According to those who understand cohabitation and such, the dating app Tinder has changed the dating market. People struggle to commit. Why settle for what you have if the next, and perhaps even better candidate is just a few swipes away? For those of us who understand politics better than dating, it may seem that some of the same refusal to commit has reached Norwegian politicians. Storting swipes left, government swipes right In recent weeks, two of Jonas Gahr Støre’s handpicked shooting stars in government have said no to the Storting. Neither Knowledge Minister Kari Nessa Nordtun nor Digitization Minister Karianne Tung want to stand for election from their home counties. But they would very much like to continue as ministers. They justify this by saying that the family situation with young children makes it difficult to commit to Oslo for four years. As an elected member of the Storting, it takes a lot to resign from office. The AP ministers’ reasons are very reminiscent of what Conservative deputy leader Tina Bru said when she refused re-election. But she also made it clear that she would in no way close the door to becoming a minister again if the opportunity presented itself. Tina Bru clarified before the summer that she would not continue in the Storting. She believes that commuting life is not easy to combine with being a mother of young children. Photo: NTB Although Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide gave up his seat in Oslo, he also made it clear that he would very much like to continue in government. Reasons that are about family life or releasing new energies are unassailable. Although some will object that the Cabinet job is far more demanding to reconcile with commuting and family. From the horn on the wall, you hear a lot about how “in the past” it would have been unthinkable to say no to the national assembly itself, the Storting, if you wanted a political career. Trapped in the Storting An obvious difference between ministers and representatives of the Storting is the term of office one has as an elected representative. Government members can choose to resign, and in any case are always living on borrowed time. Although most departures appear mostly involuntary. The fact that it is still tempting to sit in government is probably due to the fact that the job is not only hard-working and demanding (and not family-friendly), but also entails a lot of power and prestige. One might wonder if it is not more prestigious to sit in government than in the Storting. There is reason to wonder whether the Storting has lost its status. Traditionally, it has been the most important position of trust that can be obtained. Now it is sometimes referred to as a kind of “prison” and something you don’t want to commit to. The strict, uniquely Norwegian exemption practice has irritated politicians who want to resign. Either because they have had to leave the government, or lost their position in the party as a result of some scandal. For example, the Swedish foreign minister chose to resign on Wednesday this week, and left the Riksdagen (the Swedish parliament) in the same vein. Poor politician… Something worth dwelling on is news’s investigation into how the politicians in the Storting experience their situation. More than half of those who answered would not recommend family and friends to become politicians. Seven out of ten say that their trust in the media has weakened. Something they point out is a high workload, prejudgment and unbalanced cases in the media. Now, of course, all the answers are anonymous, but you don’t have to walk a lot in the corridors of the Storting to hear the same thing. Many express concern about who wants to become a politician in the future. Few dare to say it out loud for fear of appearing whiny. Knowing that they will do poorly in a sympathy contest anyway. Probably in joint last place with the journalists. In particular, the media’s coverage of the commuter housing cases is perceived by many politicians as unreasonable. Good away, best at home And speaking of commuting. For many, that is the crux of the problem. As an elected representative, you must represent the entire country. This means that many people have to commute. This puts families in particular in a difficult situation. If you bring your family with you to Oslo, you may be exposed to criticism for not being very present in the county you represent. It is almost inevitable not to form ties to the city you live in. Several politicians justify this with why they do not seek re-election from their original home county, such as Ap politicians Torstein Tvedt Solberg and Hadia Tajik. If you choose to commute, you get a life away from children and family, which many find demanding. It gets a little wrong anyway. The politicians are also good at adding stones to their own burden. At the much-discussed annual meeting of Trøndelag Ap this winter, the party proposed that parliamentary representatives should have their permanent residence in the county. The proposal was interpreted as a jab at Trond Giske, who lives with his family in Oslo even though he is registered in Trondheim. But the demand may come as a boomerang on a politician in the same situation as Karianne Tung, who justified her no to the Storting by saying that she did not want to commute away from her family in Trøndelag. For some politicians, it is an almost impossible balancing act. Consideration for the family and for the home district does not arise. And just to complicate things further. How satisfied the people around them are with their parliamentary politicians is not necessarily linked to where they live, but to what effort they put in for their county. Unhealthy draft? Several have expressed concern about recruitment into politics. In particular, it causes a stir when young people with an upward career curve say no. Like Kari Elisabeth Kaski (SV), Kari Nessa Nordtun (Ap) and Tina Bru (H). But is it really that dangerous? Election researcher Svein Tore Marthinsen has gone through the reasons for all representatives of the Storting who have declined re-election. He finds no systematic differences between genders, but rather related to age and stage of life. The younger people often reason with family, the middle-aged with the need to do something else in life and the oldest with the total load, for example with commuting. And call it healthy draft. Quite undramatic actually. It is still the case that when someone leaves, someone else comes. Even in the Storting. Published 05.09.2024, at 10.58
ttn-69
Has the Storting become a valley of woe? – Speech
