Reducing Conflicts of Interests – Post-Employment Regulations (NO0030)

Norway will consider formalizing the three sets of post-employment regulations by law rather than as a clause in the employee’s contract of employment (or the appointment document for ministers and state secretaries).

19. Reducing conflicts of interests – Post-employment regulations

Commitment Text:

[…] The regulations apply to those who have decided to take up a new post or have accepted duty outside the state sector or intend to start up a business. The aim of the regulations is to avoid conflict of interest, unfair competition and decrease of confidence in the state sector. The regulations may be imposed if there is a clause in the employee’s working agreement (or in the appointment document for ministers and state secretaries).

[…] In 2005, Norway also introduced regulations (temporary disqualification) for politicians moving to positions as top civil servants in the ministries.

COMMITMENT DESCRIPTION
Norway will consider formalizing the three sets of post-employment regulations by law rather than as a clause in the employee’s contract of employment (or the appointment document for ministers and state secretaries).

Responsible institution: Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs                                            

Supporting institution(s): None

Start date: Ongoing           End date: 1 July, 2014

Editorial note: The text of the commitments was abridged for formatting reasons. For the full text of the commitment, please see http://bit.ly/1QlVIja.

Policy Aim

The IRM researcher found the policy aim of this commitment to be unclear and was not able to gain clarity from focal points for the commitment.^{[Note 104: Daniel Møgster (Higher Executive Adviser, KMD), interview by Christopher Wilson and Lene Olsen, phone interview, March 16, 2016.]} On the basis of desk research and contextual information, the IRM researcher understands that this commitment is aimed to address the danger of the inappropriate influence of lobbyists on political processes, by virtue of their previous positions in governmental positions. These issues became prominent in Norwegian media after certain lobbying firms attracted attention for perceived corruption, including alleged efforts to influence local procurement processes,^{[Note 105: ”Økokrim mistenker Troms Kraft for grov korrupsjon,” Aftenposten, accessed October 11, 2016, http://www.aftenposten.no/okonomi/Okokrim-mistenker-Troms-Kraft-for-grov-korrupsjon-102296b.html. See also, “Oslo-politikere selger hemmelige PR-tjenester,” Aftenposten, accessed October 11, 2016, http://www.aftenposten.no/osloby/Oslo-politikere-selger-hemmelige-PR-tjenester-143701b.html.]} and making payments to local politicians.                          

Status

Mid-term: Complete

The government submitted to the parliament a legal amendment to the Norwegian Post-Employment Regulations in December 2014, thereby fulfilling the commitment. For more information, please see IRM Progress Report 2013-2014.

Did it open government?

Public accountability: Marginal

This commitment was to review rules regarding post-public sector employment and, as such, was a positive first step towards establishing clear rules for political quarantine and preventing the perceived or real abuse of political position in the Norwegian political context. A new law on political quarantines was passed on January 1, 2016^{[Note 106: ”Karantenenemnda,” Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, accessed September 8, 2016, https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dep/kmd/org/styrer-rad-og-utvalg/karantenenemnda/id611309/.   ]} and represents a positive outcome from the consideration process described in this commitment. Media representatives interviewed for this report noted that government efforts to quarantine lobbying and political offices has been underway for several years and that this law replaced an existing law with the same objective. Interviewees also referenced conflicting opinions about whether the new law was a meaningful improvement. These interviews suggested disagreement in civil society as to whether the new law introduced new substantive components or mechanisms that significantly improved potential for public accountability, or whether it simply “gave new names” to existing regulatory mechanisms.^{[Note 107: Nils Øy (Special Adviser, Norwegian Press Association), interview by Christopher Wilson, in-person meeting, Offices of the Norwegian Association of the Press, September 1, 2016 and Siri Gedde-Dahl (Chair, Norwegian Committee for Access to Information (Offentlighetsutvalget)), interview by Christopher Wilson, in-person meeting, Offices of the Norwegian Association of the Press, September 1, 2016.]}  

Carried forward?

This commitment has not been carried forward in the Norwegian government’s third national action plan, which is available on the OGP website.^{[Note 108: ”Norway’s third action plan Open Government Partnership (OGP),” Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, accessed September 4, 2016, http://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2001/01/Norway_2016-17_NAP.pdf.]}