(Dagbladet): First, would Parliament President Olaf Michael Thommessen (H) reject a proposal that Congress should indicate all shares they hold in Parliament’s register of financial interests. As revealed Dagbladet that Thommessen even had violated regulations for several years, by failing to register shares for a value of 362,500 crowns.
This led to an apology and that parliament against his will resolved that there should be full transparency on shareholding , from the first share: “Parliament requests the presidency to take the initiative to change the Regulations on the register of parliamentary representatives offices and economic interests so that all company interests, regardless of value, must be recorded in this register.” came the decision in April.
the reason for the parliamentary decision was Dagbladet revelations that several members of parliament, in contravention of the regulations, had failed to register large shareholdings. How did voters insight into the financial ties between them and the companies that could be affected by the legislation they passed or tasks they performed.
Dagbladet revealed that several members of Parliament’s industry committee had earned money in shares of companies that were directly affected by the committee and their own work.
– be played hide and seek
in response to Parliament’s demands for more transparency, Thommessen and presidency submitted a proposal to Parliament saying that all shareholdings, too small, should be disclosed in the register. But a new paragraph in the rules also allow the elected can avoid the requirement of registration of the shares they own in their entirety.
– it is that it be played hide and seek with openness, says parliament Torgeir Knag Fylkesnes (SV).
the method Thommessen and the presidency allows the elected use to drop to educate voters about their shareholdings is simple:
equity holdings may be moved to an investment company that owns the shares for representative. When does she or he just write the name of this one company, not holdings. How voters and the press know which financial ties the elected has, by looking at the Parliament’s register.
A new paragraph in the draft legislation from the presidency reads: “For business interests owned indirectly through an investment company, only the ownership of the investment company stated. “
the statement stood formerly as a footnote in the rules, but instead of taking it out and ensure full transparency of share ownership among the elected, the presidency proposes that it should in the main text .
Defender proposal
– Helps suggestion that members of parliament do not have to abandon their shareholdings if owned by an investment company for more transparency?
– New §9 means that all business interests owned by the representative directly, registration is required, regardless of value. This means that all interests are recorded. As it stands in the proposal, is the provision that the registration requirement only applies to the shares they own directly not new, but a clarification of what has been current practice. Here there is also no change as such, says Thommessen.
– Parliament has meant that there would be a reasonable claim that the representatives at any given time will have to be updated on the interests and underlying companies at any time owned by the companies they own shares directly, said parliamentary president.
– Large industrial companies, banks or holding companies are increasingly turning portfolio without this communicated to the shareholders, says Thommessen.
– Loopholes
But an investment company, which is the term presidency itself uses in setting, is not necessarily a big corporation where ordinary shareholders normally can not affect the portfolio. An investment company is normally to speculate in stocks and bonds. The goal is to make money with fast acting or long-term investments.
And it can be owned by a person, such as a Member of Parliament.
– As long as the ownership is registered, it will be possible for the media or other interested , to obtain the composition of ownership has in other public sources – or by asking the representative directly, says Thommessen.
A believes the new proposal breaks with Parliament’s intention in the decision in April.
– the proposal by the presidency violates Parliament’s intention. After a close unanimous parliament adopted full transparency it is remarkable that the presidency respond by proposing new big loophole, says Fylkesnes.
Defender proposal
Members of the Presidency Svein Roald Hansen (Ap ) defends proposal.
– In practice this means their proposals for new regulations that parliamentary representatives can engage in active equity management with large amounts, without informing the public through Parliament’s economics registry, as long as they do it through an investment company?
– Yes. Mandatory registration would otherwise be too extensive and unmanageable, says Hansen, who argue that the voters and the press may use other sources if they want a list of politicians cashes.
– Where do you find out which stocks someone holds through its investment company?
– There will be stated in the company’s annual reports which interests the company is sitting with and who your MP has a share of.
emerges not
But Hansen’s presentation does not match the information that is available in practice. According to the Accounting, investments in shares stated in the companies’ financial statements, but it comes far from all shareholdings.And Nor is it in financial statements shall be the shareholdings that are bought and sold during the year. It just says what company owns when accounts printed.
