Denmark's New Government

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48535939  Quoting:

Denmark election: Social Democrats win as PM admits defeat

Denmark's Liberal Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has conceded victory in the country's general election, paving the way for Social Democrat leader Mette Frederiksen to take power. At 41, Ms Frederiksen is set to be the country's youngest ever prime minister.

The centre-left Social Democrats won 25.9% of the vote and her bloc secured 91 of the 179 seats in parliament. Support for the anti-immigration Danish People's Party (DPP) dived, four years after becoming second biggest party. Immigration was still a key factor in the election, along with climate change and welfare cuts, and the Social Democrats bolstered their support with a tougher migration policy.

"Together we have created a hope that we can change Denmark, that we can improve Denmark," Mette Frederiksen told supporters.

Denmark becomes the third Nordic country in a year to elect a leftist government, following Sweden and Finland. Mr Rasmussen's Liberal Party has been in power for 14 of the last 18 years and won power from the Social Democrats in 2015 . . . During the campaign, the Social Democrats pledged to increase public spending, increase taxes for businesses and the wealthy, and partially roll back pension reforms so that people who have worked for 40 years can retire earlier . . .

Major parties on the right and left adopted anti-immigration policies. Both the Liberal Party and the Social Democrats said doing so would help to protect the welfare system.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/elections/news/danish-social-democrats-expected-to-maintain-tough-migration-policy/ Quoting:

Keen to protect its prosperity and social cohesion, Denmark has spent two decades cracking down on immigration under pressure from the far-right. But now that tough rhetoric is widely adopted by the mainstream to the dismay of immigrants who say they feel stigmatised . . .

Since 2001, the Danish People’s Party has heavily influenced immigration and integration policy in the country of 5.6 million, where almost 10% of the population was born abroad. In return, the party has provided crucial, informal backing for the right-wing minority governments that have been in power for 14 of the past 18 years, during which time the far-right’s ideology and terminology have come to be the norm.

“What we thought was extreme 10 years ago is now a common discourse in Denmark,” says Kasper Hansen, political science professor at the University of Copenhagen.

In Denmark, long known for its progressive and liberal policies, all of the political parties — with the exception of the far left — are in agreement on keeping immigration numbers as low as possible. With policies like no family reunification for partners under 24 years of age, the seizure of migrants’ valuables, and doubled sentences for crimes committed in certain areas, the message has been unambiguous.

. . . while Denmark boasts almost full employment and is crying out for workers, 80% of ethnic Danes hold down a job, compared to just 56% for “non Western” people — now the preferred term for many immigrants in Denmark.

I am glad! You guys are in a better position to keep your countries safe, as opposed to the US. Denmark is doing better than Sweden, so there is that.

Denmark is part of the EU, correct?
Doesn’t being part of that Union mean that the country must comply with mandatory migration quotas regardless of what political party is in power?
Why even make the rules, if nobody follows them....kind of silly.

It sounds like perhaps Denmark is implementing these new strict policies to make their country less attractive and accommodating to any potential immigrants.
Who would want to live in a country that clearly does not want you there.


Social Democracy /leftist government is not something that I would ever vote for.
I value freedom, less government in my business and pocketbook.

As an American it is difficult for me to understand European politics, but I am thinking that a Democratic is a Democrat no matter what the country.

Sary wrote:Denmark is part of the EU, correct?
Doesn’t being part of that Union mean that the country must comply with mandatory migration quotas regardless of what political party is in power?
Why even make the rules, if nobody follows them....kind of silly.

Yes, Denmark is in the EU. But the EU quotas are for refugees (mostly from the Middle East plus Africans, some faking it). Asylum seekers make the news headlines, but for Britain they are only 5% of all immigration and I assume it's similar for Denmark. According to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Denmark#Countries_of_origin over half of Denmark's immigrants are non-Western economic migrants and those are the ones that are now being more restricted.

There's also the EU free movement policy which means any EU citizen can automatically go to any other EU country and look for work. This is the thing a lot of us in Britain are not keen on because, naturally, it means more people moving from the poorer places to the wealthier ones, which can drive down wages.

Neon Knight wrote:

Sary wrote:Denmark is part of the EU, correct?
Doesn’t being part of that Union mean that the country must comply with mandatory migration quotas regardless of what political party is in power?
Why even make the rules, if nobody follows them....kind of silly.

Yes, Denmark is in the EU. But the EU quotas are for refugees (mostly from the Middle East plus Africans, some faking it). Asylum seekers make the news headlines, but for Britain they are only 5% of all immigration and I assume it's similar for Denmark. According to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Denmark#Countries_of_origin over half of Denmark's immigrants are non-Western economic migrants and those are the ones that are now being more restricted.

It is understandable why Denmark wants to limit the flow immigrants. If people are crossing into the their country Willy nilly how can they know who is a refugee and who is the terrorist?  In a perfect world everyone is a kind and a law abiding citizen, but sadly this is not reality.
I imagine that it would be difficult and very expensive to enforce borders in land locked European countries, where one side of the street is another nation all together.
So close, but very different.

Needless to say, one would hope that government would have national security at the top of the list alongside safety of her citizens.

Neon Knight wrote:There's also the EU free movement policy which means any EU citizen can automatically go to any other EU country and look for work. This is the thing a lot of us in Britain are not keen on because, naturally, it means more people moving from the poorer places to the wealthier ones, which can drive down wages.

Here in the US , we have a deficit of home grown physicians. But because we have a top notch health care system, the United States is a very attractive country for new graduates from foreign countries.

Our government regulates where doctors from other countries can work.  Most young people want to live where the action is, in the cities and not somewhere out in the boondocks.
These lucrative jobs in big city hospitals are given to American citizens first. Immigrant doctors have to serve/work for five years in an area of the country where we have a shortage.

They can not even get around this by obtaining a green card by marrying an American citizen.