Erna Solberg - Prime Minister of Norway HARDtalk

Welcome to HARDTalk. I'm Stephen Sackur.

Few countries take more seriously their commitment

to international diplomacy and humanitarianism than Norway.

So it's perhaps no surprise that Norway is co-hosting a donors'

conference, here in London, to boost aid for Syria's

More surprising is the criticism the Norwegian government is itself

facing for its own stance on migration and asylum issues.

My guest is Norway's Prime Minister, Erna Solberg - is she putting

Prime Minister Erna Solberg, welcome to HARDTalk.

Let's start with the donors' conference that you

have just arrived in London for, all about Syria.

The truth is, in 2015, the UN asked for, I think,

$8 or $9 billion to help the Syrian people.

Only got, I think, pretty much less than a half of that.

So, what makes you think this time around you can convince donors

Hopefully, they will see that if we don't help in the neighbouring

countries, if we don't get enough help into Syria,

I think what we have seen the last year is that so many people have

lost hope in a situation when they are refugees in Turkey,

in Lebanon, in Jordan, they are losing

When the children are not allowed to go to school,

because there is a lack of funding for extra

classes in those countries, then they will start to move

because this conflict has gone on too far.

Interesting new couch all of that in terms of migration,

It is sort of selfishness you are now appealing to,

to save Europe from yet more problems with

I think it's important to say, yes, we have a moral

People will sometimes say, well, we have done

this for years and years, how far can it go?

In this world, today, we are so interconnected.

If you don't solve problems where they arise, we will have

So there is always the self-interest, together

with the altruism, the principles, the need

Sometimes, you need to appeal to the self interest say,

you have to use a little bit more of your own tax payer's money

or else you will have to use your taxpayer's money to help

The cynic might say that the whole approach you have just outlined is,

in the end, nothing more than a sticking

As long as the conflict continues in Syria, one way or another,

there are going to be, still, hundreds of thousands of people

suffering, leaving the country and in desperate need of help.

The real issue, surely, is not so much to just keep putting

the sticking plasters on, it is to end

What, if anything, are you doing to help that?

It's true, all humanitarian aid is a sticking

It is humanitarian aid, it is not long-term development.

I think the real focus we should have is on stability.

If you look at children outside school, I work a lot,

the Norwegian government works a lot as a priority to get everybody,

all children in the world, they should

Education is the biggest development factor, I think,

Half of those who do not attend school are in conflict areas.

We know if you are going to reach the sustainable development goals,

for example to stop hunger, or to eradicate poverty like most

of the heads of nations have said yes to,

this autumn in New York, we have to do something

But you can't say that you only are dealing with this.

You have also to do something about the humanitarian situation.

You are co-hosting this donor conference

You're going to cast your beady eye around the room,

you're going to have representatives there from European countries,

from the United States, from the Middle

East, the rich Middle Eastern countries as well, to whom would

you look and say, brutally, honestly,

There are a lot of countries that have not

They are doing a lot on the military side,

but if you compare to a lot of other countries in Europe,

they have not donated as much to the humanitarian aid as some

What about the rich countries in the Middle East?

Per capita, they are the largest donor to the Syrian

But of course the Saudis, the Emirates, all of those should

participate more in the years to come.

And, if I may say so, there is good old Norway?

Representing an oil country, I know that everybody has

Well, you also know you have a sovereign law

fund that is worth not so far short of 1 trillion US dollars.

You have one of the wealthiest countries of the world per capita.

Bob Geldof, the humanitarian, the activist, the musician,

he came out with a memorable phrase recently, he was

talking about Norway and the fact you have only agreed to take,

I think, 8000 Syrian refugees over three years.

He said that is just not good enough.

Norwegians should realise that they have been handed

the golden ticket in life and they should look

But that means that he does not know what the Norwegian refugee

We are taking 8,000 UNHCR refugees over three years.

Britain has taken 20,000 UNHCR refugees over five years.

So, comparably, we do a little bit more.

