Subscription 790/year or 190/quarter

From impossible to necessary

Does Røe Isaksen advocate a more radical governance of the globalized economy than SV?


[Norway's money bin] China, Iraq, Israel, Russia, Venezuela, the Philippines and the United States. Ny Tid showed on 2 March that Norway, through the Petroleum Fund, lends money to a number of countries with controversial heads of state. These investments in government bonds are not subject to ethical considerations.

One of the sources in the case, Torbjørn Røe Isaksen, leader of the Young Right, says that we need "rules that ensure that we do not lend money to regimes that undermine democracy or violate human rights". The statement is interesting to compare with this: "Unfortunately, in the global economy we cannot help but get in touch with what is hurting and sorry," Per Kristian Foss told Dagbladet on May 5, 2002.

SV fought for a long time alone, and Øystein Djupedal should have much of the credit for the Storting following a loud debate, and agreed to establish ethical guidelines for the second part of the oil fund, the investments in companies. On the other hand, neither SV nor the Right have advocated similar guidelines for government bonds. For now?

Torgrim Asphjel writes in Ny Tid on March 16 that Ny Tid is heading "in the wrong direction" because the newspaper also passes on Røe Isaksen's statement "it is stupid to lend money to Chavez". I would like to answer that Røe Isaksen's position is interesting because Unge Høyre in this case seems to be in favor of a more comprehensive management of Norway's role in the global economy than SV's Roger Schjerva. Therefore, I would like to challenge Røe Isaksen and Erna Solberg to jointly clarify whether the Conservatives will now take the lead in ethical guidelines for government bonds as well.

You may also like