Thus, a legislator who owns the investment company active management without voters get an insight into the economic bindings.
As a test checked Dagbladet last available accounts for investment company Femstø AS where Labor leader and Member of Parliament Jonas Gahr Støre own 76 percent of shares. According to accounts owned Femstø AS marketable shares of over 31 million, but do not reveal which shares the company owned in 2014.
And in the register of shareholders issued by the tax authorities is only listed ownership as New Year in 2014 and 2015 listed. For the record: The Minister has stated ownership entirely correct in Parliament’s register and he chose not to be an active manager itself.
– for it is not a list of all shares of investment companies have bought and sold within a year in an annual report?
– no, it does well not. But it shows well how difficult it is to enter, says Hansen.
Minister is the parliamentary leader of the Labour Party in Parliament. He told Dagbladet that he did not want to comment on the proposal this weekend.
Members of Parliament are not prohibited from engaging in active equity management. And with the new regulations in hand and Parliament President permission they can thus invest and sell as much as they want without the voters get to know about the economic linkages.
As long as they do it via an investment company.
– Inconsistent
The Presidency consists of President of the Storting Olaf Michael (Olemic) Thommessen (H), Marit Nybakk (Ap), Kenneth Svendsen (FRP), Svein Roald Hansen (Labour), Ingjerd Schou (H ) and Line Henriette Hjemdal (Krf).
Despite Hjemdal voted for full transparency on stocks in April, she has been to adopt the new proposal.
– Why deliver you now a proposal that allows you to hide share ownership so?
– I see that you notes can be viewed as inconsistent basis of my voting earlier this spring about fully transparent from the stock. I will discuss this issue with the group before treatment Tuesday, saying Hjemdal Dagbladet now.
In the proposal there are also other changes and clarifications of current regulations. including that politicians should not have to disclose the gifts if they are given by the party they represent in Parliament.
Fylkesnes criticizes several of the suggestions:
– Why are not state ownership through investment companies? Why should not the concrete values specified? Why should not the gifts given by parties stated? Why put it as high limits to what must be expressed by gifts? Why is it so vague about what one should register of real estate? It is absolutely incomprehensible.
All members of parliament shareholdings registered now can be read here.
Will be going through regulations
Disputas (Ap) has not dealt with the setting to be treated in parliament Tuesday, but will head a committee in the autumn, which seeks to go through Parliament’s rules of procedure and regulations. She peace is not the current loopholes and rules.
– We will go through all the regulations in the autumn and spring, and we will return to this point. Right now it was important to follow up the decisions to remove at least limit of 1G to disclose shareholdings. In principle, I do not understand why it is dangerous to be open about economic interests. Transparency is terribly important, says Disputas.
– I do not understand why anyone should cover anything. If the individual Member of Parliament is so stupid that he or she can not enter their financial interests, then he or she is responsible only to their electorate and party says Disputas.
10 million hidden
Dagbladet revealed 24 . last September that several members of parliament, in contravention of the regulations, had failed to register large shareholdings. How did voters insight into the financial ties between them and the companies that could be affected by the legislation they passed or tasks they performed.
By doing lookups in the shareholder register and verify a findings could Dagbladet document that 10 million was kept secret so.
The biggest shareholding belonged to a member of the Finance Committee Svein Flåtten (H) in Sparebank 1, with a value of NOK 6.5 million. Oskar Jarle Grimstad (FRP) had failed to keep up a shareholding to 1.8 million in Agasti Holding ASA.
Multiple role mixtures
Four days later revealed Dagbladet that several members of Parliament’s industry committee had earned money in shares of companies that are directly affected by the committee’s work.
• parliamentary politicians had lobby meetings on policy development and investments with companies where they eiede shares.
• the white politicians had written and enacted input to both state ownership and Aquaculture message pertaining to companies in which they own shares for hundreds of thousands of crowns.
One of them was Odd Omland (Labor) who owned a stake in Telenor 110 000. He says he constantly was careful to check their impartiality, but nevertheless chose to sell.
– I intend to be neat, said Omland.
Earlier this year tightened the Oslo City Council in its equity legislation, after Dagbladet revealed how several politicians not brought up their stock ownership.
No comments:
Post a Comment