And we have 31,000 asylum seekers who came last autumn.

So, the influx of people coming from the conflict area is much

This is where your government enters very controversial waters,

in particular in the autumn of last year, at least 5000 migrants entered

Norway, in the far north, across the Russian border.

You have kept them in centres, facilities, which look a lot

We have kept them in hotels, we have kept

them in very different types of facilities.

I was just looking at the words of one Sudanese guy.

He said, you know what, it reminds me of the

treatment I got when I was a human rights activist in Sudan,

before I managed to get out of the country.

There is one centre just by the border, where people are put

before we are supposed to return them back

But most asylum seekers in Norway, first of all, they get

They stay in hotels, they stay in very different, good facilities.

But, on the average, compared to most European countries,

our reception centres for asylum seekers are on the best side

You slipped in a very interesting phrase there.

You said we keep them there before we

are, quote, supposed to hand them back to Russia.

Who says you are supposed to hand them back to

Many people don't believe you should be handing them back to Russia.

These are people, many of whom have legitimate claims to asylum,

Why don't you allow them to process their claim inside Norway?

We decided that we should follow the international regulations

That means that everybody will have their case looked at.

What we're doing now is that we are having a shorter type

of processing than what you would do on a regular

Let me just tell you, Russia, some of those people that have come

to Norway, have stayed for a long time in Russia.

We believe that Russia, for most of those that

are coming, not all, but most of them, will be

Let's quote you the words of the UNHCR official Vincent

He says, we believe Norway is wrong to

regard Russia as a safe country for people who need protection.

Well, we believe that, for most of those that

have come and used the asylum system to seek asylum,

it will be a safe country because some of them have stayed

Did you not know that the European Court of

Human Rights has looked at what Russia has done

with would-be asylum seekers, deporting them willy-nilly back

to their home country to face persecution,

and has concluded that Russia is contravening international

standards and laws, and that, therefore,

Norway, by sending these people back to Russia,

That is why we have a mechanism that says that every case should be

If you, in the interview with the police, are giving

indications of your story that says we should look more thoroughly

into it, that is why we are not sending back everybody -

because there is an individual approach to all these cases.

The Bishop of Borg, in your country, said, I am astonished my government

Human dignity, he said, is being violated.

We are often criticised on asylum policies.

All governments have been that in Norway.

But this isn't just criticism for the sake of it.

This is a man of the Church saying, morally, much of anything

else, he is appalled by the stance taken by your government.

Well, first, we have a broad majority

behind that policy in our Parliament.

We have to make sure that we can have a sustainable

We know that quite a lot of those that come have a need

for protection, but there is a large number who are now coming who do not

have a need for protection, and we have to have easy processing.

We have to make sure we can return people fast,

because it gives a clear signal back to those countries

that people are coming from that you should not try to seek asylum.

Well, Europe has a choice to make about

Angela Merkel, she talked about Europe

presenting a smiling face to those who have suffered so much and made

it across borders into the European Union.

I think it is because your coalition is dependent upon the support

of the far-right, populist Progress party.

In fact, you chose to appoint as Minister for Immigration

and Integration Sylvi Listhaug, who is

one of the most extreme opponents of Norway taking immigrants in,

I think if you look at what our government is doing,

it is up to high international standards in how

we are dealing with the asylum process.

But there is such a large influx to Europe now that we can't

Norway have had quite liberal policies.

We say we should be fair, we should be strict,

but we should always respect the international regulations.

This is what your Minister of Immigration said last year.

I think it was just before she got the job.

Interesting you then chose to appoint her to the job.

She said, quote, for too long a tyranny

of kindness has blown over Norway like a nightmare.

You want to make a major cultural attitudinal shift in your country,

away from kindness, tolerance, openness -

which we associate with Norway - to something very different?

This is rhetoric in a heated political debate.

She said it and then you appointed her Minister!

Why did you appoint her Minister of Immigration?

Because she is a very good politician.

