Under Inatsisartuts processing of the National Treasury’s accounts for 2025, there was not only a lengthy debate about the approval. Along the way, there were also two attempts to carry out a vote of no-confidence against naalakkersuisoq for culture.
Before that, there had also been an attempt to carry out a vote of no confidence against Naalakkersuisut.
Under Inatsisartuts processing of the National Treasury’s accounts for 2025, there was not only a lengthy debate about the approval. Along the way, there were also two attempts to carry out a vote of no-confidence against naalakkersuisoq for culture.
Before that, there had also been an attempt to carry out a vote of no confidence against Naalakkersuisut.
When the second vote of no confidence came up, the coalition parties concluded their proposal to prevent the vote thus:
“Therefore, we propose that Inatsisartut end consideration of item 11/EM 2026 and go directly to a vote by the National Treasury’s Accounts Clerk for 2025.”
When the coalition parties made this proposal, Inatsisartut’s chairman, Kim Kielsen, decided to put it to a vote to meet the demand.
– I would say that democracy took place according to the rules in there.
They wanted to continue the debate
As Atassut was the only party to present its speaker’s speech in the case, the party was not given the opportunity to say anything about the national treasury’s accounts for 2025. The party has complained about this to Inatsisartut’s Presidency.
Member of Inatsisartut for Atassut, Bentiaraq Ottosen, writes, among other things, the following on his Facebook page:
– It can be described as a disregard for democracy and people’s rule, just as it is a violation of Atassut’s dignity and rights as a political party.
When the coalition parties yesterday put forward a motion to avoid the first two no-confidence votes, they ended the motion with the following words:
“We therefore propose that Inatsisartut continue the processing of item 11/EM 2026.”
However, the debate did not continue as the second vote of no confidence was immediately tabled. Therefore, it was required that a vote should be taken on the discussed item in order to avoid the vote of no confidence.
Atassut, Demokraatit and Inuit Ataqatigiit had signed the motion to avoid the vote of no confidence. In doing so, Atassut himself had also helped to demand that a vote should be taken on the discussed item.
– We have followed the procedure, we have not deviated from it. The comments can be seen. As meeting leader, I have an obligation to follow the procedure. My guidelines are quite clear. Actions have been taken on the basis of them, says Kim Kielsen.
