Erna Solberg secret in the blue – Aftenbladet.no

The day the Prime Minister retires, the National Archives a set of documents which basically are exempt from public i25 to 40 years.

These cover for instance what happens during cabinet meetings behind closed doors. The conferences have not formal basis in law, but is still the government’s premier venue. The conclusions here are politically binding for government members.

At the conferences goose it through notes containing a State Council main factors in his case as well as other ministers suggestions, comments and suggestions to conclusions. Beforehand you concerned ministers give their input, and Prime Minister’s Office receives a copy of all drafts. To disagreements mapped before the meetings and give the Prime Minister the opportunity to outline conclusions. The outcome of the meetings end up in a protocol as well as an overarching report.

Everything happens in confidence, and since 1945 has such government documents has been considered as the ministers’ personal documents. Then came some snowmobiles and Kjell Magne Bondevik (Christian Democrats) up.

Got denied access

Erna Solberg government opened last year that snowmobiling in Norwegian nature could be tried in municipalities that wanted it , within certain limits. 108 municipalities participated. Opposition in Parliament protested. Tourist Association, Outdoor Recreation FNO and active complained experiment before the Ombudsman, which will oversee management.

The Ombudsman requested usladdede versions of internal memos in Ministry of the Environment (KLD) to consider the matter properly. Some information was still censored. KLD was April 22 asked to justify this.

Regjeringskonferanser Government’s foremost gathering. Liquidated normal weekly at the Prime Minister’s office.

Conferences take place in confidence behind closed doors. Documents produced in conjunction with conferences kept secret for years. These are often called government notes (r-notes).

Parliamentary Ombudsman has asked a series of questions about the opportunity to refuse access an r-note . Prime Minister’s Office notifies amendment about this.

11 days earlier was right to access government documents theme in an appeal. Here came the Ministry of Culture up a refusal by former Prime Minister Bondevik (Christian Democrats).

KLD requested that the cases were seen in context, and Prime Minister’s Office (SMK) took over management.

Erna alerts amendment

SMK showed among other things that the Justice Department has practiced a non-statutory rule that the Ombudsman can not demand transparency in government notes. The letter concludes with the Prime Minister wants to clarify law in this area and that the government will implement a work that will culminate in a bill that clearly anchors practice in legislation.

Ombudsman replied on 2 October that it supported the government’s initiative. It does not mean that the Ombudsman necessarily buy all the arguments of SMK.

– We have found it expedient to await legislation work and possibly come back with a submission, says office manager Annette Dahl with the Ombudsman.

An unresolved question is whether it can be granted access to internal memos in a ministry if it contains references from the government’s internal work.

Can resort to Parliament

As recently as 2009 the Ombudsman to Parliament and were dispensed a document MPE had refused access to. This was not done in the case of a snowmobile experiment, which the Ombudsman still disallowed.

– We are looking forward to getting this resolved, says Dahl.

SMK concludes that government documents, both from sitting and former governments, falls outside FOIA, and is regarded as private archives by the Archives Act. Nevertheless, over 1,000 government documents except for FOIA just one month, the Public electronic mail journal (OEP).

– Yes, and that is why we have raised this type and other questions. We have not concluded, but awaits legislative history. There have been differing opinions on the practice has been regulated by law or not. I understand that SMK now want to get regulated what they believe is a non-statutory practices, says Dahl.

SMK has not answered Aftenbladet inquiry to comment on the case.

Examples of questions Ombudsman wants clarified whether government notes:

• included the FOIA?
• What are the rules for government internal work?
• Applies other rules of previous governments than sitting?
• Changes government retirement status of documents?
• Why treated documents from retired governments apparently not by FOIA?
• Why archived documents for archival law on private, not public, archives?