She's good at handling her business and she has a broad mandate

from our Parliament about being strict, tightening or asylum

policies to make sure that people who get the rights to stay in Norway

are people who are persecuted, who need protection,

and that we have even better return policies than we have had so far,

because we need to make sure that those who are using the asylum

system, in fact, are in need of protection...

I may be wrong, but it seems to me that you,

right now, are being driven by the Progress Party,

They are actively discussing, right now, copying the Danish model

and confiscating the assets of immigrants over 10,000 kroner.

They think if they are going to pay their way,

as long as they are in this country, their assets

have to be taken, short of wedding rings and things like that.

No, and the government has said that we will

Even my Minister of Immigration has said that is not

My message has been very clear, we will not copy that type of laws.

But, during the Red-Green Coalition, they made a policy in Norway that

if you have large incomes before, if you are rich when you come

and seek asylum, you might not get all of the free benefits

in the asylum processing system as other people

That's the same type of system would continue to have.

Let's just to find some broader thresholds beyond which you will not

go, because maybe you feel they are immoral, too much.

You say you won't confiscate assets of

these people who make it across your borders.

Would you have tightened up, in a draconian fashion,

some of the residency rules, the dependency rules.

You now say anybody who is studying or working as an immigrant

in Norway will have to wait four years before they have any chance

of bringing a dependant into the country.

for discussion, and then the government will decide

Yes, we believe that we should tighten policies on family

Because it is one of the pull factors that we have

for immigration and for using the asylum processing system to get

That is the message you are giving me, that Norway,

as a bastion of liberalism in Europe,

That was the nightmare of kindness and you're not

Our neighbouring country got 180,000 asylum seekers last year.

They have now put up a lot of proposals for

We know that we have to be, in a way, in the same line

Interesting, so if Denmark goes far to the right,

No, not all, but on some of them we will follow.

I think this is the European problem today.

As long as the European Union system does

not function well enough, we will all look at each other

and say, we cannot be the one country that gets

all the asylum seekers, so we will have to tighten our policies.

If Europe managed to have more common

European policies on asylum processing, on how to deal with it

and can protect its borders, we will be able to...

Well, that is a very interesting point.

In fact, have less competition between these

We should remind our audience, although Norway is not a member

of the European Union, you are signed up to some of the key

You're signed up to the Schengen freedom of movement principle.

Basically, you have open borders, with all your EU

member state neighbours, but now you have reimposed some

border controls, as indeed have Denmark and Sweden.

In your view, speaking as somebody who is associated with the EU,

but not a member of it, is Schengen, that idea,

It's not dead, but it needs firmly to be rescued

if it is going to continue for the future.

I understand that is also what the Dutch Presidency

We need to have border control into Greece.

We need to have a system of registration that starts

when you are entering the European Union.

And we need to have a system of redistribution and common

solidarity on the amount of refugees that come.

I think the EU started well in September, but the problem

is that they are not managing to impliment

the decisions they have already made.

Do you regret signing up to Schengen?

It's important to remember, we have hired

a free passport union between the Nordic countries

We have a very, very long border with Sweden.

If we were outside Schengen, and Sweden were inside Schengen,

we would have a border problem, because

it is so long, it is impossible to control.

We have had this freedom between the Nordic countries,

Well, you know, that might be coming to an end?

Well, these days, we do have, between Denmark and Sweden,

Norway only has border control on the ferries

that we have from Denmark and Germany.

That is because Sweden and Denmark is having

border controls and because they are doing that,

of course, the influx these days are a little bit,

well, not just a little bit, they are much smaller

Let me redirect our debate a little bit.

It's fascinating that you are in London right now,

as the UK wrestles with this question of

whether to stay in or leave the European Union.

We expect the referendum may come as early as June this year.

Here is what the leader of your Centre Party,

not your party, but another party in Norway,

said to the Sun newspaper in the UK just a few days ago.

Norway is proof that you can work on your own.

We rejected EU membership and we have never looked back.

Do you share that sentiment? No.

