It has become a kind of truth that there is always a political bomb during Arendal Week. This is where the opinion polls turned when everyone thought Jonas Gahr Støre would become prime minister in 2017, and this is where the Center Party’s collapse really began in last year’s election campaign. That we would have a party leader resign this year in Pollen in Arendal, probably no one predicted. And not at all that it should happen in the party which three months ago re-elected its popular party leader. A clearly moved Une Bastholm justifies her departure by saying that she “lacks time and energy”. That it is demanding to combine the life of a young child and top politics, no one doubts either. But both the timing and the demanding situation the MDGs find themselves in means that underlying conflicts and power struggles can emerge in the vacuum after Bastholm. Because it is not only the outgoing party leader who lacks energy. The mood in MDG can at best be described as sullen after last year’s election defeat. Because this was the election MDG should win on a walkover. The party had been stable above the blocking threshold for a long time, and the UN’s climate report gave the climate issue new topicality into the election campaign. Many of the party’s top candidates had more or less packed their bags and envisioned a life in the Storting. Nevertheless, the party was unable to get above 4 percent. For Bastholm as party leader, this was a great personal defeat. The party’s own evaluation was merciless. We were too “aggressive, uncompromising, immature and single-tracked”, was the rarely honest judgement, penned by deputy chairman Arild Hermstad. Extra salt in the wound must have been that the voter survey showed that climate and the environment were by far the most important issue for the voters. Even when the ball was ready on the penalty mark, the team was not able to put it in the goal. It is difficult to interpret otherwise than that the voters are concerned about climate, but they do not have sufficient faith that the MDGs have the best policy. It doesn’t get any better if the party has low credibility in all policy areas other than climate and the environment. That should provide the basis for a solid soul-searching. What kind of party should MDG be? And for whom? Several conflicts have long simmered beneath the surface. One is about whether the party should focus and be a one-issue party for climate, or whether it should spread out more. The second is about how harsh and confrontational they should be, and to what extent one should raise the moral finger against people who drive cars, eat meat and fly to the South. In addition, we see the contours of both urban and rural conflict, where some feel that the MDG is an urban metropolitan party with no relevance for people in the rural areas, and a generation gap. Many of those who built MDG as a slightly idealistic hippie party have viewed the young and uncompromising in the party with a certain skepticism. To make it even more complicated, there have been major changes both among advisers and politicians. There have long been murmurs that a central circle in the party has too much power. In addition, the party suffers from the fact that the climate issue has been slightly overshadowed by war and other economic crises. It is not a uniquely Norwegian phenomenon. In Sweden, MDG’s sister party is struggling to get over the barrier when the Swedes go to the polls this autumn. Une Bastholm’s personal qualities have been a strength in bringing together the still young and immature party. Her friendly and diplomatic nature is respected far beyond the ranks of the party. Now the far more controversial Lan Marie Berg will be the one to lead the party’s work in the Storting, as the new parliamentary leader. From Oslo politics, she is known for a far more confrontational style than Bastholm. There is obviously a race for the party’s deputy leader Arild Hermstad to move up to become the new party leader. Hermstad has long been a kind of super substitute and jack of all trades in the party. He has moved in as a replacement both as party leader and city council in Oslo, and has become an experienced and strong debater. Twice he has topped the list for the party in Hordaland, without entering the Storting. Precisely the fact that he does not sit in the Storting, could become a problem for both him and the party. It is demanding to gain both authority, overview and, not least, attention as a party leader when you are not part of the daily work in the National Assembly. Hermstad is the unequivocal favorite as new party leader, and it is unclear whether anyone will challenge him. It is difficult to spot any obvious counter-candidates, but the impression that a race has been set for Hermstad is hardly only popular among his critics. A question that will arise is whether Hermstad has what it takes to keep the party together, and get back the fervor and enthusiasm the party badly needs. All parties in trouble know that it can always get worse. Because if the MDG did not get its big national breakthrough this time either, they are at least in power in many large Norwegian cities. Given the current situation, there is absolutely no foregone conclusion after next year’s local elections.
ttn-69
The party leader leaves. The party must go by itself – Statement
