Trond Giske Gains Control in Trondheim Ap Nomination Amidst Internal Turmoil

by time news

Pål Sture Nilsen and Trond Giske’s ⁤proposal regarding who should be at the crucial nomination meeting‌ received a majority​ after voting in Trondheim Ap.

This means that Giske has control over the⁣ list that will vote at the decisive nomination meeting on November 30.

– ⁢We have made a majority decision​ and we will ⁣stand‌ by​ it when we ⁢get to the nomination ⁣meeting, Trond Giske told Adresseavisen after the meeting.

Everything now indicates that he will be the main candidate for Ap in Sør-Trøndelag.

– Yes,⁢ I believe ‍so, said Giske when asked if he thinks he will get a majority at the nomination meeting at‌ the ​end of November.

Giske’s⁣ list‌ succeeded in the meeting of ⁣the representatives’ ‍council ⁤Wednesday evening.

Strong‍ criticism against ‌Giske

Late Wednesday evening,⁣ ten local party ​leaders in Trondheim Ap issued ⁤strong criticism ‌against Trond Giske and his supporters in a ⁤letter.

The local party leaders believe that the party branches’ proposals for delegates have been neglected and overridden by the majority, led by Trond Giske and ⁢the Nidaros Social ⁢Democratic Forum.

– Instead, only those who have shown 100​ percent⁢ loyalty to the personal struggle, with its undemocratic means, led⁤ by Trond Giske, get to ⁢represent Trondheim Arbeiderparti, the statement reads.

The statement also mentions that the strength of the Labour Party has always ‌been ⁢its⁣ breadth.

– We⁢ are a party ​that encompasses many and different opinions, where we discuss ​and disagree, but where everyone has a place. A majority in Trondheim ⁤Labour Party, ⁢consisting of Trond ⁣Giske and the Nidaros Social Democratic Forum, has decided to put an end to⁢ that, they write.

The⁤ statement​ is signed by the leaders‍ of Charlottenlund/Brundalen Arbeiderlag, Studentenes Arbeiderlag, Strinda Arbeiderlag, Byåsen Arbeiderlag, Heimdal Arbeiderlag, Trondheim Arbeidersamfunn,‍ Kolstad Arbeiderlag, ​Flatåsen Arbeiderlag, AUF students in Trondheim,​ and AUF in Trondheim.

Trond Giske ​and Pål‌ Sture Nilsen ahead of the meeting on ‍Wednesday evening.

Photo: Bjarte Johannesen / NRK

None of the ⁣leaders on the list

On Wednesday,⁣ Nilsen‍ and Giske, together with three other board members,⁢ submitted a list that was dominated by members of <span class="note" data-content="

Trond Giske is the ​leader ⁣of the Nidaros Social⁢ Democratic Forum. The local group is part of Trondheim ‌Ap.

” data-term=”Nidaros Social Democratic Forum”>the Nidaros Social Democratic Forum.

None of the top leaders in Trondheim Ap were on the list.

On the other list, ⁢the board, city council leaders, local party leaders, and AUF were guaranteed places. The remaining spots were to be determined by membership numbers.

Giske ⁢is one of⁢ the deputy leaders in Trondheim Ap, while Jannicke Eriksen is‍ the other. To NRK, ‍she described the list from Nilsen and Giske as unfortunate, surprising, and sad.

The party secretary Kjersti Stenseng ‌gave the following comment​ to Adresseavisen:

– Trondheim Labour Party should take into account that they are a ‍large municipal party with many branches. The delegate list should reflect ⁣that. It is common for the board, city council‍ group, party leaders, and AUF to be ⁣represented ​in the delegation, she said.

Great suspense

Trondheim Labour Party is the largest municipal party in the <span class="note" data-content="

Although Trøndelag became one county in 2018, there⁣ are still two electoral districts: Nord-Trøndelag and Sør-Trøndelag

” data-term=”electoral district ⁣Sør-Trøndelag”>electoral district of Sør-Trøndelag, ⁤and accounts for ‍57 of the 133 representatives who will vote on the electoral list at the nomination meeting on ⁤November​ 30.

Due⁤ to⁣ the split in the party over Giske, there was significant ⁢speculation about who these delegates would be.

The competitor is Per Olav Hopsø. He has support from the majority of local parties.

Many want Per Olav Skurdal ​Hopsø at the ‌top.

The first half hour of the meeting was spent discussing ‍written voting.

The proposal from Kirsti Tømmervold for written voting was rejected with 66 votes. There are 168 eligible voters at the meeting.

Giske’s proposal to use a show of hands received ​a⁣ majority.

– In practice expelled

Then ⁤the discussions began in earnest.

– Some talk about the list being purged. But that is based on ‌completely wrong premises, ‌namely that someone originally had a claim to ‍a place, and then was taken out, ‌said leader Pål Sture ‍Nilsen, who presented his list.

He further pointed out that two representatives’ council meetings have determined that Giske is Trondheim’s main candidate.

– We who are not in the ‍inner circle, we are squeezed out.‍ It is not possible to say that this is not a list that has been ​cleansed. When it is cleansed of our future, from AUF, then I cannot understand what kind of democracy ​this is set up for.

That was stated by Gunn Elin Høgli, who was ousted as leader⁤ of the Trondheim Labour‍ Party last year.