It is important to remember that the Centre Party is also

But we should just say, the EEA Agreement...

That is where we are members of the single market.

You're all but members of the EU,

in an economic sense, because you signed up

The problem for you is, you have to abide by all the rules

of the single market, but you don't have a single

participatory voice in decision-making.

We are a small country, and small countries usually

have to adapt to what bigger countries do say.

So you sacrificed your sovereignty, knowingly, and without any sort

of recompense in terms of a voice at the table?

I voted in favour of EU membership, the last

And the Norwegians said you were wrong.

That is what we are lacking in Norway.

We are not influencing quite large parts of our laws and regulations

that will be adapted into Norwegian laws.

We can say yes and no, we can lobby before it is decided

on, but we are not participating in the actual

decision-making, which I think is a very difficult issue

But we know that we are benefiting so much from being part

We are a very small economy, which is very export

and very international orientated, especially

That is why it is so important for us to have a common

But here's the thing, the British advocates of exit,

they say, look, we can be a little bit

different from Norway, we like Norway's spirit

of independence, but, unlike Norway, we won't have to sign up

to all the rules of the single market to have our full

trading relationship with the European Union,

In fact, the EU, if we were to leave the European Union, the British

advocates of exit say, the EU would have to trade with us,

because we'd be their biggest trading partner.

So we can dictate the terms much better than Norway could.

I believe it is very difficult to get away from the fact that,

for European companies to compete on the same basis,

they have to be inside the same regulatory framework.

If Britain is supposed to be outside the regulatory framework,

it will be more difficult to have the same system.

So, before we became members of the single market,

we had Norwegian companies being threatened with saying

they were having dumping prices, getting sanctions against it.

It's always up to countries to decide themselves.

I think it's going to be difficult, because Europe is putting up a lot

The countries around will have to apply to it.

So the argument is, Britain would have a much stronger

negotiating hand with the EU, post-exit.

I believe that the EU is a body that always is good at making

So you might get a political agreement, but you cannot get away

from the fact that you have to have the same playing field.

You have to have the same rules and regulations.

If you are outside the EU, you will not sit at

I am guessing that if you were Prime Minister

of Britain today, not Norway, you would be staying

Yes, and I hope that Britain will stay in,

because I think it is important for all of us

that are market-orientated politicians, who believe

that we should have a Europe that is focusing on competitiveness,

focusing on creating more wealth for the people,

I think it's important to have a country like Britain in.

Because sometimes you do oppose some of the federalism

I think it would be a loss for Europe if Britain left.

So, Britain is like Norway's proxy inside the EU?

Before we end, I just want to put one thing to you.

We have couched this whole conversation in the context

But there is a plunge in the oil price.

The oil boom is over, and it seems like it is over

That is going to change your economic model completely, isn't it?

Well, it means that we need to find new ways of getting our

economic growth and securing our wealth in future.

Would you agree that you have become over reliant on oil and gas?

Our economic basis is too strong on oil and gas.

But our budgets and our economic policies are not that,

because we have put all of our incomes from the oil and gas

sector into our sovereign fund, meaning that we have a buffer,

Well, I agree, congratulations, very thrifty.

But I notice now you have started to draw

down on the sovereign wealth fund for the first time.

Which suggests to me that, long-term, you may end

But still the sovereign fund is increasing because

of what they are getting out of their other investment.

But we're not putting more oil money, or

When you have $30 a barrel, it is very difficult to get

In a word, Norway, per capita, is pretty much

one of the top five richest countries in the world today.

Will you still be in the top five richest

countries in the world ten years from now?

We are trying to use the income and our budget to make sure

we can diversify our economy, and make sure that we can use a lot

of the other resources that Norway has.

Not just on people, but also nature, fishery resources.

We have very many other strong aspects.

Erna Solberg, thank you so much for being on HARDTalk.

If you found it a little chilly today, there is good news for

tomorrow. It's going to be a little bit milder, but you are going to

have to pay for it. It