
And it's taken a lot of work, the press conference and the petition, not to mention the letter writing. I was supposed to be working on a lot of things over the past fortnight, but I put them all on hold. It has some of my musical collaborators puzzled [laughs], but I am a person that is always very focused on the context of things. I cannot isolate the protection of Iceland's nature from my role as an Icelandic musician. They are so closely linked.
How am I supposed to live with myself if I stand back and potentially allow the worst possible scenario to arise, without attempting to fight it? Iceland has given me so much, I feel as if Iceland's nature was bestowed upon me and all the rest of us as a gift, and I feel a great need to defend it. I simply cannot ignore that.
Just imagine, how can I face myself at age eighty if some nightmare situation has unfolded where we have eight more aluminium plants lining the countryside and our hitherto unspoilt nature reserves are all gone to ruin, knowing I could have done something but didn't even try.
ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND MAKING A CHOICE
-You feel a sense of duty?
When you've been in the spotlight for as long as I have, you realise that you are, for better or worse, a public servant. Then you have to make your choice of how much you want to be involved.
When I was in London, I could have been a 24/7 celebrity, going around parties and charities for a living. I could have stopped making music and thrown myself into tabloid life completely. Then there's the other side of that coin, which is saying no to everything. A lot of people choose that path. I have decided