– Thus, I will say that our party‌ in Trondheim is soon dead. ⁤It is like a large crater. It is divided in​ two, and who will take responsibility​ for‍ it. The ‌board must do that.

To Adresseavisen, the newly elected leader of AUF, Gaute​ Skjervø, ​has also strongly reacted to the ⁣situation.

– If⁤ Trond’s proposal is adopted as it looks,​ AUF will essentially be expelled from Trondheim Labour Party. I think the Labour Party would ⁤benefit from creating political answers to people’s problems instead​ of yet another round of internal ‌power struggle, he says.

– It went a bit fast in the turns. It is outrageous to⁣ allow Norunn and Bjørn Giske to represent their son, said Pål Sture Nilsen, who proposed to replace them.

Trond Giske elaborated that⁢ the⁣ parents⁢ were also not asked.

The⁤ atmosphere⁤ in ⁢the meeting on Wednesday⁤ was charged with emotions.

After many speakers, the members went to a vote.

Emotionally charged discussions

Siv​ Sandvik, political​ editor at​ Adresseavisen, described ⁣the atmosphere at the meeting as marked‍ by emotionally charged discussions.

She noted‌ that representatives from the various factions accused each other of being undemocratic.

In a political party, being undemocratic ⁣is one of the ugliest things you ⁤can say to people,‍ but that claim is​ quite loose​ here in Trondheim Ap.

Siv Sandvik, political editor at Adresseavisen.

Photo: Morten Andersen /​ NRK

She is certain ⁤that many will be very disappointed on November 30 – regardless of which direction it goes.‍ She recounts people from both sides saying they cannot bear‌ to‌ campaign if they do not succeed.

If Trond Giske and his supporters get their way today, all 57 from Trondheim will be Giske-friendly, she​ said.

– What Trond Giske is going for, and what he is most likely ⁤to get a majority for in this room, is a list⁤ that is handpicked where almost ⁣all are from Nidaros, and where the ⁤few others representing other branches are declared supporters of Giske. This has triggered very strong reactions.

Outrage on Facebook

On Facebook, Kirsti Leirtrø has ⁤strongly criticized the proposal led by Nilsen and⁣ Giske.

– This is not democracy! What has gone on behind the scenes, which led to me withdrawing, is very ugly and inappropriate,‌ writes Leirtrø.

Leirtrø has been a member of ⁣the Storting since 2017,⁢ and withdrew from ‌the nomination process in September.

– What⁢ we see now is an extension⁢ of that. Threats and coups do not belong in Norwegian politics, she continues.

Member of Parliament for Sør-Trøndelag, Kirsti Leirtrø, expresses outrage on Facebook.

– This, Trond and Pål Sture, is a historic low for ⁢member democracy‌ and the motivation ​to stand strong. It is unforgivable!

– Several violations

Here it was revealed that their assessment is that ⁤during the nomination process, there have ⁢been several violations of good organizational ‍practices.

– A clear violation concerns this member ⁤transfer that⁢ is a collective ‌transfer of members towards the nomination process. We believe that is very problematic, and we also believe it⁤ must lead to ⁤changes, said the deputy leader‍ of Trøndelag Ap, Emil Raaen, after ​the meeting.

They therefore want amendments to the bylaws that regulate member transfers.

Raaen emphasizes that bylaw amendments must be presented at the national meeting, ‍and ‍that‌ they will not have‍ retroactive effect.

According to ⁢NTB, Trond Giske ⁣believes that it is “completely in ‌line with good organizational⁢ practices” that members of Trøndelag Ap have ​transferred ‍from his local group to other groups.

What are the main concerns among Labour Party members regarding Giske’s leadership?

P>She ‌stated, “This is a blatant disregard for the diversity that has always been the foundation of our party. The exclusion of various voices and opinions is not just a tactical⁤ error, it’s a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Labour Party stands for.”

Leirtrø’s comments reflect a growing sentiment among party members who are ⁣concerned about the direction the party is taking under Giske’s leadership. Many are worried that the party is moving away from its inclusive roots and towards a more centralized and autocratic structure.

Social media has become a battleground for‍ party ‌factions, with many members taking to Facebook to express their frustrations. ⁣Posts criticizing Giske’s approach have garnered significant traction, eliciting responses from supporters and ‌opponents alike.

Meanwhile, Giske​ and his ‌allies continue to defend their stance, ‌emphasizing the need for unity and a focused vision ‍for the party’s future. In a⁤ recent interview,​ Giske argued, “We must prioritize⁤ effectiveness and loyalty to our ‍core values, which is why this list has been created the way it has.”

As the‍ nomination meeting looms on November 30, the division within⁢ the Trondheim Labour Party appears to be deepening, raising questions about the party’s future and its ability to ⁢represent the interests of all ⁤its members.

The potential impact

The internal conflict is not just‌ a matter ⁢of ⁤procedure; it has the ‌potential ⁢to affect the Labour Party’s⁣ standing in local elections. Observers worry that if the divisions remain unresolved, ⁢the party could struggle ‍to present a united‍ front against their ⁢political rivals.

Political analysts suggest that the ongoing power struggle may lead to voter disillusionment during the upcoming elections, ‌highlighting the need for party leaders ⁣to address the​ grievances of their⁢ members in​ a constructive manner.

As the situation develops, it will be essential for the leadership to strike a balance between maintaining party discipline and allowing for healthy ‌democratic debate within⁣ their ranks.

You may also like

Leave a Comment