Corruption is tempting and a well-established phenomenon in Norwegian municipalities and municipal councils. A tangible document of this, in the proper sense of the term, is Transparency International Norway’s publication of the Anti-corruption Handbook for Municipalities, which is also distributed by the municipal sector’s own interest organization, KS.
The ability to distinguish ethical conduct is not much more developed at the national level.
One example is how the conduct of parliamentary politicians’ support staff and a vast parliamentary administration has provoked contempt among many Norwegians. The country’s foremost trustees and their administration have shown themselves to lack the very abilities that public administration demands of Norwegian employers and employees—namely, not exploiting public benefit schemes for personal gain and maintaining control over how such schemes function.
The Office of the Auditor General has described the politicians’ conduct as “severely reprehensible”. Anyone reading the criticism may easily feel that the Auditor General—who throughout his career has been a politician and a close colleague of the career politicians affected by the report, several of whom committed criminal acts—does not press the point particularly hard.
Another example is how a major party organization mixes the cards by allowing external organizations and financial sponsors into its own executive board, nomination committee, and cabinet positions. That these are trade unions makes it even worse, because freedom and independence are vital to this type of organization, which plays an important role in working life. Ironically, the website “Fri Fagbevegelse” presents the status of this immature, unfree, and persistent contamination of politicians’ role as representatives of the people.
There are many more examples of the immaturity of the Norwegian Parliament. One of them is how the parliamentary director, in her former role as head of the Norwegian State Educational Loan Fund, showed no mercy toward students who “cheated their way to grant money they were not entitled to.” The parliamentary director was, however, far more forgiving toward members of Parliament—Norway’s very foremost trustees.
Neither the police nor the Office of the Auditor General were nearly as understanding. In the end, the parliamentary director had to step down. A parliamentary president (a politician) also had to resign after becoming intoxicated with his ruler’s role and granting himself a private driver 700 times, most of the trips being rides home.
The European Union is so undemocratic that it would probably not accept itself as a member state. While decision-making authority on a large scale is transferred to the EU level, citizens steadily lose influence over the shaping of policy. Read more (German, but drop the link into Google Translate)
The organization Mehr Demokratie
What we are seeing are the consequences of a political industry beyond the control of the people, and how this is exploited in ways that make the average citizen blush—or be inspired not to be any worse than the members of Norway’s legislative assembly.
Many party organizations are additionally marked by democratic immaturity, and it is this immaturity that we see being propagated further—not only into political assemblies, but also into public administration and oversight bodies that recruit extensively from the political industry.
Those who have followed election campaigns in the union known as the United States of America (USA) have noted the enormous spending, as described by NRK. Many candidates for the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the presidency receive such substantial support from individuals and corporations that it is hard to believe they will not face demands for quid pro quo once they come into power.
This unhealthy culture in Washington, D.C.—the nation’s union capital, much as Brussels is considered for the European Union—has its parallels in the EU. The culture reflects a deep immaturity among those employed in the political industry. When we acknowledge this, observe how Transparency International Norway must produce guides to municipal anti-corruption, and note how our legislative assembly violates laws and basic civic decency to secure benefits for itself, Norway as a whole falls into the category of countries that are not mature for participation in unions.
A key element is that union headquarters are even farther removed from citizens than Norwegian elected assemblies, and thus even more shielded from scrutiny within a political industry with a substantial self-serving agenda.
De fleste av artiklene på Oagal er utarbeidet av redaksjonen. Innholdet fra redaksjonen er det fortløpende redaksjonelle arbeidet i Oagal. Redaksjonen driver undersøkende journalistikk, utvikler ideer til saker og utarbeider artikler ved hjelp av ulike tilgjengelige kilder og verktøy. Meningsbærende innhold og også reportasjer bærer skribentens navn.
0 Comments