Calls on Bergstø to step down now as Vice President of SV – VG

– We no longer have confidence in Bergstø, and we believe that she should not continue as deputy director, says Tonje Kopstad.

She is the first Storting deputy for Buskerud SV and speaks to VG along with Linda Bergwitz, deputy board member at Bærum SV.

– She should probably have another chance as a politician, because she is so talented. But sadly, these cases show that she is willing to go too far to get what she wants, says Kopstad.

The background to the tough deal with the deputy party leader is the controversial nomination processes in both Akershus and Finnmark.

Kopstad and Bergwitz believe that Bergstø has behaved unacceptably in handling both conflicts:

– We reply that he showed undue opportunism by taking advantage of the difficult situation the county team found itself in in Akershus. And that during the process in Finnmark through her participation, she clearly demonstrated that there are different rules for her as a leader and for us others as party members.

– Do you think Kirsti Bergstø should resign now or should he resign at the national meeting?

– We believe that it is most logical and orderly for him to resign before the national meeting, reply the two SV politicians.

Lysbakken: – Full confidence in Kirsti Bergstø

Bergstø has not understood the criticisms of the two shop stewards.

– I do not recognize myself in the criticisms that are made, and I wish they would contact me instead of the media. I feel like I have great confidence in the organization. I do not recognize myself in the media image that has been created about my participation in Finnmark SV, Bergstø tells VG.

He gets the full support of party leader Audun Lysbakken:

– I have full confidence in Kirsti Bergstø. I am also confident in the process that Troms and Finnmark SV have begun to evaluate the nomination process. Therefore, it is not natural for me to comment on the questions about the nomination in more detail, write in an SMS to VG.

Bergstø: Some may have perceived it as derogatory

In one NRK case, the SV deputy leader is criticized for interfering in Finnmark’s nomination and accused of attempting to mask one of the relevant parliamentary candidates in the county.

– Have you made comments in dialogue with SV members in Finnmark that may have been perceived as derogatory?

– I have provided information that is relevant to include in the Finnmark nomination. So there may be some who have perceived it as derogatory. But there is a big difference between having conversations and giving advice or responding to requests and campaigning for or against candidates, Bergstø says.

The denunciation of irregularities generated controversy

The two SV politicians believe that Bergstø should have rejected a place on the list in Akershus, following a case of notification between the acting Storting representative, Nicholas Wilkinson, and the Storting MP Sheida Sangtarash.

The conflict is about a warning that was delivered by Sangtarash against Wilkinson after a comment Wilkinson made in a conversation, which she thought could be perceived as a threat.

The two inform VG that they have parted ways, but the consequence was, among other things, that neither of them is at the top of Akershus SV’s parliamentary list for this fall’s elections. Finnmark’s Bergstø is at the top.

Bergstø emphasizes that a unanimous nominating committee in Akershus asked her to be the first candidate.

– A unanimous nominating committee in Akershus has asked me to be on the list. After thinking about it, I said yes. It is an expression of party democracy and that the committee wanted me to be at the top. I was also unanimously elected at the nomination meeting without a single blank vote, he tells VG.

Recommended not to interfere

In a message to Kopstad, the SV deputy leader writes:

“I understand that you want to support Sheida and that is fine, but in general I recommend that the party comrades be low when it comes to nominations in other counties, especially externally / publicly. We quickly get a bad party culture if it is completely different from the one. of the members who must choose candidates to carry out campaign activities. It is something completely different to be supportive and to be present for the individual. “

– You have told others not to interfere with the nominations of other counties. However, now we see what emerges in Finnmark, that she, as deputy leader, has interfered with her nomination, says Kopstad.

Bergstø does not agree that she interfered in her home county:

– I am the first candidate in Finnmark since 2009 and leader of the county team. I have said that I could help the nominating committee with its work, but I have always been aware that Finnmark chooses its own candidates.

– Doesn’t work for anyone else

Kopstad and Bergwitz want the national party meeting in April to elect a deputy leader other than Bergstø, but they will not designate a candidate.

– We don’t work for anyone else. We go out alone against the game because we want order in the game. We have a lot of good and good people who we are sure could do a good job as assistant principal, says Kopstad.

Bergwitz says he respects the outcome of the nomination meeting, where Bergstø was unanimously chosen as the first candidate. But trust is low:

– Should we in Akershus stand up and sell a candidate I know so much crap about? It feels empty and difficult.

– Black campaign

Gjermund Skaar, chairman of the nominating committee at Akershus SV, responds to the allegations:

– I perceive it as a smear campaign against Kirsti, he tells VG.

– One of the reasons I experience it, is that before Kirsti’s nomination in Akershus, the committee did not experience that there was any criticism of Kirsti. Neither as a deputy nor as a candidate, he tells VG.

– On the contrary, the feedback from the party organization was very gratifying, my impression is that Kirsti is popular and loved in the party.

– What makes you perceive it as a smear campaign?

– In that case, I’ll take that discussion internally in SV.

– I would like to be friends with Kirsti.

Both Skaar and Bergstø confirm that they are friends.

– Are they close friends?

– I have been a member of the SV for more than twenty years and I know many in the party. I have known Kirsti for about twenty years, I would describe her as a friend. I’d like to be friends with Kirsti, says Skaar.

Bergwitz and Kopstad believe that the nomination conflicts in Finnmark and Akershus are characterized by camaraderie.

Several key SV politicians are old friends from the Youth Socialist era in the mid-2000s, including Bergstø, nomination committee leader Gjermund Skaar, SV leader Audun Lysbakken, and party secretary Audun Herning.

– Abuse of power and camaraderie

– We believe there has been too much abuse of power and poor understanding of roles, and we must say so. In SV you say “comrades” when you meet. But here it has been more of a form of camaraderie. It’ll be wrong, and then we’ll have to say no, says Bergwitz.

Bergstø disagrees:

– Some are closer friends than others, but you have to distinguish between being a group of friends and having been involved and worked for the party for a long time, he tells VG.

VG has also asked Skaar, Herning and Lysbakken to comment on this. Lysbakken refers to Herning.

– I don’t recognize it at all. There are many in the party and with backgrounds in the UB who know each other and are friends, but I feel that we are very aware of the roles and we are careful not to mix friendship in the party processes, Herning tells VG.

– This is a description that is hurtful, rude and wrong, but I prefer to discuss how we treat each other internally at the party, and not at VG, says Skaar.

– I had to persuade Bergstø

Skaar says he contacted Bergstø in spring 2020.

– We had to convince her to move from Finnmark to Akershus. A unanimous committee thought it was crucial to find a unifying candidate to stop this disturbing conflict, he tells VG.

– Who had the idea?

– It was an internal process in the committee where, based on the feedback from the first round, we thought that now we have to start thinking outside the box. We then made a list of the first preferred candidates, and at the top of that list was Kirsti Bergstø.

– Did you discuss it with Kirsti Bergstø before discussing it in the nominating committee?

– No. We made a list and she was at the top of that list. So I called Kirsti.