It started with white middle-aged men who polluters. After that Green Party spokesperson Åsa Romsons statements and actions repeatedly caused writings and apologies. Here are her top five most publicized frogs.
Asa Romsons speech in Almedalen last year started the chain. Since then she has often appeared in the media in less flattering context. She was only the mouthpiece, now she is Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Environment and scrutinized even harder.
But despite the misses and some strange statements, she has remained a strong support within the party. Political scientist Jenny Madestam has, among other things, SR-pod The political game described the MP’s process in connection with the mouthpiece election and the strong support Åsa Romson have. Jenny Madestam researching the right party leader changes. She says that, of course, there is a limit to how many frogs MP tolerate, but it is still far away.
For the memory weak here five of the more publicized Romson misses:
1) White middle-aged men are polluters
In his speech in Almedalen last year depicted Åsa Romson white, middle-aged, heterosexual men as polluters. Statistically, they are over-represented when it comes to meat-eating, car driving and hours in airplanes. But there are also a lot of men who vote for the Green Party and do not want to be singled out as rogues because they are men.
The speech was an attempt by Romson to stem the pink cannibalism on the red-green. When it looked like the Feminist Initiative was on his way into parliament.
So here it was in Asa Romsons script:
“And this suspicion is of course that when it is primarily white, heterosexual, middle-aged men sitting on power, well then the risk is that society is built based on the norm of white, heterosexual, middle-aged men, and it is wrong. For most of us is actually not just white, heterosexual, middle-aged men without People, you know, those that have equal value but are different in every possible way.
//
Today’s passive climate policy is to set lazy men’s interests ahead of women and children.
It must be questioned. “
2) Toxic antifouling paint to the boat
In October 2014 revealed Expressen that Asa Rome’s houseboat was painted with a toxic and prohibited color, the copper-based antifouling Sigma Antifouling.
She blamed her partner and then found a loophole in the law that is now proven not to hold for the type of boat that Romson have.
The MP wants to toxic antifouling phased out and speaks often of the Baltic Sea as a particularly sensitive sea should be better protected through legislation. Then of course there is extra sensitive to the party’s spokesperson and Minister of the Environment uses this toxic paint.
She later apologized, but before that she had pulled on further negative publicity. When Expressen showed pictures of how she paints, she asked the reporter, “There is copyright on the pictures. You know it?”.
3) Mediterranean Auschwitz
Agendas debate between party leaders in May compared Åsa Romson refugee disaster in the Mediterranean with the Holocaust. She said: “We are in Europe to make the Mediterranean Sea to the new Auschwitz”.
There and then it was none of the other party leaders who protested against the parable. However flooded social media over the criticism. It was later also from other parties, the Central Jewish Council and the editorial pages.
First tried Åsa Romson explain himself by saying that she used an expletive in the heat of debate. Then she made everything even worse.
4) The excuse after Auschwitz statement
When Asa Romson would apologize for the Auschwitz-statement she made next blunder by call Romanies for the now obsolete word “gypsies”. So here she said on STV News: “I am the first to apologize if there are any of the groups ….. Hitler’s crimes against the Jews, the Gypsies, the homosexuals and Hitler’s failure in the gas chambers stand completely alone” .
New criticism followed, including from the organization Young Romer.
5) KU-criticism for the hunting of wolves statement
Wolf hunt is a dear MP issue, but more complicated when the party is in government. In October last year interviewed Åsa Romson of SR and TT. In which, forward of the government did not agree to the wolf issue. And Romson said: “I deplore today’s decision by the Environmental Protection Agency for a license hunting in the winter.”
In the statement, she was criticized by the Committee on the Constitution recently. A unanimous committee stated: “Asa Romsons criticism of the planned wolf hunting could influence subsequent decisions by the provincial government and possible appeal to the Environmental Protection Agency. It is therefore quite natural that KU criticizes the Deputy Prime Minister’s behavior.”
Åsa Romson received KU criticism even in two other cases.
No comments:
Post a Comment